Lloyd's recommendations for:
SSD • Hard drives • Memory
from trusted vendor OWC
For reviews, please visit:
Mac Performance Guide
Subscribe and renew to guides and reviews here.
Hand-picked gear: Nikon • Canon • Leica • filters, computers and more.
I’ve been using the Acratech GP ballhead for a few months now on my light and medium tripods, and I like it a lot. I’ve also just received the GP-ss model, which is even smaller and lighter, yet full-featured, something I value when I carry my camera gear on my mountain bike.
Read my review of the Acratech GP and GP-ss ballheads. Highly recommended.
Last year I reviewed a variety of binoculars.
Brian (and Esta) writes:
My wife is legally blind, she has vision similar to Macular Degeneration but not quite the same disease.
These Canon optics have given her back a view of the natural world that was previously not available to her. Your review was instrumental in our purchase decision.
DIGLLOYD: Wonderful!
The reviews required a lot of work, so I thank readers for using my B&H links to buy them at B&H Photo, especially since B&H made the reviews possible by providing the binoculars for review.
See also May 19, 2011 reader comments on a similar topic.
Markus M in Germany writes:
I wanted to thank you again for your great advice as regards the Nikon AF-S 60 Micro! I have bought the lens used from a dealer in Germany, and I am very happy with it. It is very sharp, and also great at distances further away (not infinity), in my opinion better than the Zeiss ZF 50 in this regard.
As you have shot with the Zeiss ZF 28 and the new ZF 25, I would be interested which lens you consider to be sharper. It is clear to me that you like the 25 better:-)). As regards the 28, I would be really interested in your opinion as regards the following:
You wrote in the review that the 28 behaves really well when shooting into the sun/ contralight. How does the 25 compare?
Color: Is the 28 similar to the pureness/ clarity of the 25?
Sharpness: Is the 28 as sharp in the centre of the frame as the 25 (it is clear from what you wrote that the 25 is considerably better in the edges)? Or at least comparable?
CA: It is clear that the 25 is considerably better than the 28. But I think the 28 can be corrected in postproduction.
Ability to manual focus handheld: Is one of them considerably easier than the other?
I am asking this because I got a quite good deal for a 28 (second hand, around 500,- Euro), but if the difference between them is huge ("night and day"), I will pass it nevertheless. To be sure I will keep my Nikkor 24 f/ 1.4 G (especially for moving subjects, or taking photos at night), which is a fine lens also. I like the focal length around 24 mm:-)).
Again thank you so much for giving me your personal opinion! It is very much appreciated!
DIGLLOYD: one has to be careful with “better” because the term takes meaning only when adequate context is given.
The new 25/2 Distagon is better corrected for color than either the 25/2.8 or 28/2 Distagon, and it would be my preference over either of those.
I use the 25/2.8 Distagon more than the 28/2 Distagon primarily because of focal length (field of view). But the 28/2 is really designed more for environmental portraits or similar documentary context. The 28/2 has more field curvature which is particularly strong to the corners, but this is actually less than most other 28mm designs of other brands, so keep the context in mind. Stopping down to ƒ/5.6 largely makes this point of no importance except for the far corners.
Both have similar properties: high contrast and brilliance, and the 28/2 has an extra stop to play with, which I really like for its own reasons, especially for its vignetting (ditto for the 25/2.8 at ƒ/2.8). Both lenses have some lateral chromatic aberration, but I have not found this to be an issue in most of my shooting. Both lenses are very sharp and contrast at center by ƒ/4.
Lately certain lenses from Leica and even Nikon have been in short supply. Why not rent one from LensRentals.com, to see if the lens is really what you like?
I’m incredibly impressed by the way in which LensRentals.com keeps improving their “game”. They have a very serious committment to being the best in the business. What other rental company keeps this kind of high quality blog and articles and dedicates staff to some very serious lens research (see the articles).
The rental process is super easy, the gear has always operated perfectly, and the shipping process a piece of cake.
Disclosure: LensRentals.com has helped me expand the work I can do by supplying test lenses when I need them for testing (I pay shipping, but otherwise free). They are also an advertiser on this site. Try somewhere else if you like, but I’d pay these guys if I had to (I hope they don’t read that part!).
