So we are comparing a designed in 1999 diminutive 77mm ltd lens against the hunk of glass which is the Nikkor 85mm 1.4G.
Ian Leach: If you don't want to view the photo right away, you don't have to. So what Leica are saying is that they are going to help out people with no self control by removing the screen.
The people who buy it are admitting they have no self control and need help. Let's face it people who buy leica aren't trying to save a bit of money.
Isn't the whole thing a bit demeaning?
Saying 'I think you're overreacting' is fine.
Saying I have a mental illness is overreacting.
If you don't want to view the photo right away, you don't have to. So what Leica are saying is that they are going to help out people with no self control by removing the screen.
The black background is much easier on old eyes. I would need to turn the screen brightness right down for a white background, this would ruin the photos.
They should have made a 35mm equivalent focal length version, for their anniversary edition, that would have made a few people take notice.
DPR please do the sunny Seattle city scene at all f-stops when you can. Haze, trees and snow don't tell you much about the lens edges.
DPR thanks for including the Seattle city scape photos at each aperture. It is so much more telling for scenic photographers than close, flat charts and test scene. Please add to 35mm lens scenic comparison tool and do the same for every camera/lens you review. Basically have this tool as well as the test scene tool for everything.
This lens clearly has an issue on the right hand side and isn’t as good as the Canon EF 35mm 1.4 ii. As it is a super wide I suppose you can’t ask for too much. I’d rather take two photos with the longer lens and stitch them together.
The cityscape comparison tool is a real winner. Please do this shot (on a clear day) for every camera/lens you review. Too many sample photo sets do not include such a photo, at a lenses sweat spot for everything sharp across a large DoF. Scenic photographers often have little idea how a lens performs in these conditions as flat test charts at a close range may not tell the whole story.
retro76: As these were all adjusted in raw how can we tell how the lens performs in terms of color and contrast and do we even have a true guage on detail etc ?. I would rather see these tests conducted using the cameras JPEG engine so we have a baseline comparison, otherwise I don't really know what the samples posted tell us other then the skill level of the person processing raw ?
der Steppenwolf. If you are comparing lenses using images from the web you can't be sure the same raw editor and settings were used each time. Your last sentence was unnecessary and is a comment on your personality.
Retro76 is correct you can’t compare one lens with another, using raw images. The camera should be set to factory defaults and jpeg’s taken. It does not matter if the jpeg engine is not ideal, what matters is that consistency is maintained. You can see the difference between two lenses which are guaranteed to have the same processing applied. Unless of course Sony applies completely different jpeg processing depending on the lens, but I haven't seen any info on this.
DPR like so many confuse Best and Popular.
My dad made me one I designed a few years back, I've posted a picture in the open forum.
Although this focal length is going to be used more for objects than scenes, it would be nice to see how it performs right into the corners. Sky, sea, tarmac and dirt don’t tell you very much. Please always have one f8 photo looking across a town with buildings receding into the distance.
To DPR team. This lens has a problem down the left hand side. If you look at the scenic shots (grass) it is clear there is a band of softness on the left but the right is fine. When it comes to edge sharpness the newer NX lenses are very good normally, much better than my Tamron 17-50mm for example. I would ask for another copy for testing.
justmeMN: No, Kodak isn't reborn. Now, it's just a hollow brand name, owned by an obscure company.
They are all hollow brand names. Any company that lives long enough ends up with completely new staff and product range. Whether this happens via new owners or not is irrelevant. People’s ideas of history and reverence are mostly romantic notions. These cameras will be good or not regardless of what went before.
The 28-70mm lens looks rather poor for landscape shots. The cityscape photo DSC00583 at f9 is terribly soft well in from the edges.
To me the DF looks like Frankenstein’s Monster and this X camera looks like Dracula (or maybe Vampirella), just an opinion.
Ian Leach: I realise this lens is not exactly aimed at landscape photographers but it wouldn’t hurt putting in one f8 shot with far and distant content. It is nice to see if a lens can achieve sharpness at the edges with reasonable depth of field if called upon to do so.
I didn't say peak sharpness, I said sharpness at edge with reasonable depth of field.
I realise this lens is not exactly aimed at landscape photographers but it wouldn’t hurt putting in one f8 shot with far and distant content. It is nice to see if a lens can achieve sharpness at the edges with reasonable depth of field if called upon to do so.