>it's not soft, it's just the "Leica Glow™!"

>>3087187
What?

>>3087187
This refers to an actual describable attribute: spherical aberration in Leica lenses designed by Walter Mandler.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1001925/0

>muh 3d pop microcontrast glow t-stops bix nood muh fugga

>>3087187

http://3d-kraft.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=151

A laughably bad investment.

>>3087197
>>3087212

Leica makes soft lenses, and their fans say the softness is actually a plus with catchy phrases like

"leica glow"
or "hidden microcontrast"

>>3087595
You didn't read the fucking link, did you, you mongoloid?

>>3087580
>wow look non-native lenses don't work as well crazy huh
stop putting lenses where they don't belong, my summicrons look great on my m bodies

>>3087633

Being on a different body makes no difference to how sharp the lens is. All that matters is the flange distance to the sensor - and that will be exactly correct. The connection of a Leica body and lens is nothing special. These lenses were tested equally.

The problem lies in that the Zeiss is the most optically advanced photographic 50mm around and is about £2000. The Summilux 50mm f/1.4 is around £3000 and is very optically inferior, even to Zeiss's £700 55mm.

Total waste of money on a lens on optical par to designs from the 80's.

>>3087580
>lens x not designed for 36MP sensors doesn't resolve as much as lens y designed for 36MP sensors
>lens x is bad
>only pixel peepers care

File: 1456956561885.jpg (75KB, 671x900px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 671x900px

>>3087580
>taking advice who bought 5 manual focus 50mm's to compare them for something as lame as sharpness

ishygddt

File: 1459131720815.gif (2MB, 180x230px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 180x230px

>poorfags complaining about cameras they can't afford

Never change /p/

I think I'm going to start talking about the "Fuji Glow" just to watch the Sonyfags get triggered.

>>3087740
Hahahah i love this idea

File: 1479268823885.jpg (424KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

424KB, 1920x1080px

>>3087740

Lenses with the unique fuji glow, and bodies with the unmatched x-trans coloring!

>>3087740
I'm 100% behind this. For best result make some unscientific comparisons a la microcontrast.

>>3087641
>>3087644
>>3087633


>Defending lame overpriced glass

>>3087779
poorfag detected

>>3087740
You can do this with anything, and sheep will rush to buy it. It's the oldest kind of marketing there is (making up bullshit intangibles).

>>3087740
>implying there's some kind of fuji-sony rivalry

>>3087839

>it's actually sony vs. taking photos

>>3087841
>being this lame

>>3087833

Spend the same money on a better lens then and you can stick the Leica logo on it to make your crippling lack of self value seem slightly better.

>>3087847
yep, poorfag behavior

>>3087850

> thinks living with his mum means he has money

>>3087851
Stop projecting, kiddo. One day you'll have a real job.

>>3087863
>being a stupid rich person and buying soft leica lenses

should have gone with medium format like me stupid

>>3087623
This is a statement not a question my man.

>>3087873

>Medium Format
>Not Polaroid 20x24 Big Shot ULF

Plebian

>>3087883
Whatever you use sugar, your shots still suck. Kys

The "glow" isn't a specifically Leica thing, really - even though some of the Mandler designs seem to have it in an especially attractive way. The resolution is there, but at the expense of various aberrations. It's really hard to fake that "soft over sharp" look, particularly ow it affects transitions from focus to defocus.

You can look to other brands who have lenses with this quality. And a number of Mandler lenses suck ass.

File: weeaboo shoot.jpg (3MB, 6000x4000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 6000x4000px

>not Helios glow

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3300
Camera Software	Ver.1.01
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	15256
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:05 13:58:42
Exposure Time	1/400 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3090235
that looks amazing. would work killer for boudoir too.

I think sharpness is overrated. All sorts of aberrations, distortions and the overall 'look' of the lens affect the final photo more. For example the 58mm Nikkor, which was bashed for being kind of soft, produces excellent looking images. Same thing with my 18-70mm Nikkor.

>>3087638
Actually, on digital, different bodies (sensors) can have a profound effect on lens sharpness because of the varying differencies between the sensor stack size between different manufacturers.

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/06/the-glass-in-the-path-sensor-stacks-and-adapted-lenses/

>>3092748
the funny thing is that I didn't even pay that much for it.
The Helios 44-2 goes for like $10 on ebay if you don't mind the barrel looking a bit scratched up.

>>3093086
But sharpness and CA are the easiest things for pixel-peeping photoplebs to understand, so they rate all lenses on those criteria

>>3093221
Yep and I think Nikon has a pretty good chance to convince those people that their new professional lenses are "technically" capable. They have apparently figured out ways to measure bokeh quality and other things and have developed a new way to design optics based around that research. They even have a fancy name for it but I've forgotten it. The 58mm was the first lens developed with those principles and the 105mm and the new 28mm also belong in the same series. They just need better branding. Most photographers are gear whores, so this kind of seemingly unnecessary marketing is actually necessary.