Recently I posed a series of questions to Leica USA, questions of interest to myself, and that I think are of interest to all Leica M and potential Leica M users.
Like any other company, Leica is constrained in the types of answers that can be given for future products, so while we might all wish for more specifics, the answers naturally can be limited. In that sense, the Q/A is partially to get the issues on the table, even if they cannot necessarily be satisfied at present.
My questions and follow-ons are prefixed by “DIGLLOYD”. See also my Guide to Leica.
Since its introduction, the Leica M9 has become the tool of choice for those who demand the highest standards in image quality and love freedom of composition. As a result, we’ve seen a steady increase in the number of photographers that are becoming Leica owners worldwide.
Our customers appreciate the brand’s qualities that set it apart, namely mastery in optics and mechanics, high-quality design and outstanding craftsmanship. In addition, they are drawn to the M9 and M9-P’s compact size, full frame CCD image sensor and the resulting images that are particularly rich in details.
From our many conversations with customers, we know that M-System owners, both amateur and professional alike, enjoy traveling with their cameras because of the flexibility allowed by their compact, ergonomic construction.
The Leica Akademie, a series of photographic lectures, workshops and experiential learning days introduced in North America last year, is extremely popular with new Leica users. With programming dedicated solely to the M-System, it provides customers with an opportunity to discover additional lenses. We are seeing that most M9 and M9-P owners like to have 3-4 lenses on average, leading to high demand for Leica lenses.
As for lenses, I would agree that 3-5 lenses is about right, and one lens is just right some of the time too.
Buyers might unfortunately include more than a few dilettantes looking for a status symbol. But if that is what it takes to keep Leica healthy, I’m all for it.
While this is an option for video applications, Leica lenses are designed to best perform on Leica equipment and customers may experience limitations when combining them with equipment from other manufacturers.
DIGLLOYD: I am hearing of developing demand from LensRentals.com for Leica M lenses.
All Leica lenses are hand-crafted in Germany and go through meticulous manufacturing processes to uphold the quality and precision defined by Leica and expected by our customers. In the age where technology almost inevitably means mass manufacturing, Leica products are still made with exacting precision by the hands of highly-trained technicians. With such attention to detail, it is often hard to instantaneously meet the demand of customers seeking the finest lenses available, especially the fastest lenses that are extremely popular as a result of their uniqueness and superior image quality.
That being said, Leica Camera regrets the often difficult situation our customers experience in acquiring their dream lenses. We are actively working to increase Leica's production while keeping in line with our core goal of providing the best optical performance possible.
We invite customers to view the "Leica Lenses" video, providing a rare behind-the-scenes look at the craftsmanship and making of Leica lenses in the production facilities of Leica Camera AG in Solms, at: http://en.leica-camera.com/photography/m_system/m_cameras
DIGLLOYD: Indeed, hand-crafted lenses which require years of training to produce cannot be increased in production quickly. The used and overseas markets are one way M users might find a desired lens, and don’t rule out older lenses and/or Zeiss ZM or Voigtlander M-mount lenses, at least for placeholders until the desired Leica M lens can be obtained.
Leica's focus remains first and foremost on providing a premium customer experience and products of outstanding construction and performance quality. Pricing for each lens depends on its individual design and production requirements.
Due to a significant rise in the cost of certain materials used to manufacture Leica lenses, Leica has been forced to increase its lens prices accordingly. The increase in cost is particularly related to certain types of specialty glass containing rare-earth materials. Rare-earth materials are also used to polish optics in the production of lens elements. Further cost increases have resulted from the rise in base pricing of noble metals as well as the cost of labor.
DIGLLOYD: I have followed the rare earth market for some years now. Cerium oxide (glass polishing) and Lanthanum oxide (some types of glass) have skyrocketed in price enough to make any hedge fund manager green with envy. Lutetium might be used for certain special glass types, and perhaps praseodymium. Some of these elements are up 1000% or more.
Leica Camera maintains a position at the forefront of optical technology and continuously investigates new technologies as they become available. Our goal is to study these new technologies to deliver improved customer experience with reliable advances.
We have seen the M-System come a long way since the introduction of the Leica M8 in 2006, as evidenced by the renewed success of the M9. With the M9, we united over 50 years of continuous technical improvements to the system with the best in cutting-edge digital technology. Most recently, the Leica M9 Titanium was released, featuring new advancements made in the rangefinder of our M-System cameras.
