marco1974

I know many people will roll their eyes, thinking that any claim that a lens may be worth using because of its 'character' is just a way of making excuses for its poor technical performance. And ...

Be that as it may, the same technique still works just as well 20 years on - as it did 50 years earlier...

Use Manual exposure mode, and take time to learn how to effectively use SPOT metering: http://spotmetering.com/ Marco.

:-) Smartphones .. 1" .. m43 .. "FF" .. MF .. etc. It's all relative. "Full Frame" is no absolute "best". You just pick whatever format works best for you and get on with your photography, which is ...

X-Pro2 + Voightlander Nokton 50/1.1, SOOC-JPEG

These days I'm trying to shoot some pictures with shallow DOF where the 'bokeh' of the OOF areas is key to the image, but without it being gratuitous. This is one recent example: X-Pro2 + ...

Just fooling around the house on a lazy Sunday morning... All sooc-jpegs with the Voightlander Nokton 50/1.1 on a Fuji X-Pro2. This is lens with two characters: dreamy and low contrast at f/1.1 - ...

Interesting indeed, thanks. If anything, it proves that there are many ways one can compare lenses, and draw conclusions. For instance, I have the Voightlander Nokton 50/1.1, and through my own ...

Well, I own the Nokton 50/1.1, while I have only occasionally used (not extensively) the Fuji 56/1.2. Having said that, my impressions are as follows: - the Fuji is sharper, with less CA up to f/2; ...

Fair enough. I deliberately aimed for the trumpet mouth's rim, instead. M.

Approx. 90º. MFD is 1m, BTW.

Ops! I meant Astia (S), sorry.

The 50/1.1, with Fuji's own M-mount adapter:

No, @ f/2.

OOC-JPEG, Sensia film sim. C&C welcome. M.

This whole widespread "ordering and evaluating (and returning)" thing is at the root of the problem, IMHO, and it is a very American problem. Nowhere else in the world do people routinely return ...

Going by the many criticisms voiced on this forum and elsewhere about the "old" 23/1.4, the "no longer SOTA" X-Pro2, and the "inferiority" of unedited out-of-camera JPEGs ... one could reasonably ...

It's about ooc-JPEGs. Some value that (I do), some don't. Fair enough. M.

It was late December, 2006.

What I see is that your RAW image is oversharpened and has more chromatic aberration, which makes me prefer the out-of-camera JPEG. That being said, the differences are trivial, and you'd be hard ...