A mystery, wrapped in an enigma, etc, etc.

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Jun 26, 2012.

  1. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    Robert Coe <> wrote:

    >On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 17:11:52 -0400, I <> wrote:
    >: On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 21:42:38 +0100, Bruce <> wrote:
    >: : Robert Coe <> wrote:
    >: :
    >: : >On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 17:19:29 -0700 (PDT), RichA <> wrote:
    >: : >: On Jun 27, 3:21 pm, Bruce <> wrote:
    >: : >: > RichA <> wrote:
    >: : >: > >Yes, the guy just wanted to know which one was a keeper.  The Zeiss
    >: : >: > >won over the Summilux.
    >: : >: > >He saved about $2500.00 in the process.
    >: : >: >
    >: : >: > Which Zeiss?  Which Summilux?  There are several variants.
    >: : >: >
    >: : >: > Leica M mount or (SL)R mount?  I ask because Zeiss doesn't offer an
    >: : >: > f/1.4 in M mount.
    >: : >:
    >: : >: Well, that's the annoying part. I read the thing fast and forgot the
    >: : >: URL!! But the general question was what remained. It's like the $4000
    >: : >: fluorite macro lenses (60mm and 100mm) I read about 2 years ago and
    >: : >: can't find word one about now.
    >: : >
    >: : >Is this it? First hit googling: zeiss summilux resolution
    >: : >http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony_nex_7_rolling_review.shtml#24
    >: :
    >: :
    >: : It cannot be the comparison Rich referred to because the Summilux won.
    >:
    >: Reading it more carefully, I see that the reviewer mentioned that he had tried
    >: to do the comparison a few months earlier but had screwed it up. Maybe that
    >: was the comparison that Rich remembers.
    >
    >http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony_nex_7_first_impressions.shtml




    Thanks, Bob. Conundrum solved! :)
     
    Bruce, Jul 5, 2012
    #21
    1. Advertising

  2. Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
    > On 27/06/2012 05:48, Me wrote:
    >> On 27/06/2012 8:56 a.m., RichA wrote:


    >>> Two lenses. One Zeiss, one Leica, both the same focal length. Both
    >>> capable of handily exceeding sensor resolution. Both tested on the
    >>> same object and one of them beats the other.
    >>> How?


    >> Is this a riddle, or do you have something more to add?


    > It is quite possible depending on the target pattern. If the lens
    > resolution can and does exceed the sensor resolution then the image is
    > undersampled by the detector and may show jaggies and/or chroma
    > artefacts on some line art subject material with sharp edges.


    You got that the wrong way round. If the lens doesn't manage to
    resolve what the sensor samples, this is a 'natural' blur filter,
    which (if strong enough, i.e. with very bad lenses) will make
    jaggies and chroma artefacts impossible. But the result will
    look very soft.

    The correct solution is of course to use a proper AA filter
    with the sensor.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Jul 5, 2012
    #22
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Jul 4, 5:24 pm, Robert Coe <> wrote:
    > On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 17:11:52 -0400, I <> wrote:
    >
    > : On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 21:42:38 +0100, Bruce <> wrote:
    > : : Robert Coe <> wrote:
    > : :
    > : : >On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 17:19:29 -0700 (PDT), RichA <> wrote:
    > : : >: On Jun 27, 3:21 pm, Bruce <> wrote:
    > : : >: > RichA <> wrote:
    > : : >: > >Yes, the guy just wanted to know which one was a keeper.  TheZeiss
    > : : >: > >won over the Summilux.
    > : : >: > >He saved about $2500.00 in the process.
    > : : >: >
    > : : >: > Which Zeiss?  Which Summilux?  There are several variants.
    > : : >: >
    > : : >: > Leica M mount or (SL)R mount?  I ask because Zeiss doesn't offer an
    > : : >: > f/1.4 in M mount.
    > : : >:
    > : : >: Well, that's the annoying part.  I read the thing fast and forgot the
    > : : >: URL!! But the general question was what remained. It's like the $4000
    > : : >: fluorite macro lenses (60mm and 100mm) I read about 2 years ago and
    > : : >: can't find word one about now.
    > : : >
    > : : >Is this it? First hit googling: zeiss summilux resolution
    > : : >http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony_nex_7_rolling_...
    > : :
    > : :
    > : : It cannot be the comparison Rich referred to because the Summilux won..
    > :
    > : Reading it more carefully, I see that the reviewer mentioned that he had tried
    > : to do the comparison a few months earlier but had screwed it up. Maybe that
    > : was the comparison that Rich remembers.
    >
    > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony_nex_7_first_im...
    >
    > Bob


    No, that's not it, I remember that one from Dec. I haven't been on
    the LL site that often of late. Also, do the Sony Zeiss lenses use
    the same designs as the manual units for Nikon/Canon? Are they made
    in the same place?
     
    RichA, Jul 7, 2012
    #23
  4. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    RichA <> wrote:

    >On Jul 4, 5:24 pm, Robert Coe <> wrote:
    >> On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 17:11:52 -0400, I <> wrote:
    >>
    >> : On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 21:42:38 +0100, Bruce <> wrote:
    >> : : Robert Coe <> wrote:
    >> : :
    >> : : >On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 17:19:29 -0700 (PDT), RichA <> wrote:
    >> : : >: On Jun 27, 3:21 pm, Bruce <> wrote:
    >> : : >: > RichA <> wrote:
    >> : : >: > >Yes, the guy just wanted to know which one was a keeper.  The Zeiss
    >> : : >: > >won over the Summilux.
    >> : : >: > >He saved about $2500.00 in the process.
    >> : : >: >
    >> : : >: > Which Zeiss?  Which Summilux?  There are several variants.
    >> : : >: >
    >> : : >: > Leica M mount or (SL)R mount?  I ask because Zeiss doesn't offer an
    >> : : >: > f/1.4 in M mount.
    >> : : >:
    >> : : >: Well, that's the annoying part.  I read the thing fast and forgot the
    >> : : >: URL!! But the general question was what remained. It's like the $4000
    >> : : >: fluorite macro lenses (60mm and 100mm) I read about 2 years ago and
    >> : : >: can't find word one about now.
    >> : : >
    >> : : >Is this it? First hit googling: zeiss summilux resolution
    >> : : >http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony_nex_7_rolling_...
    >> : :
    >> : :
    >> : : It cannot be the comparison Rich referred to because the Summilux won.
    >> :
    >> : Reading it more carefully, I see that the reviewer mentioned that he had tried
    >> : to do the comparison a few months earlier but had screwed it up. Maybe that
    >> : was the comparison that Rich remembers.
    >>
    >> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony_nex_7_first_im...
    >>
    >> Bob

    >
    >No, that's not it, I remember that one from Dec. I haven't been on
    >the LL site that often of late. Also, do the Sony Zeiss lenses use
    >the same designs as the manual units for Nikon/Canon?


    No.

    >Are they made in the same place?


    Unlikely, as the CZ lenses for Nikon/Canon are made by Cosina. Sony
    has had a licensing arrangement in place with Carl Zeiss for much
    longer than Cosina has.
     
    Bruce, Jul 7, 2012
    #24
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Steve Roberts

    Enigma Special Edition - Aspect Ratio?

    Steve Roberts, Sep 16, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    484
    Joshua Zyber
    Sep 17, 2003
  2. swoosh
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    450
    swoosh
    Sep 5, 2006
  3. Sosumi

    Happy enigma about crappy Sigma

    Sosumi, Jan 9, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    951
    Paul Allen
    Jan 12, 2008
  4. Rubicon

    A public Wi-Fi enigma

    Rubicon, May 5, 2008, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    384
    Rubicon
    May 5, 2008
  5. Ian
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    8,739
Loading...

Share This Page