Would you replace a 90mm and 135mm with a 110XL?

I know this is horribly OT and will upset some... but I just have to share. ;)

A buddy of mine and I compared his Leica M8 and 35 'lux to my Canon 5D and 24-105L. We matched the FOV with the zoom and shot both at f/8 and infinity. I'll be darned if the Canon 24-105L wasn't sharper.

I'm going to run and hide now..... :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sheldon N

I know this is horribly OT and will upset some... but I just have to share. ;)

A buddy of mine and I compared his Leica M8 and 35 'lux to my Canon 5D and 24-105L. We matched the FOV with the zoom and shot both at f/8 and infinity. I'll be darned if the Canon 24-105L wasn't sharper.

I'm going to run and hide now..... :p

---

Why? Not everyone cares. I'm sticking with film.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sheldon N

I know this is horribly OT and will upset some... but I just have to share. ;)

A buddy of mine and I compared his Leica M8 and 35 'lux to my Canon 5D and 24-105L. We matched the FOV with the zoom and shot both at f/8 and infinity. I'll be darned if the Canon 24-105L wasn't sharper.

I'm going to run and hide now..... :p

---

This doesn't sound so strange to me.. I bought a 35L prime for my 5D and compared it with the 24-105 to see how much better it was. It didn't seem that much better but was visibly sharper. Until I realised I'd picked the wrong lens.. the 24-105 was actually better than the 35 prime.. I won't contribute about the Leica as I know very little about it. (all my other canon lenses were sold in order to fund my Ebony + lenses)

Tim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sheldon N

I know this is horribly OT and will upset some... but I just have to share. ;)

A buddy of mine and I compared his Leica M8 and 35 'lux to my Canon 5D and 24-105L. We matched the FOV with the zoom and shot both at f/8 and infinity. I'll be darned if the Canon 24-105L wasn't sharper.

I'm going to run and hide now..... :p

---

Shoot the M8 in RAW only. JPEG looks like garbage. Shoot the 35 at F2 or between F4-F5.6 (max) and not at F8-F16.

Report back your similar findings...and while you are in the field, find me a nice AS front standard;):)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack Flesher

totally agree Frank --- it's why I still shoot with 4x5 :) (And FWIW, I still own the Chamonix --- I think we had a bet?)

Bottom line is the M8 is about like quality drum-scanned 2-1/4. Frankly, the only digital solution I've found that beats scanned 4x5 is the Betterlight scanning back in high-rez mode, but it's not a very convenient capture medium relative to film, at least in the field. The 33/39 MP digital backs are impressive and close to 4x5, but the entry cost is prohibitive unless you shoot a lot of frames per year.

Cheers,

---

So it's true that these Betterlight backs can beat a 4X5 w/150 Sironar APO S shot with the best film possible, and scanned with the best drum scanner in the world?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sheldon N

I know this is horribly OT and will upset some... but I just have to share. ;)

A buddy of mine and I compared his Leica M8 and 35 'lux to my Canon 5D and 24-105L. We matched the FOV with the zoom and shot both at f/8 and infinity. I'll be darned if the Canon 24-105L wasn't sharper.

I'm going to run and hide now..... :p

---

No need to hide, just get a bit more educated... Leica M glass is optimized to be its sharpest at relatively close reportage shooting distances, like 1.5 meters for the 35's. Also, they are optimized to be sharpest wide open and tend to have their best operating aperture 2 stops down from wide open. By f8, ALL M lenses are suffering from VISIBLE diffraction. THe last factor is the lens and body being in synch --- IOW making sure what you thought you focused on was what you actually focused on.

So, assuming the mechanical focus connection is proper, try a repeat of your test, using the systems at 1.5 meters and f4. then get back to us with those results :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by audioexcels

So it's true that these Betterlight backs can beat a 4X5 w/150 Sironar APO S shot with the best film possible, and scanned with the best drum scanner in the world?

---

Yes, assuming "best film possible" is a color emulsion too :D But to be clear, I'm referring to the Super 6K HR version (or 8K), not the 4K.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JPlomley

...
55 APO Grandagon
75/4.5 Grandagon-N
90/4.5 Grandagon-N
135 APO Sironar-S
210 APO Sironar-S
300 APO Sironar-S
120 Nikkor AM-ED

...In order to reduce weight, ...

---

If you just want to save weight, replacing the 210 with the 200/8 Nikkor M, and the 300 with either the 300/9 M or the Fuji 300/8.5 might save as much weight as dropping any one other lens. Do you use the 120 Nikkor only for macro, or for regular use as well? If you only use it for macro, can you live with the 135 as your close-up lens?

As long as we're spending your money ;) , how about the 80XL instead of the 75 and 90?

Personally, I don't like the perspective of a 90 or 135, so, for me, the decision to replace both of them with a 110XL would be easy. If the 135 is your most used lens, keep it.

Drew

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack Flesher

No need to hide, just get a bit more educated... Leica M glass is optimized to be its sharpest at relatively close reportage shooting distances, like 1.5 meters for the 35's. Also, they are optimized to be sharpest wide open and tend to have their best operating aperture 2 stops down from wide open. By f8, ALL M lenses are suffering from VISIBLE diffraction. THe last factor is the lens and body being in synch --- IOW making sure what you thought you focused on was what you actually focused on.

So, assuming the mechanical focus connection is proper, try a repeat of your test, using the systems at 1.5 meters and f4. then get back to us with those results :D

---

I'll have to do that. I did promise my friend a re-test, since he was near tears. :)

Keep in mind, there's no pretention that this was anything approaching a scientific test. He was just showing me his new toy and we couldn't resist firing a couple frames off in the back yard.

Of course at f/4 I'll need to use the 35L instead of the 24-105L. There wouldn't be any contest if you forced the Canon zoom to shoot wide open. Like Tim I've also found that the 24-105L is just as sharp as the 35L when stopped down.

We may have to match up his 75mm f/1.4 against the Canon 85mm f/1.2L. I doubt that you could find fault with either lens so it's sort of a moot point. :)

To expand on what Jack said about the Betterlight 6K, it's performance is phenomenal but its applications are somewhat limited. You need to be prepared to double the size and weight of your kit if you re going to use the back in the field. You also need to be careful to choose subjects where there is NO movement or where movement doesn't matter. In the studio, working with product shots or art reproduction it's a different matter. I've got some recent shots where the detail is incredible, probably exceeds what I could do with 8x10.