What's the secret of Leica? ...and else.

Ramseus

Have you been high today?
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
5,605
Location
Derpronto
I don't see what you're trying to show that's so special about the lenses, I just see you using fast glass wide open on full frame. But that's some weird bokeh, it gives it an almost impressionist look, the first picture especially. But, ^, colours in the final image aren't much to go by because they're often more down to how one processes an image than anything (see: Ren Kockwell cranking the colour sliders up to 11)

"3D effect" is stupidtarded, all it really is is shallow DOF with a still somewhat defined background (which is why people say Olympus has teh threedee effeck, shorter focal length, less blurred background or smaller COC or something... so the background is more defined and more freedee looking)
 

Dr_Q

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
1,084
Location
United Kingdom of Englandlandshire
Car(s)
Horse & Cart
Different lenses can render a scene differently, this is particularly noticeable with the more expensive brands of lens. Zeiss lenses for example are typically a lot warmer than the Nikon and Canon variants which quite a few people love (myself included) but some people hate. If you don't notice the difference, obviously these lenses are not for you.

I personally lust after the Zeiss 100mm f/2 which is outstanding optically, in build quality, handling and renders out of focus areas beautifully too, whether I could ever put my money where my mouth is and buy one is a completely different matter.
 

Rooster

Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
56
Location
Indiana
I don't see what you're trying to show that's so special about the lenses, I just see you using fast glass wide open on full frame. But that's some weird bokeh, it gives it an almost impressionist look, the first picture especially. But, ^, colours in the final image aren't much to go by because they're often more down to how one processes an image than anything (see: Ren Kockwell cranking the colour sliders up to 11)

"3D effect" is stupidtarded, all it really is is shallow DOF with a still somewhat defined background (which is why people say Olympus has teh threedee effeck, shorter focal length, less blurred background or smaller COC or something... so the background is more defined and more freedee looking)


There is no point in arguing about the topic. The Zeiss lenses render the OOF areas in a way that I've never seen from Canon, even in their finest lenses. Use all the jargon you'd like, from what I've read it comes down to microcontrast that Canon can't quite handle. And yes, the Contax lenses I've used have rendered much richer and more impressive colors. No doubt in my mind.

If you don't see the effect, or don't like it, or whatever...too damn bad :)
 

Rooster

Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
56
Location
Indiana
Different lenses can render a scene differently, this is particularly noticeable with the more expensive brands of lens. Zeiss lenses for example are typically a lot warmer than the Nikon and Canon variants which quite a few people love (myself included) but some people hate. If you don't notice the difference, obviously these lenses are not for you.

I personally lust after the Zeiss 100mm f/2 which is outstanding optically, in build quality, handling and renders out of focus areas beautifully too, whether I could ever put my money where my mouth is and buy one is a completely different matter.

The Planar 100/2 is a freaking gem. Just unreal. Sold mine for $1150 and the hood and step ring for another $140. I just couldn't afford to keep a lens that pricey for more than the few months I had it. Gotta finish the edumacashun. :lol:
 

Ramseus

Have you been high today?
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
5,605
Location
Derpronto
There is no point in arguing about the topic. The Zeiss lenses render the OOF areas in a way that I've never seen from Canon, even in their finest lenses. Use all the jargon you'd like, from what I've read it comes down to microcontrast that Canon can't quite handle. And yes, the Contax lenses I've used have rendered much richer and more impressive colors. No doubt in my mind.

If you don't see the effect, or don't like it, or whatever...too damn bad :)

This is the first time you've said that you're referring specifically to teh bokehs being better. Don't get uppitty at me for not reading your mind. Yeah, most Canon lenses have pretty crappy bokehs, only delusional fanboys would disagree. And better lenses do give better colour, but I was just saying that final processed end result isn't comparable to straight out of camera results so it's nothing to judge colours by.

My moaning about "3d effect" was off topic and not related to you at all, just some people. You know, those people. Damn them, damn then all to hell!
 
Top