DIGLLOYD: I expect that we will see new developments, but perhaps taking longer than users might wish.
While Leica Camera does not comment on other manufacturers' products, it is exciting to see the interest in product categories which were pioneered by Leica. The Leica X1, with its superior APS-C sensor and superb lens quality, follows in the footsteps of our flagship M-System and has proven to be an extremely popular camera system.
DIGLLOYD: Interesting comparison. But the X1 is not an ALLVIEW camera.
Again, Leica Camera is continuously investigating new technologies that may lead to reliable advancements for the M-System. However, our main focus remains on providing our customers with the invaluable confidence and assurance that they are using the finest cameras and optical photographic accessories available in the world, rather than forcing change for the sake of change.
DIGLLOYD: This is a curious response, as I would not consider higher resolution “change for the sake of change” when in fact the lenses can deliver MUCH more than the M9 sensor can record. In film days, was a new film with higher resolving power and/or with tighter grain “forcing change for the sake of change” also?
How about change for the sake of lower noise, or change for the sake of exploiting the deep optical reserves in Leica M lenses?
For decades, Leica customers have appreciated these cameras because of their ease of use and extremely bright rangefinder. When designing products, our dedicated engineers focus on processing speed in order to ensure ease of use and deliver exceptionally fast speed, attributes that are key to the advancement of the Leica M-System.
A compact LCD screen like the one on a Leica M9 is a good aid for quick reviewing after capture. Leica recommends utilizing high resolution monitors to review the superior performance of Leica lenses and sensor technology.
DIGLLOYD: the first step in fixing an issue is to acknowledge it as an issue. The LCD resolution is not the core issue; rather it is the low quality (blurry) image presented on the screen when zoomed in that makes focus-accuracy check impossible.
Reader comments are their own, and should not be take as reflecting my own views.
Note: when writing me, please take the time for proper spelling and capitalization and brand names capitalization and grammar.
It was very interesting the Leica Q&A on your blog. I have to say though that their response to your monitor screen question was little short of ludicrous - reviewing the images on a high-res monitor sort of defeats the purpose of having a compact, lightweight travel kit, does it not? It also seems to imply that the M-system is just so awesome you don't need to worry about gauche, pesky things like reviewing your images until you get home - at least that's how it reads to me.
Maybe there is some inherent processing weakness in the M8/9 that prevents rendering a full-res JPG fast enough for usable image review, even if it can write it to the card? Their statement about "exceptionally fast [processing] speed" is a little disingenuous too.
3" VGA (921,600 dot) screens have been around since at least 2007 (I think the D3 or D300 was the first) and are now found on some of the most basic DSLRs costing less than 1/10 of the M9 - while the ol' 230,000 dot screen is now standard fare on a <$100 P&S.
DIGLLOYD: Indeed. My gripe is not so much with the screen as the fact that what is displayed on it is ultra poor quality (when zoomed in). I had speculated on that very notion today (processing power) with Leica on the phone today, and I hope to hear something back on that issue. After all, if it’s possible to fix in firmware, it would remove a big sore point in using the M9.
As for the LCD screen, I believe Leica had some severely restricted choices based on the availability at the time, and the projected volume. Leica cannot commit to buying a million screens at a time, and when the M9 was released, Leica was thinking tens of thousands most likely. With the M9 a runaway hit, perhaps the next model will garner more optimism from the designers.
Cascadel © Copyright 2012 Paul IDidn’t think I’d write back so soon, but have to comment…
I just finished making a 30” print from my M9 when I saw your great interview with Leica. Nice of them to talk to you. I was especially impressed with their comment:
“However, our main focus remains on providing our customers with the invaluable confidence and assurance that they are using the finest cameras and optical photographic accessories available in the world”
Yes, the lenses are wonderful, as the prints clearly show. You just published a crop of one of the many images I had to discard because of highlight posterization at ISO 80. Was that caused because I didn’t spend $1,000+ to upgrade to the improved titanium model?
And I second Scott M’s remarks about the screen, but unfortunately my desktop computer with a high resolution screen didn’t fit in my backpack. The manufacturing cost of a much improved screen (as in my Canon S90 or iPhone 3G, let alone the 4S) is trivial. The arrogance in making the above statement after changing the color of the red dot instead of addressing functional issues is what will cause many of us to look for alternate bodies on which to mount our Leica glass.
DIGLLOYD: the posterization problem is sensor related, and probably nothing much can be done with a CCD sensor as is used in the M9; there are other oddball issues as I show in my Guide to Leica. It is rare for this to be an issue, but it often can be with water; I suppose I have learned to accept it, and to expose like slide film (one reason I often “push” during my RAW conversions).
As for the LCD screen, Canon and Apple deal with millions at a time, and at the time the Leica M9 was designed (3-4 years ago), no doubt Leica had to make a decision based on unfavorable pricing for very small quantities (eg tens of thousands at most). Leica could not assume they’d have a hit, and simply made a rational business decision. And remember that in 2009, Leica was not in great shape financially. But today, with the M9 in great demand, and Leica financially invigorated, that logic could be revisited, since Leica has ample data at this point.
Many thanks for raising the M9 issues with Leica, and sharing the interview with us. Many reviewers fail to mention the downsides to M9 ownership, so subscribing to your "Guide to Leica" has been invaluable for me.
I understand why Leica gave corporate answers during the interview, but hopefully they will listen and address these issues. I`d love to buy an M9, but my poor short-sighted vision means that I will only be able to use M lenses on an ALLVIEW camera. Unfortunately, if Leica do not address the M9s shortcomings with the next model, it will still sell very well, simply because it`s a "Leica"!!!
DIGLLOYD: there are up to +3 diopter eyepieces for the Leica M9. You would have the same issue with an EVF, and anyone in their mid-40s has an increasing (year by year) issue with presbyopia with respect to the rear LCD.
I thought their response in re crappy LCD performance was awfully weak. your defense in re number of purchases, yeah, maybe, but what is the difference in unit cost? Please don't tell me that cost is a big consideration as part of the whole $$$$ M9 package. and how about upgrading it now then? I don't see any reason a same physical-sized improved LCD couldn't be retrofitted along with firmware. would *you* bite the bullet and pay $300 for a better LCD? You could get a good estimate of the real cost by asking Canon repair what it would cost to replace the LCD on a 60D (very big, articulated, and very high res) or Nikon for one of their big LCDs.
DIGLLOYD: context-dropping is always a poor basis for understanding complex situations.
I just read your interview with someone at Leica. I know companies are reluctant to say much about future products or features. However, I find Leica’s responses to your questions rather condescending, because you were raising many important issues that are of concern to all users of M digital cameras and lenses.
Especially, to your pointed question about the frustrations of M camera users with respect to composition, focus, usability, etc., their responses failed to even acknowledge your concerns as relevant, or demonstrate they even comprehended the issues (witness the suggestion to carry a high resolution monitor with you!).
I would at least feel a little better if Leica had responded with something like “Yes, we’re acutely aware of it, of course, and our engineers are looking at it.”
I hope Leica realizes that they are so good in optics that the M lenses have now exceeded the capabilities of the M9, and possibly, the rangefinder as a camera paradigm. There is no point in spending $5,000-$10,000+ on M lenses if the camera deficiencies undermine the expensive optics. So Leica has to provide a reasonable roadmap to how the M line will evolve.
At the same time, there is a furious pace of evolution taking place in “ALLVIEW” cameras (mirrorless + EVF), and very soon, there will be ALLVIEW cameras with a full frame sensor for under $2000 that will work with Leica M and R lenses, and solve most of the challenges with a rangefinder.
In fact, ALLVIEW camera possibly pose an existential challenge to rangefinders: Is the rangefinder as a camera paradigm on its last legs?
So that leaves loyal Leica M users with important questions: How does Leica plan to address some serious functional shortcomings in the M9? In fact, what is the future of the M line? Does Leica have any plans to introduce its own ALLVIEW camera?
Offering scratch resistant glass upgrades to cover the crappy LCD on the M9, or offering the M9 in Titanium are irrelevant to higher image quality or greater usability, or getting the most out of the optics of the M lenses.
DIGLLOYD: I raised my concerns over two years ago in my review of the M9, now in my Guide to Leica. The key issues have never been acknowledged as important, or even acknowledged as issues (“thousands of users are happy with the M9” has never satisfied me, as it is a self-defeating evasion of reality). It is frustrating, but as I have no direct contact at the Leica factory, I have no way to know what the thinking actually is over in Solms.
Leica has out there a loyal base, at least part of which considers it blasphemy to offer constructive criticism— a (very) few readers of my M9 review have emailed me to say that my raising of these issues is a “rant”.
So far, Leica can sell all the M9 bodies it can produce. That might change in 2012, especially if the right ALLVIEW camera comes along that works well with wide angle lenses. Perhaps the Fuji X-Pro1 will be that camera, something I aim to answer definitively. But until a full-frame camera without ray-angle issues arrives, the Leica M9 remains the only camera that can deliver high quality results on 28mm and wider Leica M lenses.
For sale:
You pay S&H and insurance. Contact me.
Just added to the color shading / vignetting page in my Sony NEX-7 review are results for for the Leica 28mm ƒ/2.8 Elmarit-M ASPH and 50mm ƒ/0.95 Noctilux-M ASPH, AND for the Sony 24mm ƒ/1.8 Sonnar.
By showing color shading, one gains insight into potential performance issues on the Sony NEX-5N, Fuji X-Pro1, and similar ALLVIEW cameras.
Sensor design can vary greatly, and thus one cannot even assume that the NEX-5N will behave like the NEX-7. What can be said is that if a sensor interacts the way the NEX-7 does with one lens, then it will interact for the same reasons with other lenses.
Reduced size screen shot below.
The Leica M9 includes lens correction for Leica M lenses to correct vignetting (partially) and color shading off-center (partially). The correction is not perfect, and cannot be, due to variations in individual lenses.
I’ve posed that very question to Leica, or rather made it an emphatic suggestion. I’m told it’s not an issue that bothers most users. My prediction is that nothing will happen.
Leica is all about image quality, and this is a color defect that is not subtle to anyone with good color vision (like me). It is not an issue with film, digital sensors cause it.
If the image below looks even in color to you, then you have a problem with your display, or your vision. The color cast at lower left is a distraction on snowy scenes, but a critical eye can detect it on any scene.
A real-world example. Observe the white snow at lower right, and cyan/green snow at lower left. This is not the lighting, it occurs in every frame. It is at its worse with 28mm and wider lenses (in general, the lens design also plays a role).
Just added to the color shading / vignetting page in my Guide to Leica are results for for the Leica 28mm ƒ/2.8 Elmarit-M ASPH and 50mm ƒ/0.95 Noctilux-M ASPH.
By showing color shading both with and without lens correction on the M9, one gains insight into potential performance issues on the Sony NEX-7, Fuji X-Pro1, and similar ALLVIEW cameras (not to mention the color and vignetting themselves on the Leica M9/M9P, their native platform).
Reduced size screen shot below.
This site maintains a mailing list segemented by interests. The mailing list is very low volume, never sold, and 100% opt-in. I use these lists mainly to notify subscribers of updated to my publications.
For more info, see the mailing list page.
The Mac Performance Guide and Biking mailing lists correspond to those sites.
Published in DAP in my Sony NEX-7 review are close-range examples with the Sony/Zeiss 24mm ƒ/1.8 Sonnar.
I had a lot of fun shooting these examples, and I discuss that in my comments. I give the nod to the Sony 24/1.8 Sonnar as an important lens to have for the Sony NEX-7 for environmental and close-up shooting of this kind— it has exceptionally lovely bokeh, and is razor sharp wide open at close range. See my page with links for buying, and thanks to B&H Photo for making both the NEX-7 and Sony 24/1.8 available for testing.
Published in DAP in my Sony NEX-7 review is an ƒ/1.8 - ƒ/16 aperture series at close range with the Sony/Zeiss 24mm ƒ/1.8 Sonnar.
Where the 24/1.8 excels is bokeh— background blur. Combined with outstanding central sharness, this is a super lens for environmental portraiture and similar applications. This “blankie” example gives another sense of the image rendition— very nice, and from a child’s eye view.
Published in DAP in my Sony NEX-7 review is an ƒ/1.8 - ƒ/16 aperture series at close range with the Sony/Zeiss 24mm ƒ/1.8 Sonnar.
Surely the NEX-7 and Sony/Zeiss 24/1.8 Sonnar deliver DSLR quality — better than many DSLRs, at least at ISO 100.
This “pencils” image is very different example from the Black Mountain radio towers landscape-style image, and the result are very nice here.
Color space: both sRGB and AdobeRGB flatten the reds in this image (out of gamut), so it is presented in ProPhotoRGB colorspace. Use a colorspace aware browser like Apple Safari (Mac or PC, best choice) or Mozilla Firefox, NOT Internet Explorer or Google Chrome.
I was going nuts trying to see why the highlights on the M9 photo are posterized. Set on ISO 80. Importantly, the highlights on the histogram are nowhere near clipping in ACR. Even if I turn the brightness to minimum and highlight recovery to max the highlights are posterized. (Obviously shot in RAW and not JPG). Printing the area of highlights shows a nice even light grey, nowhere near white.
Attached is a JPG, but RAW shows same thing. So I googled Leica M9 highlight posterization” and immediately came to your page on this. Thank you! This saved me hours of psychiatric care going nuts over trying to figure it out. So much for ISO 80 to allow longer shutter speed.
DIGLLOYD: Funny, I was wondering about that myself recently, having the same issue! I don't remember everything I've written, and I sometimes have to google my own site. Well, actually I remembered the problem from past experience but had forgotten that I had written on it.
Yes, ISO 80 can be an issue with the Leica M9 / M9P. It is best to use it for low contrast scenes only, avoid it in particular with reflections off water.
My name is Emanuel L and the purpose of writing this email is to ask if it is possible for you to write an article about Ricoh GXR Mount A 12 with different Carl Zeiss ZM lenses.
I have Ricoh GXR body, with Mount A 12 and two ZM lenses which are Distagon f4/18 mm and Biogon f2/35 mm. These lenses are excellent. I am learning the Ricoh's system and trying to understand how the lenses work best. I would greatly appreciate if you can do the review, and if there exists one, I would like to subscribe to receive the articles.
DIGLLOYD: The Zeiss 18/4 Distagon and Zeiss 35/2 Biogon are very sharp lenses, as I show in my Guide to Leica. Whether they perform well on the GXR is something that has to be determined by shooting pictures; one cannot predict how a given sensor will react to the ray angle of such lenses (that statement is not just based on my research, it is also from Zeiss). Ray angle interaction with the sensor influences both color shading and sharpness, and can severely degrade lens sharpness off-axis.
Let’s take the Ricoh GXR as a proxy for every ALLVIEW camera out there. A review presumes I have the GXR and the A12 mount— I do not, so getting those items is one challenge. Could be done, but read on for why not in the GXR and general case.
Reviewing cameras is very time intensive, yet camera reviews for point and shoots also have a very short shelf life. And lens behavior on ALLVIEW cameras (such as color shading) cannot necessarily be predicted even from one model to another (e.g. Sony NEX-7 vs NEX-5N). Which makes a review of any particular camera not relevant to another model (even of the same brand), and devalued as soon as the next-gen model appears. Except for cameras like the Leica M9, which is stable in design and evolution. Not so with the consumer and prosumer markets.
With regards to the Ricoh GXR, I saw marginal interest out there (there is one Fuji X100 comparison with the GXR is in my Fuji X100 review). As my time is limited, I must pick my reviews carefully based on reader interest and significance; while the Ricoh GXR is a nice camera, I deem it a footnote in comparison to much more exciting recent cameras , such as the Sony NEX-7 and Fuji X-Pro1. The GXR is of the same genre, well executed, but already stale. I liked the GXR, but I would not buy one with the NEX-7 and X-Pro1 out there, and I think that’s true of my readership also.
Add in the Nikon D4, a high-res Nikon D*** body, the Canon 1D X, the Fuji X-Pro1, the NEX-5N supplement, the Zeiss ZF.2 25/2 Distagon, the Nikon 85/1.8G, and so on, , and I will be severely overloaded for at least several months.The GXR just does not make the cut.
Just published in my Zeiss Guide is a high-res apertures series with the Zeiss 35mm ƒ/1.4 Distagon on the Canon 5D Mark II.
Anticipating the 2012 release of the “retina display” on iPad 3 and new MacBook Pros, this series like yesterday’s series, offers a “retina display” image size of 2880, along with a 1920 version from ƒ/1.4 through ƒ/16.
* Note: the Firefox browser on Mac OS X is glacially slow for drawing large images compared to Apple Safari (10X slower or worse!). Use Safari, which is available for Mac and PC.
Just published in my Zeiss Guide is a high-res apertures series with the Zeiss 25/2 Distagon on the Canon 5D Mark II. This series is mainly about bokeh and the high level of color correction of the 25/2 Distagon, but is also just fun in an animation sort of way*.
Anticipating the 2012 release of the “retina display” on iPad 3 and new MacBook Pros, this series like yesterday’s series, debuts a “retina display” image size of 2880, along with a 1920 version from ƒ/2 through ƒ/16.
* Note: the Firefox browser on Mac OS X is glacially slow for drawing large images compared to Apple Safari (10X slower or worse!). Use Safari, which is available for Mac and PC.
Just published in my Zeiss Guide is a high-res apertures series with the Zeiss 25/2 Distagon on the Canon 5D Mark II. This series is mainly about bokeh and the high level of color correction of the 25/2 Distagon.
Anticipating the 2012 release of the “retina display” on iPad 3 and new MacBook Pros, this series debuts a new “retina display” image size of 2880, along with a 1920 version from ƒ/2 through ƒ/16.
Note: the Firefox browser on Mac OS X is glacially slow for drawing large images compared to Apple Safari (10X slower or worse!). Use Safari, which is available for Mac and PC.
Maxmax.com (the out that I use for my infrared camera conversions) has developed proprietary technology for stripping off the CFA (color filter array) from a digital sensor. This is of particular value in converting a digital camera for ultraviolet photography.
Of course, you’ll need a UV capable lens, like the Coastal Optics 60mm ƒ/4 UV-VIS-IR APO Macro, since ordinary lenses block most UV light.
According to Dan Llewelyn at maxmax.com—
Before the camera can see light at the photodiode, light must pass through the microlens and the color filter. Both the microlens and the color filter block UV light. LDP has the proprietary technology to remove the microlens and color filter without damaging the photodiode underneath. Since we are only talking about removing microns of material, this is a delicate operation to say the least!
Once we have removed the microlens and CFA, the camera become roughly six times more sensitive to UV light. In practical terms, this means you can shoot outdoors handheld versus needing a long exposure time and tripod. Removing the CFA also gives the camera much more resolution in the UV because the blue and green color filters block UV light more than the red filter. For a monochrome camera with no CFA, all the sensor pixel locations can see the UV light equally well which translates into a much higher resolution image
For more on this technology, and image examples, see the MaxMax.com UV page.
With more and more ALLVIEW cameras able to take Leica M lenses (Sony NEX, Fuji X-Pro1, RED video, etc), demand that is already sizzling hot is likely to go ballistic, e.g. the Leica *mm ƒ/* Unobtanium-M ASPH lens line.
Even though Leica raised prices on the M lens line by about 7% for 2012 (multiple years running now), this will cause no slackening of demand in a market whose customers can afford it. And the video guys... well they order lens kits, and that’s why 90% of Zeiss ZE and ZF.2 sales now are for video use.
Wait times for some coveted lenses like the Noctilux can be 2 years or more. Wait times for the Summilux 50/1.4 can be around a year (what I was told last July).
In short, if you’re an M shooter lusting after a new M lens, I strongly advise you to find one now (use my link there to monitor in-stock status at B&H Photo), and get on a waiting list. Especially for the ƒ/1.4 lenses, which never show up as in stock.
What are some outstanding Leica M lenses that are in a slightly less demand than others? I’ve seen these show up in stock very briefly at B&H within the past few months:
The Carl Zeiss ZM lenses for Leica M are also relatively scarce, but generally only backordered by a few months. Ditto for Voigtlander M lenses.
As an apropos point— today I saw the Leica 21/3.4 Super-Elmar-M ASPH and the Leica 35mm ƒ/2.5 Summarit-M briefly appear in stock, then disappear as they were snapped up. Bookmark my in-stock status page for Leica (blue prices are in stock).
