Nex 7 and Leica 24mm f/1.4 Summilux = Fail

DamenS said:
LOL - No, way too close to what so many people on the forums would believe and state with total and utter conviction. Maybe I will do better with such subtleties as I see more of your posts, become familiar with your general ideals and can ajudge the tone accordingly ... but as it stands, at least it gave me a chance to rant when I was in desperate need of one. It was a GOOD rant :)
Click to expand...


Maybe some bran in the diet? :D

Seriously ... people can spend their money how they want. I remember choking somewhat though when I saw the price of the 24mm Summilux when it was released ... I so would have liked that lens for my M8 when I had it! It was the lack of available lens speed at shorter focal lengths that really killed that camera for me.
 
Actually probably a few less beers before 7pm would help - though maybe not ... my verbosity has always rendered my words somewhat, ahem, loose and easy ?

I hear you on the Need for Speed though - I have actually just bought the new Leica 50mm Noctilux with a personal loan, but I wont be able to afford the camera for another 4 years.

Originally Posted by Frank Version Two
Nah he's just a rich wanker.
Click to expand...


LOL - so true !! He pontificates far too much for my liking and his spelling and grammar are atrocious ! I have yet to see a bad review from him after a "personal junket" funded by a camera company (of which he attends MANY).
 
Last edited:
Frank Version Two said:
Not to mention the people who make the Zeiss lens just flew him out on a fancy trip that probably cost $10-20K a head, that's worth a lot of focusing errors.
Click to expand...

Do you really think Zeiss even cares about whether a handful of people on the planet plan to use a Summilux on a NEX 7? I'd be surprised if Zeiss even gives a passing thought to competition from Leica in this particular market segment. They don't need to.

Reichmann isn't a paid stooge, and he's had more experience with cameras in real use and testing than most of us here.

Bowing to !outrage! he has volunteered to re-run the comparison. I for one will not vent my spleen until he has a chance to do so.
 
Well... you've pegged it! My first name actually is Michael. While like Reichmann I too am from Canada (Adanac = canadA, reversed), I certainly am not a Reichmann.

I find it terribly amusing how quickly some will accuse another of commercial bias particularly when there is no track record of it or evidence of same. If you look at the history of equipment Reichmann has chosen to use in his business over the years there are no clear patterns of bias other than an honest desire to seek out top performance for his purposes.
 
I have to say that shot with the FF sony zoom and the LA-ea2 of the couple in ww2 garb looks fantastic---to me anyway
 
GaryLH said:
Bob

I think u may have nailed it.. I know from my experience with focus peaking that u can be off focus but if u are using manual focus assist (ie 7x or 14x mag) u should be able to nail the focus better than that...

Gary
Click to expand...

Hi Gary,
Peaking is new to the stills camera field. The cinema/video folks could tell us more. MR is a video aware person and probably not awed by a new gimick like peaking in stills. OTOH, in looking at peaking from a photo editor tool perspective, it must involve radius/threashold fine tuning and if not finalized could be quite sloppy in picking truely focused areas in various scenes/contrasts.
Over the years MR has given us very good evaluations from his point of view. He has rubbed a few of us the wrong way on some things, too. For me it was his inability to use my E-1 with gloves on in the dead of winter, so he declared it a failure coming along. I wonder how the NEX-7 will do in his "glove test" ....:eek: Then where I live we just had out 56th day over 100F this year and we don't wear glove in winter ..... :p
Bob
 
"Update: I have been told by some people that the test below may be flawed, and that the 24mm Summulux was slightly defocused because it couldn't be that bad on-center. This is quite possible, since this wasn't performed under controlled studio conditions, and the lens may well have become accidentally defocused during handling. I intend to repeat this test as soon as I can put this combination of gear together again. I regret any confusion this may have caused."
 
The test may be flawed.

Ya think?

What is worse, the flawed test, or not catching it before the readers do?
 
digitalintrigue said:
"Update: I have been told by some people that the test below may be flawed, and that the 24mm Summulux was slightly defocused because it couldn't be that bad on-center. This is quite possible, since this wasn't performed under controlled studio conditions, and the lens may well have become accidentally defocused during handling. I intend to repeat this test as soon as I can put this combination of gear together again. I regret any confusion this may have caused."
Click to expand...

He must have been really rushed, but to suggest that you can only focus in the studio is a bit much. He should withdraw the comparison in that it is clear what happened. Is there such a thing as reviewer malpractice?
 
It is rather sad that people still fall for the fake controversies that is brewed by all these review sites especially LL to bump the traffic for a while... Richemann might be a rich and vulgar fuddy-duddy but his no fool, and he makes money by other people's nerdy outrage.

This whole photography thing has become so predictable and monotonous that one has to be slightly senile to still find it interesting, due to memory loss, otherwise anyone who has been through one of these silly storms in the teat-cup would not fall for it again... And on the subject of age, maybe Richemann has just made a age-rated mistake in this review...
 
Bob
U maybe right that he did not use focus peaking, but that would imply two different paths to bad focus.

1-someone knocked the camera when he was not looking after everything was in focus
2-accidentally used something like f16 to do his initial focus and in rush did not refocus when he set it to f1.4

Did not realize focus peaking came from video world, interesting piece of info

But I thought it could be focus peaking because when u combine it with a .6 rev, peaking SW could be buggy for that sensor still..


Gary
 
bwcolor said:
He must have been really rushed, but to suggest that you can only focus in the studio is a bit much. He should withdraw the comparison in that it is clear what happened. Is there such a thing as reviewer malpractice?
Click to expand...
It is inexcusable that he should not have removed this faulty comparison from his website after people pointed out that the comparison was so poorly done as to be useless. As someone suggested above, this may be a way for him to attract traffic to his website, which many people call "Ludicruous Landscape". I stopped reading the Reichmann site years ago when he came out with the evaluation that the Epson 1280 printer — notorious for color casts — could do neutral B&W "right out of the box". I just don't trust his eyes.

I only read the the article in question on the NEX-7 when someone referred me to it in the context of saying that the GXR/M-12 Mount was likely to be better for using M-Lenses. That still remains to be seen,

—Mitch/Bangkok
Tokyo: It is love by people and special thanks for you
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom