NoRules

NoRules

Lives in Norway Nissedal (Goblin Valley), Norway
Works as a Author/ Art Photographer
Joined on Nov 29, 2005

Comments

Total: 45, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article The Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 is old-fashioned fun (189 comments in total)

On film, analogue cameras, this Topogon lens design has a lot going for it. It was created to give distortion free, CA free, corner to corner sharpness. The drawbacks were small aperture and vignetting. And this holds true. On a digital sensor, with microlenses or not, there is not much left of the strengths of the design. It's still small, elegant and CA free, but the fantastic sharpness is only in the center. For some reason the Summaron (and the Russian earlier version from the 50s) are have better corner sharpness on a Leica Monochrom, than on a Leica M9. It is of course flawless on a film Leica.
So the question everybody is asking, is why? Why this lens now? And I have honestly no idea :)

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 14:40 UTC as 48th comment | 2 replies
On article Re-make/Re-model: Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 Samples (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

NoRules: There have been made 4 lenses of this Zeiss Topogon design for smaller formats. The original, of course, in the 1930s, and the Russian developed an improvement during the war (later for public consuption in the early 50s) and two years later by Leica. And now we have this new creation. I have some experience with this design, and have used the Russian Orion -15 exclusively for a year (28mm f.6.0). The design is fantastic for landscapes, but is not stellar untill f.11 (all but two samples above are shot at f.5,6 or f.8.0, and that is not this design's optimum). Diffranction is not a problem before f.16 (rather strange), but I have tested it against 35mm Summicron and Summarit. For semi-wide detailed landscape the Topogon (developed for aerial photography in war) is the best there is. The only strange thing is that my old Russian lens have better corners. I was actually planning to buy this new Leica lens, but now I think not. The Russian lens is $150 and outperformes this one, it looks.

This is the Russian made Orion-15 from the 50s, the one Leica made a copy of 2 years later, and the one they are re-making now. But I thought it would be better, that the corners would be sharp too, because they added two extra elements for correction. The conclusion is obvious; this lens design is for analogue film. I think a sensor has to be specialy made to make the most of its capabilities.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 20:06 UTC
On article Re-make/Re-model: Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 Samples (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

NoRules: There have been made 4 lenses of this Zeiss Topogon design for smaller formats. The original, of course, in the 1930s, and the Russian developed an improvement during the war (later for public consuption in the early 50s) and two years later by Leica. And now we have this new creation. I have some experience with this design, and have used the Russian Orion -15 exclusively for a year (28mm f.6.0). The design is fantastic for landscapes, but is not stellar untill f.11 (all but two samples above are shot at f.5,6 or f.8.0, and that is not this design's optimum). Diffranction is not a problem before f.16 (rather strange), but I have tested it against 35mm Summicron and Summarit. For semi-wide detailed landscape the Topogon (developed for aerial photography in war) is the best there is. The only strange thing is that my old Russian lens have better corners. I was actually planning to buy this new Leica lens, but now I think not. The Russian lens is $150 and outperformes this one, it looks.

Thanks! :) The original dng-file is a tiny bit sharper than this jpeg.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 17:03 UTC
On article Re-make/Re-model: Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 Samples (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

NoRules: There have been made 4 lenses of this Zeiss Topogon design for smaller formats. The original, of course, in the 1930s, and the Russian developed an improvement during the war (later for public consuption in the early 50s) and two years later by Leica. And now we have this new creation. I have some experience with this design, and have used the Russian Orion -15 exclusively for a year (28mm f.6.0). The design is fantastic for landscapes, but is not stellar untill f.11 (all but two samples above are shot at f.5,6 or f.8.0, and that is not this design's optimum). Diffranction is not a problem before f.16 (rather strange), but I have tested it against 35mm Summicron and Summarit. For semi-wide detailed landscape the Topogon (developed for aerial photography in war) is the best there is. The only strange thing is that my old Russian lens have better corners. I was actually planning to buy this new Leica lens, but now I think not. The Russian lens is $150 and outperformes this one, it looks.