Just read your latest blog entry on Leica lens scarcity. I am also noting a general scarcity of M mount lenses from Zeiss and CV as well.
I have no special knowledge or insider information on what is driving lens scarcity but I'm just a little skeptical that the NEX cameras, m4/3's and the upcoming Fuji X1Pro are driving this scarcity.
I have two hunches.
The first is that many long time RF users were finally lured into the digital RF arena by the M9. Personally, I sat out the M8 even while my M6 saw very little use, I wanted full frame. By happenstance, I had purchased a Panasonic GF1 lured by the excellent and well reviewed Panasonic 20/f1.7. Almost as an afterthought I ordered a Novoflex adapter so I could use my 20 year old 35 and 50 Summicrons as short telephotos on the Panasonic. Didn't take me long to realize why I had never been able to part with these lovely little lenses nor my M6 for that matter. I quickly placed an order for an M9. Not long after that I bought a new 28 Elmarit and I currently have an order in for a 21 Elmarit.
Would I have gone out and spent $5000 for an 35 and 50 Summicron for my Panasonic or even the well regarded Nex7? No way, not a chance. Would I then have gone out and spent another $5000+ for a 28 and a 21, even for the technically superior (to the GF1) Nex7? Even less of a chance.
Am I surprised that as the demand for M9's has been sated that the demand for new lenses has increased. Nope. The M9, far more than the film cameras before it can actually exploit the technical excellence offered by modern lenses, and owners like me can see that and have been willing to part with the money for that.
My second hunch is that the Leica is seen as a luxury good throughout the world and in parts of the world with "new money", e.g., Russia and China, the Leica's are being snapped up as status symbols as well. Ever seen a $10,000 handbag? Well, the families that are buying that and exquisite Swiss watches that are the timekeeping equivalent of my Timex Ironman are the same families snapping up M9's and a passel of Summiluxes….
DIGLLOYD: [ NEX-7 is used in what follows as a proxy for all ALLVIEW cameras.]
I don’t think that the consumer cameras like the NEX-7 are by themselves are driving the scarcity, after all the NEX-7 is hardly out, and the X-Pro1 isn’t out. But I am aware of NEX owners buying Leica M glass, and when the supply is very limited, any incremental demand has an impact.
But here is a fair point: existing Leica M camera body owners now have an incentive to continue to invest in additional Leica M glass (and not sell existing lenses), knowing they are not bound to a Leica camera body any longer. And my samples with the 50/1.4 Summilux show just how good the image quality can be— stunning. So by no means do I think that the average NEX-7 user is out there considering Leica M lenses, rather I think that there are M users looking at ALLVIEW cameras.
Video users have very large budgets, and the latest RED cameras apparently support M lenses, and that demand could be huge.
Let us also remember that the NEX-7 is one of a long line of future ALLVIEW cameras of many brands. The SMART move is to invest in 'glass', then regularly transition to whatever current camera fits that glass.
So I don't think the lens cost is unreasonable when one thinks in terms of many years of use, with increasingly capable cameras. And when the Leica M lenses have deep reserves of performance for any conceivable resolution for the next 5 years, at least. The fly in the ointment is ray angle for wide angle M-mount lenses.
I agree that once one owns an M9 with its full-frame sensor capable of matching or exceeding any of today’s DSLRs(Jan 2012) in real resolution (think no AA filter + Leica M glass!), the lust for more M lenses is stoked. It has been for me, certainly.
I am disappointed to agree that the “status symbol” demand is likely very significant, but I don’t know this for a fact. I’ve always had a distaste for collectors who buy up interesting lenses, then put them onto a shelf (the NIkon 28mm ƒ/1.4 aspheric and 50/1.2 NOCT also come to mind).
Just published in my Guide to Leica is a evaluation of the Leica 16-18-21mm ƒ/4 Tri-Elmar-M ASPH at its 3 settings of 16mm, 18mm, 21mm at ƒ/4, ƒ/5.6, ƒ/8, ƒ/11.
Anyone interested in the Leica 16-18-21mm ƒ/4 Tri-Elmar-M ASPH should find this comparison quite helpful. See also the Alpine Creek comparison.
Mailing Lists
RSS Feeds
Twitter
Contact
