scho
Well-known
Just started using this lens on the M8 and I really like the sharpness and smooth transitions. I hand coded the biogon as a 35mm f/2 summicron and this seems to work fine (no significant cyan viginetting with the B+W 486 UV/IR cut filter). Couple of full size jpegs (large files) on my pbase site for detail evaluation, shot with 486 filter and lens recognition enabled (firmware 1.092):
http://pbase.com/scho/image/75458092/original
http://pbase.com/scho/image/75458099/original
I also posted this on DPR.
http://pbase.com/scho/image/75458092/original
http://pbase.com/scho/image/75458099/original
I also posted this on DPR.
Last edited:
sirius
Well-known
Thanks, that lens and camera look like a wonderful combination. The 50 mm equivalent is all one really needs.
x-ray
Veteran
Isn't the Biogon a stunning lens. After 39 years of leica glass i discovered the new Zeiss lenses and they've become my all time favorite lenses. I've had a number of leitz 35's including the v1 summicron, v4 summicron, v1 summilux and asph summicron and still have the asph summicron and the new Biogon and hands down favor the Biogon over any of the Leitz. I also have the 25 Biogon and the 50 Planar. There's nothing that will touch the 25 and I'm starting to favor the smooth tonality and super sharp images of the Planar over my 50 asph summilux. I actually feel the Zeiss is as sharp or sharper than the Leits lenses and have much nicer tonality and smoothness over the new asph Leica lenses. I've been rather disappointed in my 90 apo asph summicrons close performance and can't wait to get the new Zeiss 85 Sonnar.
Curious about your M8, Is there some chromatic aberations around the branches in the corners o the frames? It appears there is a cyan line around the detail. If there is you might not know this is easily corrected in the lens correction tool of photoshop. It's either in the raw converter if you shoot raw or in the filters section for tif and jpg. Easy fix if this is the case.
Curious about your M8, Is there some chromatic aberations around the branches in the corners o the frames? It appears there is a cyan line around the detail. If there is you might not know this is easily corrected in the lens correction tool of photoshop. It's either in the raw converter if you shoot raw or in the filters section for tif and jpg. Easy fix if this is the case.
scho
Well-known
x-ray said:
I also noticed the slight green/cyan around the backlit branches in this 100% view, but I'm not sure if this is lens CA or camera processing induced. The camera was set for lens recognition, but I think we have to wait for the more accurate cyan viginetting algorithms in firmware 1.10. I will try to make some comparisons with lens detection disabled and also without a 486 filter. I haven't used this lens much yet, but this is the only shot where I've seen this effect so far.
Avotius
Some guy
Don, your word carries a lot of weight with me and I have the utmost respect for you, which is why I am even slightly considering the zeiss 35 for my future set. I always wanted the 35 cron asph, but you got me considering the biogon, thats for sure.
ps. the shot is great, the one I can see at least, the first one of the tree, when it opened it was on the side corner and I was thinking....ew...whats so great about that? then I realized it was the out of focus part of the image, woops! Its amazingly good, much better then anything I ever shot with my 20D and 50 1.4 which is really really really sharp....that shot though...its got character....the other one wont open for some reason, says broken image!
ps. the shot is great, the one I can see at least, the first one of the tree, when it opened it was on the side corner and I was thinking....ew...whats so great about that? then I realized it was the out of focus part of the image, woops! Its amazingly good, much better then anything I ever shot with my 20D and 50 1.4 which is really really really sharp....that shot though...its got character....the other one wont open for some reason, says broken image!
Last edited:
scho
Well-known
Avotius said:
Try opening from the index page (last image):
http://www.pbase.com/scho/leica_m8&page=2
sebastel
coarse art umbrascriptor
em, though i find your pictures quite interesting, i'd still like to know what level of JPEG compression has been applied, and where/how. i feel a bit disturbed by the artifacts, and want to know whether it was the camera or the postprocessing for the web that introduced the artifacts.
just to mention: since i own zeiss lenses, i learn to like them quite a lot, too (zm 25mm and c-sonnar on R-D1).
cheers
sebastian
just to mention: since i own zeiss lenses, i learn to like them quite a lot, too (zm 25mm and c-sonnar on R-D1).
