Leica 50 APO vs Zeiss Loxia 50
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/03/16/battle-of-the-champions-leica-m-50-apo-vs-sony-a7ii-50-zeiss-loxia-by-brad-husick/Zeiss is actually very impressive with its price!
Which is which? 考慮埋價錢嘅話，Zeiss贏晒。 又話FE 55/1.8 f/5.6之下sharp過晒 Loxia 50/2.
e+又話到 Loxia 50/2 同 50/2 APO 叮叮噹噹.
之前又話 50/2 APO 無出其右.....
;P;P;P:L:L:L APO clearly has better micro contrast.For people who are willing to pay 6x the price, I'm sure this is the diminishing return they're looking for.
The design of Loxia 50 is an adaptation of ZM50/2.The calculations are revised to optimize for the A7 sensor.ZM50/2 performs on a similar level as Cron 50 v5, except that ZM has slightly more barrel distortion.I guess the Sony/Zeiss solution is to correct this by software.In my personal experience, software correction of lens distortion may sometimes create ungainly effects, especially in portraiture.I guess this is also the reason why, when requirement for image quality is high, fastidious photographers still use optical tilt/shift rather than software to create a similar effect.
Leica is caught out on one thing though: 50 APO is not really APO.Just look at the chromatic abberation. vincecharus 發表於 2015-3-17 11:32
APO clearly has better micro contrast.For people who are willing to pay 6x the price, I'm sure thi ...
not sure if the distortion of Loxia lens is corrected by software - need to see the RAW file for that.
actually im quite surprised by the performance of Loxia as well, as it is just a reincarnation of the ZM50. Zeiss Japan told me that the main optimization they made is to recalculate the lens with the thickness of the IR filter of the Sony cameras. This accuracy can increase resolution.
I have to say the building quality of Loxia is excellent, especially for its price. 睇review Loxia 好勁, 上手玩過Loxia 50 同 35... 完全無feel.... LEICA新品脫離現實基礎 See what others have to say, nowadays I trust K San test shoots more than Steve huff, good reference but too commercial
http://www.hklfc.com/forum/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=160177&extra=page%3D1 redrede 發表於 2015-3-17 14:51
See what others have to say, nowadays I trust K San test shoots more than Steve huff, good reference ...
{:4_86:}
皆因 ...
我影相 水皮 只識“直出”
唔識 扮嘢呃人
又無 利益考慮
唯獨 ...
好可能 “影衰”咗支鏡
{:4_93:} wesley 發表於 2015-3-17 11:47
睇review Loxia 好勁, 上手玩過Loxia 50 同 35... 完全無feel....
我都上手玩過 50 APO... 亦完全無feel......
(因為荷包無能為力) 本帖最後由 kgv 於 2015-3-17 16:14 編輯
因爲喺 50鏡
又真喺無留意過 紫邊 唔紫邊
剛剛打的兩張 (with M9P)
Apo50/2 @2
50.4ASPH @1.4
(唉，最近一直玩 A7 ... ... CCD 喺醒神d neiiii;P)
Toscaninifans 發表於 2015-3-17 11:47
LEICA新品脫離現實基礎
well, Leica has position itself as "luxury" for some years
"luxury" has little to do with functions, needs and practicality Considering the price differences, Zeiss is a winner to me...although I won't but one. What this actually means is that if you put ZM 50/2 on M240, you should get a similar result as Loxia 50/2 on A7!
Anyone wanna do a ZM 50/2 and 50AA on M240 comparison ???
Or you may skip the comparison and just use ZM 50/2 on M240 to save some money and forget about 50AA.Actually I think that's not such a bad idea! vincecharus 發表於 2015-3-17 11:32
APO clearly has better micro contrast.For people who are willing to pay 6x the price, I'm sure thi ...
APO 係德文中，係咪有其他意思………… 可能無色散其實唔係佢簡寫的意思啊？ vincecharus 發表於 2015-3-17 16:51
What this actually means is that if you put ZM 50/2 on M240, you should get a similar result as Loxi ...
interesting theory but ZM 50/2 was made for film which has a certain thickness while sensors are completely flat, the exact point of focus won't be the same... 如果Zm 50/2 planar 可以為了CMOS LPF + IR Cut 而少改個光學，數碼機光學質素大幅提升，按道理，普通50/2 summicron ，35/2 asph .... 也可以改一版 數碼專用 ，完全無需要同時考慮菲林/slide 的限制。價錢也可以保持現在，甚至降低。。。。增加市場競爭力。市場/萊卡本身也應該需要呢d cash cow 鏡頭 :$ reading this thread get much better analysis than those on the web
{:5_268:} Double look at this test again, how does he take photos with two cameras and two lenses, at the same angle and at the same time with the same "living" people doing exactly the same thing and call it a test?
;P
頁:
[1]
2