Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Optics Theory -

Optics Theory - This forum is aimed towards the TECHNICAL side of photographic OPTICS THEORY. There will be some overlap by camera/manufacturer, but this forum is for the heavy duty tech discussions. This is NOT the place to discuss a specific lens or lens line, do that in the appropriate forum. This is the forum to discuss optics or lenses in general, to learn about the tech behind the lenses and images. IF you have a question about a specific lens, post it in the forum about that type of camera, NOT HERE.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 04-12-2014   #41
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 4,934
The noktons impress me here.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-12-2014   #42
jmilkins
Digited User
 
jmilkins's Avatar
 
jmilkins is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: landdownunder
Posts: 1,056
Excellent thank you for this effort. Makes me pretty happy with the CV MC Nokton, and less likely to obsess over the SC version. Impressed with the FLE and also the Canon particularly for it's age.
__________________
cheers, John

My gallery
The FlickR

"To ∞, and beyond!" B. Lightyear, 1995.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-16-2015   #43
Pete B
Registered User
 
Pete B's Avatar
 
Pete B is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiss-o-matic View Post
The most noticeable difference to me is the bokeh on the Lux - much less shakey than the other 3. Apparent in the daylight color shots (moped, and flowers).
I noticed that too. Ironically, this lens gets a bad wrap for bokeh and highlight character. I'm not seeing it in these examples. Another Internet myth busted?
Pete
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-16-2015   #44
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 4,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete B View Post
I noticed that too. Ironically, this lens gets a bad wrap for bokeh and highlight character. I'm not seeing it in these examples. Another Internet myth busted?
Pete
The FLE? I can't remember reading any comments that gave it a bad wrap for its bokeh and highlight character.

FWIW in bokeh comparisons between it (the FLE) and the pre-FLE ASPH, I couldn't tell the difference between the two. Both very smooth, for the most part.
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-16-2015   #45
Pete B
Registered User
 
Pete B's Avatar
 
Pete B is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,097
I have the FLE and used it for the first time on a recent trip to Bhutan. I was a little worried about doing so due to Internet references of busy oof areas, but the results on film were fine. I still have the idea buzzing around my head though, and, were it not for Internet rumours of focus shift with the lux asph, I would've exchanged it for that older model. I'm pretty confident about the FLE now.
Pete
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-16-2015   #46
MaxElmar
Registered User
 
MaxElmar's Avatar
 
MaxElmar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 509
Nice comparison. Very impressed by the Canon 35/1.5 but... I would have loved to have seen the W-Nikkor 3.5cm/f1.8 in with this group. You know, just out of curiosity. :>)
__________________
Chris L.

Still Photographically Uncool
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-16-2015   #47
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 4,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete B View Post
were it not for Internet rumours of focus shift with the lux asph, I would've exchanged it for that older model. I'm pretty confident about the FLE now.
Pete
The internet rumours are true! The Lux ASPH does focus shift, though less than some lenses and its quite predicable so fairly easy to compensate for. But good decision re keeping the FLE. Its basically a focus shift free Lux ASPH that has been optimized for digital (better coma control etc).

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxElmar View Post
Nice comparison. Very impressed by the Canon 35/1.5 but... I would have loved to have seen the W-Nikkor 3.5cm/f1.8 in with this group. You know, just out of curiosity. :>)
F1.8 was too slow for this comparison. If I ever do a 35mm F2 comparison I'll be sure to include it
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-16-2015   #48
Pete B
Registered User
 
Pete B's Avatar
 
Pete B is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,097
I often see comments like this pop up on the net:
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/...ons/?p=2490846

Pete
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-16-2015   #49
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 4,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete B View Post
I often see comments like this pop up on the net:
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/...ons/?p=2490846

Pete
Interesting indeed! Especially the comment about the Summicron ASPH being smoother that the FLE. In comparisons I've done, the FLE and Summicron ASPH were very similar. Not quite to the point of being pretty much identical like the pre FLE ASPH and FLE, but very close nonetheless.
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2016   #50
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 4,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
The internet rumours are true! The Lux ASPH does focus shift, though less than some lenses and its quite predicable so fairly easy to compensate for. But good decision re keeping the FLE. Its basically a focus shift free Lux ASPH that has been optimized for digital (better coma control etc).
Since this comment I've tried the FLE on digital and found that it focus shifts somewhat too. Not as much as the pre-FLE ASPH, but its there. I asked Leica Japan about it and their reply was that the floating lens element group (aka the FLE) minimizes, but does not fully negate, the focus shift. Unlike the new Zeiss ZM Distagon 35/1.4, which doesn't have any detectable focus shift.
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2016   #51
biginovero
Registered User
 
biginovero is offline
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 52
The summilux compares directly to the reality i see through my eyes (well corrected by laser surgery, it is a pleasure just to observe anything now).

The other three are just photographic lenses.

On the color side, the most natural is the canon while the lux has a strong technical feeling that will make colors artificial.

I would just make an effort of taking the lux though, apart fr5om considering a zeiss which again to me comapres favourably to reality.

A photo lens must be like a good high end hifi, just let pure music out of it, adding no character that is just coloration.

As for adding personality to pictures, one has infinite possibilieties in darkroom, esp digital
864
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2016   #52
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 938
I'm stunned by the Canon, I thought it would be worse - a shame it has not 0.7m focus distance.
I was (as Gabor noticed) surprised by the sharpness difference of the MC vs. SC. The difference otherwise is almost negligible.
The FLE would be my choice if I had another income but I still hope for a great deal on the distagon one day.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2016   #53
dave lackey
Registered User
 
dave lackey's Avatar
 
dave lackey is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 8,148
Yes, very well done comparison and evaluation by Jon! I am always amazed with his work.

Now for the question that I need to ask because it seems everybody speaks alphabets like they know and expect everyone else to know... I do not. And I can not be the only one.

There must be several different Luxes referenced above...or is it just two? What does FLE designate? An acronym? For what? I need a primer.

FLE, FLE Asph, Lux, Lux Asph, what else? I lost track. Apologies for not knowing these things.

Can anyone give a short summary of these 35mm Summilux lenses? If so, it is much appreciated in advance.
__________________
Peace, Love and Happiness...



Dave
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2016   #54
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 4,855
Ken Rockwell's website has all the info you're after, Dave.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/35mm-f14.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/35mm-f14-asph.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/35m...ng-element.htm
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2016   #55
benmacphoto
Registered User
 
benmacphoto's Avatar
 
benmacphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Age: 30
Posts: 933
Dave, here is a breakdown of the versions of the 35mm Summilux in order of their release.
ASPH means aspherical lens elements, and FLE means floating lens elements.
I'm sure I forgot a version of the lens somewhere.
I've owned or used every 35mm Summilux, except the "AA" and I like the pre ASPH versions best for their characteristics.

35mm f1.4 Summilux Steel Rim, first version lens, non ASPH lens.
35mm f1.4 Summilux version II, a non ASPH lens.
35mm f1.4 ASPHERICAL "AA" Summilux, rare lens first ASPH version 2000 made.
35mm f1.4 ASPH Summilux, ASPH lens.
35mm f1.4 ASPH FLE Summilux, an ASPH lens with corrected floating lens elements.
__________________
Instagram

Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2016   #56
dave lackey
Registered User
 
dave lackey's Avatar
 
dave lackey is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 8,148
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
Thanks, Jon...

Typical overkill from KR. But detailed I suppose to answer a lot of technical questions. So in summary, there are three 50mm Summilux lenses?
__________________
Peace, Love and Happiness...



Dave
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2016   #57
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 4,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave lackey View Post
So in summary, there are three 50mm Summilux lenses?
50mm lenses? We're talking about 35mm lenses in this thread Dave

benmacphoto's post above covers it!
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2016   #58
dave lackey
Registered User
 
dave lackey's Avatar
 
dave lackey is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 8,148
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
50mm lenses? We're talking about 35mm lenses in this thread Dave

benmacphoto's post above covers it!
Yes, 35 lenses... Sorry, distractions as a caregiver, you know. Never enough time to think or edit.
__________________
Peace, Love and Happiness...



Dave
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2016   #59
dave lackey
Registered User
 
dave lackey's Avatar
 
dave lackey is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 8,148
Thanks, Jon and Ben...

Much better than KR!

It is a long history so I thought there must be more than two or three versions!
__________________
Peace, Love and Happiness...



Dave
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-04-2016   #60
benmacphoto
Registered User
 
benmacphoto's Avatar
 
benmacphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Age: 30
Posts: 933
Really great samples here to show how each lens performs.
Very well done Jon!
__________________
Instagram

Website
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 16:04.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.