AlexMax
Established
Hi
I have a nice collection of wides,
35mm :
Biogon f2.0
Ultron f1.7
Nokton f1.2
21mm :
Biogon f4.5
Skopar f4.0
Elmarit f2.8
19mm :
Canon Fl
18mm :
Distagon f4
15mm
Super wide heliar M f4
as you can see, i am a wide angle freak
But i never, ever shot with a 12mm... so I ask...
Is perspective distortion of a 12mm that much different from a 15mm ??
I have no experience whatsoever with a focal this short... :/
Best regards
Alexandre
I have a nice collection of wides,
35mm :
Biogon f2.0
Ultron f1.7
Nokton f1.2
21mm :
Biogon f4.5
Skopar f4.0
Elmarit f2.8
19mm :
Canon Fl
18mm :
Distagon f4
15mm
Super wide heliar M f4
as you can see, i am a wide angle freak
But i never, ever shot with a 12mm... so I ask...
Is perspective distortion of a 12mm that much different from a 15mm ??
I have no experience whatsoever with a focal this short... :/
Best regards
Alexandre
pvdhaar
Peter
The perspective distortion is a matter of where objects are relative to you and one another. As you'll have found using UWA's, that means it's all about getting close to the main subject. If the 12 can't focus a lot closer than your 15 or 18, you won't get a much different perspective, you'll only pull in more along the edge of the frame..
lawrence
Veteran
As Peter says, perspective distortion is not caused by a lens but by the viewpoint of the photographer. For example, if you photograph a scene with a 90mm lens and then, without changing your position, switch to a 12mm lens the perspective distortion remains the same. In other words, the 12mm simply gives a wider view.
The 12mm Heliar doesn't have much optical distortion but there's some vignetting and loss of contrast towards the edges of the frame.
The 12mm Heliar doesn't have much optical distortion but there's some vignetting and loss of contrast towards the edges of the frame.
Sparrow
Veteran
... and to prove it, this is a photo taken with a 12mm overlaid with a 50 both taken from the same place.
As you can see the 12 has very little, if any distortion ... but of course it has that dramatic planer projection so the perspective can look odd if its not kept level
Front Cover 2 par Sparrow ... Stewart Mcbride, on ipernity
... the photo is a book cover so its been cropped a bit
As you can see the 12 has very little, if any distortion ... but of course it has that dramatic planer projection so the perspective can look odd if its not kept level
Front Cover 2 par Sparrow ... Stewart Mcbride, on ipernity
... the photo is a book cover so its been cropped a bit
robert blu
quiet photographer
I had both, the cv 15 which was later replaced by the 12. I still have the 12. It's only 3mm but the visual difference is huge. Personally I find the 12 more "difficult" to use than the 15. Framing is more critical. But when you manage to keep it under conntrol the result is really good. A couple of shots with the 12. Hope it helps.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
It's the only lens I've ever found too wide for any but the most specialized uses -- and I have 18mm and 15mm on 35mm and my wife uses 35mm on 6x9cm on her Alpa 12 S/WA (16mm equivalent, but with some shift...)
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
Michael Markey
Veteran
I have one and I agree with Roger .
I also find it far too wide for my purposes.
I also find it far too wide for my purposes.
mfogiel
Veteran
12mm is extreme. With 12mm you cannot just shoot off the cuff. You need to check the composition carefully, and if you get your verticals off, the photo immediately becomes unsettled. I find it a very fascinating FL, even if I don't use it all that often.
20104205 by mfogiel, on Flickr
20093901 by mfogiel, on Flickr
20104205 by mfogiel, on Flickr
20093901 by mfogiel, on Flickr
raid
Dad Photographer
I favor coverage 17mm-28mm as my wide angle lenses.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Too limiting for me. I also have 15 and 14 (Nikon fit, but goes on the Leicas with an adapter) -- but when I hit 12, it was wider than I was comfortable with. This was totally against my expectations, and I'd hate to be without my 14 and 15.
Cheers,
R.
Sparrow
Veteran
Sparrow
Veteran
AlexMax
Established
Hi
Nice pics there Sparrow, mfogiel, and R Blu.
Slightly off topic... how wide can a WA be, before a polarizer starts creating these weird skies effect, with darker zones near the centre of the frame..??
35mm? 21mm? wider..??
Best regs
Alex
Nice pics there Sparrow, mfogiel, and R Blu.
Slightly off topic... how wide can a WA be, before a polarizer starts creating these weird skies effect, with darker zones near the centre of the frame..??
35mm? 21mm? wider..??
Best regs
Alex
Texsport
Well-known
As many have stated, 12mm and even 15mm, are specialty optics with limited application.
When appropriate subjects present themselves, stunning results can be obtained, however, when no other lens could suffice. Being close to the subject is generally the easiest way to utilize these lenses.
Most often, the difficulty in properly framing both horizontally and vertically tends to make me switch to a panoramic format lens - more easily composed and framed.
Texsport
When appropriate subjects present themselves, stunning results can be obtained, however, when no other lens could suffice. Being close to the subject is generally the easiest way to utilize these lenses.
Most often, the difficulty in properly framing both horizontally and vertically tends to make me switch to a panoramic format lens - more easily composed and framed.
Texsport
Sparrow
Veteran
Hi
Nice pics there Sparrow, mfogiel, and R Blu.
Slightly off topic... how wide can a WA be, before a polarizer starts creating these weird skies effect, with darker zones near the centre of the frame..??
35mm? 21mm? wider..??
Best regs
Alex
... that's just how the world is the sky is naturally polarised ... a polariser on the 12 can be interesting though
YYV_146
Well-known
Very different. Different from everything I've ever used before.
As for polarizers. I use one regularly on the 21mm Summilux with good results. I don't use them for anything wider. Just my 2 cents.
As for polarizers. I use one regularly on the 21mm Summilux with good results. I don't use them for anything wider. Just my 2 cents.
Sparrow
Veteran
... I do
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Many of the pics posted here show what is "wrong" with 12mm.
Some of them show why it is so good, as well.
Some of them show why it is so good, as well.
Dwig
Well-known
One, you can encounter this effect with a 50mm lens when the conditions are right.
Two, it is not always "darker zones near the center". When using a polarizer, the lighter and darker areas are not fixed to any location in the frame. They are related to the sun's position in the sky. The darkest areas are those 90 degrees from the sun. The lightest are 0 degrees (e.g. around the sun itself) and 180 degrees.
If the sun is at the zenith (straight up) then the sky at the horizon will darken evenly through a full 360 degree panoramic sweep. If the sun is near the horizon and you frame a horizontal picture with the sun just outside of one side of the frame then the sky will fade from light, on the side near the sun, to dark quite noticeably even with a lens as long as a 50mm.
Ronald M
Veteran
... I do
The wider you go, the more circles in the corners,edges, turn into ellipses. Note the sunbathers face.
There is no such thing as perspective distortion. The size relationship between near and far objects is governed by where you stand, not focal length.
Lesson 2 is take a shot with the 15, then WITHOUT MOVING and keeping the picture center the same place, do a 50 mm shot. AREA within the 50 mm frame will overlay perfectly. If you move back as was done with the boat image, they will not overlay and the perspective changes.