cheers
sebastian
washy21
Established
I've also got the 35mm F2 Zeiss - It is truly great. Wish I could hand code it, but would not know where to start.
scho
Well-known
I don't see any jpeg artifacts in the original images and I don't what pbase does when they compress or downsize for intermediate sizes. The "original" jpeg was made at level 8 in CS3. The only artifact I see is the cyan fringing discussed above and I think that is related to the in-camera processing (lens recognition ON) that was applied to diminish cyan viginetting.sebastel said:
scho
Well-known
washy21 said:
Easy to hand code. Remove lens from M8 and using a fine point marker make thin lines from the location of each sensor to the outer edge of the lens mount so the marks can be seen when a lens is mounted. Re-mount lens and mark the edge of the lens mount with thin lines corresponding to sensor positions 2 and 5 marked on the camera mount. Remove lens, and make a black patch on underside of lens mount with a black Sharpie marker from the #2 to #5 lines on the outer lens mount. No need to mark individual sensor positions because code is 011110 and you can just fill in that area. There is a screw that is in part of the area that needs to be marked but I had no problem just marking over that. Just make sure you have the #2 and #5 sensor positions accurately marked and don't put any marker ink in the #1 and #6 areas. If you don't get it right, just erase with a q-tip and tiny bit of acetone or nail polish remover. Be sure to turn on lens detection in the M8 menu.
sebastel
coarse art umbrascriptor
scho
Well-known
Sorry, there is nothing in that area of the image that I would label as a "jpeg artifact".sebastel said:
pfogle
Well-known
Carl - your pictures are great - as an R-D1 owner I got thoroughly depressed until I saw how good your R-D1 samples are - clearly the photographer has as much to do with it as the lens/camera!
However, I take heart that when my camera goes to that great backup in the sky, there's an even better one waiting
ps I take your point about the CZ 35, it is spectacular. Still, the CV 28 Ultron puts up a pretty good show too, don't you think? Have you compared it to the CZ 28?
However, I take heart that when my camera goes to that great backup in the sky, there's an even better one waiting
ps I take your point about the CZ 35, it is spectacular. Still, the CV 28 Ultron puts up a pretty good show too, don't you think? Have you compared it to the CZ 28?
scho
Well-known
Phil,pfogle said:Carl - your pictures are great - as an R-D1 owner I got thoroughly depressed until I saw how good your R-D1 samples are - clearly the photographer has as much to do with it as the lens/camera!
However, I take heart that when my camera goes to that great backup in the sky, there's an even better one waiting
ps I take your point about the CZ 35, it is spectacular. Still, the CV 28 Ultron puts up a pretty good show too, don't you think? Have you compared it to the CZ 28?
I agree that the 28 Ultron is a great lens as well. It is not as contrasty as the zeiss 35, but has great dynamic range and is my go to lens on sunny days. Here is a shot of the same scene with the Ultron on a bright, sunny day.
http://www.pbase.com/scho/image/75335050
I sold my R-D1 (with the 40mm Nokton), but really liked the camera while I had it. The 40 Nokton was very similar (sharp and contrasty) to the Zeiss, but was difficult to focus on the M8 (tight mount). Just hope my M8 doesn't develop the sudden death syndrome that seems to afflicting other M8 owners.
Carl
x-ray
Veteran
Carl:
Try a test and see what happens. Shoot RAW files and shoot an image of branches against a bright sky much like you did. Try to simulate the conditions that caused the problem. Try a couple of different shots with branches against a very brigh sky. You'll mainly see CA's in the corners and edges. I say raw files because JPG files introduce another set of problems and much of your information is thrown in the trash vs RAW files converted to TIF. In CS2 and3 you have a fill set of lens correction tools in the raw converter under the tabs where curves and other functyions are located when you first open the raw file before conversion. Go to the lens tools and look at the corner at 100%. Adjust the chromatic aberation sliders and see if you can eliminate the blue red yellow cyan lines. This should work. If it does it is CA's which are common in virtually all wide lenses and normals to some degree. Vignetting can be adjusted out too in that same section. See how that works. I don't have to deal with vignetting and I don't know if there is a color adjustment there but give it a try. I would love to know the results. My guess is 90% of the problem can be fixed in raw with no problem and very little time.
Try a test and see what happens. Shoot RAW files and shoot an image of branches against a bright sky much like you did. Try to simulate the conditions that caused the problem. Try a couple of different shots with branches against a very brigh sky. You'll mainly see CA's in the corners and edges. I say raw files because JPG files introduce another set of problems and much of your information is thrown in the trash vs RAW files converted to TIF. In CS2 and3 you have a fill set of lens correction tools in the raw converter under the tabs where curves and other functyions are located when you first open the raw file before conversion. Go to the lens tools and look at the corner at 100%. Adjust the chromatic aberation sliders and see if you can eliminate the blue red yellow cyan lines. This should work. If it does it is CA's which are common in virtually all wide lenses and normals to some degree. Vignetting can be adjusted out too in that same section. See how that works. I don't have to deal with vignetting and I don't know if there is a color adjustment there but give it a try. I would love to know the results. My guess is 90% of the problem can be fixed in raw with no problem and very little time.
x-ray
Veteran
Avotius said:
Thanks and I wanted to thank you again for the superb print that you sent. I really enjoy it! Hope your trip back to China was a good one.
The biogon vs the asph summicron, well the Summicron asph is a superb lens but I've run into flare problems with light sources outside the frame. Brigh overcast skies and shooting into shaded areas with the sky outside the frame area has been a problem with very disappointing results. I'm finding the asph summicron to have issues with back lighting and light sources outside the frame. It's a haze of flare and also aperture pattern spots when a point source is outside the frame. On the other hand the Biogon has never done anything like this. I've shot with the sun in the frame and bright sources on the edge of the frame and just outside. I've been unable to get flare of any consequence at this point. I also find the Biogon to be much smoother in tone and much creamier in tone. It's much more classic looking but razor sharp. The Biogon is atleast as sharp as the asph Summicron if not a little sharper. I find this to be the case with the 25 and the 50 Planar too. The only time I've been able to get one of the Zeiss to flare was the 25mm but it wasn't actually flare from the lens. The light source that was just outside the frame was so bright that it caused reflecting off internal parts of my MP (in the film chamber) and reflecting back on the top of the film frame. It turned out to be internal reflections inside the camera not the lens. I believe Zeiss has better coatings resulting in better flare controll.
scho
Well-known
x-ray said:
Don,
Yes, I'll try some more tests to induce this effect. I only shoot raw (never jpegs) and I'm familiar with the CA and vignetting correction tools in ACR and Lightroom. Neither did much for this particular image which led me to think that this was related to the cyan vignetting problem that was not properly corrected by the camera firmware. I coded the biogon as a 35 summicron, so I'm suspicious that the 1.092 firmware corrections may not be appropriate for the biogon. I'll try some comparison images with lens recognition on/off and also with/without the 486 filter to see if this is just CA or something else.
Thanks,
Carl
scho
Well-known
I think the fringing problem in this image was caused by the raw processor (ACR/Lightroom) and may require a calibration adjustment for the M8. There was no fringing when I re-processed the DNG raw file using C1 LE with their default M8 profile. I don't particularly like using C1 and think that overall the C1 image looks to "plasticky" but at least it did not create any fringing. I'll play around with ACR/Lightroom calibration, but I wish they would use icc camera profiles instead of the eyeball calibration approach.
Last edited:
x-ray
Veteran
Very interesting that Lightroom introduced the problem. I agree that C1 can cause a plastic look in th conversion. This was my main objection to it. You might try backing off the sharpening in C1 which seems to help. Their default sharpening is too high for my taste. Glad it's not the lens causing the problem. It's going to be very interested to see if leica can correct the cyan corner problem in firmware.
Good luck!
Good luck!
scho
Well-known
Don,x-ray said:
I fixed the problem in Lightroom just by turning off color noise reduction in the Details tab. The first image was processed with color noise reduction on (default 25). Here is the re-processed image from Lightroom with no color noise reduction, no more fringing:
http://www.pbase.com/scho/image/75533276
Carl