And here you have a link to a full size Topogon design lens image. Expect the Leica lens to be a bit better in micro contrast. I think this image shows the strengths and weaknesses of this design. F.11. Large 100% file. http://gfsnt.no/oen/foto/Storefjell%202016%20Nov%20VIII%20Large.jpg

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 15:11 UTC
On article Re-make/Re-model: Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 Samples (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

NoRules: There have been made 4 lenses of this Zeiss Topogon design for smaller formats. The original, of course, in the 1930s, and the Russian developed an improvement during the war (later for public consuption in the early 50s) and two years later by Leica. And now we have this new creation. I have some experience with this design, and have used the Russian Orion -15 exclusively for a year (28mm f.6.0). The design is fantastic for landscapes, but is not stellar untill f.11 (all but two samples above are shot at f.5,6 or f.8.0, and that is not this design's optimum). Diffranction is not a problem before f.16 (rather strange), but I have tested it against 35mm Summicron and Summarit. For semi-wide detailed landscape the Topogon (developed for aerial photography in war) is the best there is. The only strange thing is that my old Russian lens have better corners. I was actually planning to buy this new Leica lens, but now I think not. The Russian lens is $150 and outperformes this one, it looks.

And to add, I use a Leica Monochrom, and know this design will do very poorly on all but Leica M sensors. On Sonys only the senter is sharp no matter what f.stop is used. This design is preferably film only, or digital Leica M.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 14:57 UTC
On article Re-make/Re-model: Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 Samples (202 comments in total)

There have been made 4 lenses of this Zeiss Topogon design for smaller formats. The original, of course, in the 1930s, and the Russian developed an improvement during the war (later for public consuption in the early 50s) and two years later by Leica. And now we have this new creation. I have some experience with this design, and have used the Russian Orion -15 exclusively for a year (28mm f.6.0). The design is fantastic for landscapes, but is not stellar untill f.11 (all but two samples above are shot at f.5,6 or f.8.0, and that is not this design's optimum). Diffranction is not a problem before f.16 (rather strange), but I have tested it against 35mm Summicron and Summarit. For semi-wide detailed landscape the Topogon (developed for aerial photography in war) is the best there is. The only strange thing is that my old Russian lens have better corners. I was actually planning to buy this new Leica lens, but now I think not. The Russian lens is $150 and outperformes this one, it looks.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 14:52 UTC as 54th comment | 7 replies
On article Leica M10 real-world sample gallery (345 comments in total)
In reply to:

gianstam: A question for all of you guys who realize that this camera is technically better, the other has better ISO the third has better long lenses and so on: If someone gave you as a (don't sell it) gift the M10 or the other camera, which one would you get?

I actually got a Leica M as a don't sell it gift last year from my parents. Wish it was this one:-) I sold all my Canon 5DII, Pentax K-1 and Pentax 645D and Sigma DP Merrill cameras and lenses within a month or two. I have never looked back. Leica M is photography as it should be. If taking pictures is your main objective.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2017 at 18:21 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus C-3040 Zoom (121 comments in total)

I spent a week in Berlin 6 years ago. I brought with me a Canon 5D with battery grip and the huge 24-70 zoom lens. I found this camera used in a shop for $30. I ended up with placing my Canon in the safe, and shot 3000 images with this one. Day and night, and in rain. Very fun camera. I still have it.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2016 at 14:41 UTC as 64th comment
On article DPReview Asks: What was your first camera? (766 comments in total)

Ricoh KR-10 from the late 1980s.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2016 at 22:44 UTC as 318th comment
In reply to:

Tomasz_Wk: I would rather buy the voigtlander 25mm f4. Good and cheaper.

I have only had bad experiences with Voigts on my Leica M. Bad sentering, bad rendering. Sharp, oh yes. But in a very ugly way. Aperture and focal lengths are gimmicky. I bought for $2000 in Voigts, and sold all but the 15mm. And lost a lot of money. One day with a "cheap" and "slow" Leica lens like the Summitar 35mm, will make you regret every Voigt you have spent money on. An expensive mistake to make.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2016 at 07:38 UTC

I use a Soviet made lens called Orion 15 on my Leica M Monochrom from time to time. It's a 28mm f.6.3. Simply a splendid lens for landscape, and rival the Summicron 35 for senter resolution at f.5.6. Slightly weaker sides, but better corners. The design is a symmetrical Carl Zeiss pre-war Topogon, not unlike the new Leica lens. Also one should look at the Russar 20mm. Very simmilar optical design. These lenses were used for air photography (hence the name Topogon). The lenses are really bad on Sony and other mirrorless cameras, but the Leica sensors give great sharpness on the whole image field. There are also som vignetting, but easy to correct with lens profiling. And they are cheap. The Orion 15 weighs 90g, and is made from aluminium. It sticks out 2-2,5 cm from the camera body. One of the most interesting "Leica" lenses from the Soviet aera for Leica users.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2016 at 07:29 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

NoRules: Just bought a Domiplan 50mm f.2.8 with M42-mount. It cost me $30. Why wait :-)

Just search for "Domiplan 50mm" on eBay.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2016 at 16:27 UTC

Just bought a Domiplan 50mm f.2.8 with M42-mount. It cost me $30. Why wait :-)

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2016 at 12:28 UTC as 4th comment | 3 replies
On article Erez Marom: On the importance of naming images (107 comments in total)
In reply to:

NoRules: Lee Friedlander was once asked why he always only have name of the place and date as titles. He answerd "That is the only objective aspect of my pictures". There is nothing more to say. Let the image speak for it self. When I read what he said I felt very releaved. Photography means writing with light. It's a passive (in most times) activity. We have a device that register light. Behind it we can manipulate it, and we can manipulate what's in front of it (staged photography). The only objective values are time and place. If we go beyond that we enter the realm of metaphysics and mysticism, and that is not needed. The pictures are beautiful, no need to hang a veil over them like titles that obscure and reduce them. Pure photography tells a story that do not need words. If we cross that line we end up with a mess. IMHO.

Thank you for the article! I love to talk about these things

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2015 at 12:46 UTC
On article Erez Marom: On the importance of naming images (107 comments in total)

Lee Friedlander was once asked why he always only have name of the place and date as titles. He answerd "That is the only objective aspect of my pictures". There is nothing more to say. Let the image speak for it self. When I read what he said I felt very releaved. Photography means writing with light. It's a passive (in most times) activity. We have a device that register light. Behind it we can manipulate it, and we can manipulate what's in front of it (staged photography). The only objective values are time and place. If we go beyond that we enter the realm of metaphysics and mysticism, and that is not needed. The pictures are beautiful, no need to hang a veil over them like titles that obscure and reduce them. Pure photography tells a story that do not need words. If we cross that line we end up with a mess. IMHO.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2015 at 12:40 UTC as 55th comment | 5 replies
On challenge f/22 (12 comments in total)

You are both right and wrong. Best micro contrast and resolution in the centre is about f.6.3 for full format lenses. Any f-stop smaller than that and resolution falls *in the centre* of the image. Resolution is still (at least very often) increasing at the edges and corners till f.12-16. Smaller than that is all about perceived sharpnes in the form of DOF, or depth-of-field. Micro contrast takes a hit, but larger structures get more into focus. Google the group of photographers that called them selves "group f.64" or photographers like Edward Weston and Ansel Adams. They even used f.90. It really comes down to how big you plan to print your image. To the f.64 group, tonality and subject matter was more important than pixel peeping (but when you contact print a 8x10" negative the resolution is limited by the eye :-)

Link | Posted on May 1, 2015 at 18:07 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
On article A closer look at the Nikon Coolpix P900 megazoom (197 comments in total)

The camera weight is 900g or 2 lb. That is big and heavy! Makes me want to go on a safari!

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2015 at 15:11 UTC as 67th comment
On photo Sandnes, Telemark, 2014 in the Pentax Q Series challenge (3 comments in total)

Thanks!

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2015 at 17:23 UTC as 2nd comment
On photo Storm leaving Telemark in the Night Sky challenge (2 comments in total)

Thanks!
I know that most of images like this one are composite exposures, because the tracker blurs out the forground. I like to show the earths rotation when I do astro-landscapes. Because everything moves, always :-)

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2014 at 13:22 UTC as 1st comment
On article Pentax 645Z added to studio comparison database (141 comments in total)

To go with this camera, every Pentax MF lens from the 80's up untill now fits. I spent about $2000 to get 6 lenses and a 2x Conv., from 35mm to 200mm, all of them with auto-aperture, and 3 of them with AF. Cheaper than old FF legacy lenses ...
I sold all my Leica R lenses and Canon 5DII, and came out with money to spare. Bought a Sigma Merrill for the change, to have a light camera with almost the same performance, now that I have spoilt myself with a big one :-)

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2014 at 19:03 UTC as 20th comment | 2 replies
Total: 45, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »