Lenses

[PannySVHS]

@jonpais, Jon, are the three shots above shot wide open, or at what aperture were they shot? Getting confused, you also have the 16mm Veydra or the 12mm? cheers

[jonpais]

@PannySVHS Sorry, I don’t keep track of aperture settings. I’ve got both the Leica Summilux 12mm f/1.4 & the Veydra 16mm T2.2.

[PannySVHS]

12 minutes ago, jonpais said:

@PannySVHS Sorry, I don’t keep track of aperture settings. I’ve got both the Leica Summilux 12mm f/1.4 & the Veydra 16mm T2.2.

Awesome, now I can go to bed, dreaming of that beautiful Veydra:) Have to get up in four hours. cheers

[anonim]

Comparing original Jon's images from clip and Panny's grading ones - for my eyes later look like overall moved to a little bit unnatural redish spectre. Jon's sample looks to me very similar to Leica R rendering color approach.

[cantsin]

Now onto a lo-fi lens - this video was shot with a Tarcus/Navitar 16-160mm/f1.6 c-mount zoom on a Blackmagic Pocket - almost completely at wide open aperture because of the low light:

The lens is a heavy beast that needs a lens support. Since it was made for 1" sensors, it fully covers the sensor of the Pocket.

[jonpais]

17 hours ago, Digitaliant said:

 

 

This is my first post in this great forum. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks Jon Pais, great colors, great and smooth outfocus zones.

On my GX-80 it will be more a 35 mm F/1.4 field of view equivalent.

I just bought it and I can't wait to receive it.

Please, when you have some time can you compare it to the 12mm Leica F/1.4. I know that the field of view is different and it's like to compare apples with oranges but it would be great if you can say something on the distortions of both lenses. I tried the 12mm a while ago and I found it quite impressive in this sense and with really great colors and bokeh. In fact, it's still in my shopping list.

Thanks

 

 

@Digitaliant I don't know about distortion, but the Leica's considerably more contrasty than the Sigma, and they render color differently. They're both incredible lenses. If you've already got the Leica and a GH5, you could always use ETC mode to get the equivalent focal length - but you'd be sacrificing the pleasing bokeh of its older brother. =) The Leica is also all-metal construction, it's got an aperture ring, it's more compact, and I believe it's some 4 oz. lighter than the ginormous Sigma. Then again, it's around $800 more expensive than the Sigma...

 

[anonim]

Imo Sigma in example renders better skin tones and overall finer color gradation - but shows terrible flat perspective (all rear area looks as at the same plane).

[jonpais]

@anonim Flattening or compression is not the fault of the lens, it is related to focal length. This from SLR Lounge, the authority on all things photographic. =)

As you shoot with a longer and longer focal length lens we are required to step back in distance in order to keep our subject the same relative size in the frame. This change in distance to the subject, is what actually gives rise to the “distortion” phenomenon. Why? Well, when you are shooting on a wide angle lens, we have to be close to our subject to keep the subject large in frame.

As we step back on a longer focal length lens, the distance to from the camera to our subject changes, but the distance from the subject to the background doesn’t. With each step up in a longer focal length, our distance from the lens to the subject becomes proportionally larger than the distance from the subject to the background. This creates a sort of “flattening” effect, where not only do the background objects appear larger, but it also appear closer to the subject.

Source

[anonim]

http://www.thehurlblog.com/depth-lens-tests-leica-summicron-cs-vs-zeiss-ultra-primes-film-education/

 

[jonpais]

Those are 20mm lenses and? Sorry, I'm not following. So funny, he says the 20mm makes her look skinnier, but that's because she's got her arms behind her back! :=)

[anonim]

@jon

It is not so simple... except for those who love simple solution (or explanation

[jonpais]

6 minutes ago, anonim said:

@Jon

It is not so simple... except for those who love simple solution :)

It is that simple - even Shane says the wider angle lens makes the background look farther away, ie, more depth. geez...

Edit: That's why, when I posed my student, I often shot at an angle - I like depth as much as you do!

[anonim]

Ok, be it simple for whom is simple... without that annoying "3D pop" pseudosecret and its silly followers   so effect of image depth depends exclusively of focal distance and Sigma's goal of ultrasharpness is not paid by any collateral -effect.

[jonpais]

I might've gotten a defective lens.

[anonim]

No, just your venerable nostrils and earlaps looks strangely close to each other in Sigma's interpretation of visual 2.5 world

[jonpais]

When people say the wide Sigmas don't have as much pop as Leicas, I say it's because the Leicas have greater depth bcs they're wider.

When people say telephoto Sigmas don't have as much pop as Leicas, I say it's because longer lenses have creamier bokeh. ;=) 

 

[anonim]

When people say something not in favor of Sigmas, I gradually tend to become silent and let people to enjoy 2.5 D reality (It is just 0.5 of difference.)

[Fredrik Lyhne]

Very nice videos @jonpais The sigma looks great but I prefer the 12mm in the comparison as I like the color better, especially the skin tones. Too bad the Sigma is so gigantic, even though the price is nice.

[Digitaliant]

5 hours ago, jonpais said:

@Digitaliant I don't know about distortion, but the Leica's considerably more contrasty than the Sigma, and they render color differently. They're both incredible lenses. If you've already got the Leica and a GH5, you could always use ETC mode to get the equivalent focal length - but you'd be sacrificing the pleasing bokeh of its older brother. =) The Leica is also all-metal construction, it's got an aperture ring, it's more compact, and I believe it's some 4 oz. lighter than the ginormous Sigma. Then again, it's around $800 more expensive than the Sigma...

 

Thanks John,

I watched your video on a LG 55 screen (LG 55B6V) and I could say that the Sigma looks quite good for color and contrast.

Yes I noticed too that there is a quite sensible difference btw the Sigma and the Leica with ETC which has less contrast (without it is the usual splendid performer, no doubts about it).

If i had the GH5 I'd most probably use the ETC when I need to be closer to the subject with a tele lens so to get an extra reach. I am not fully convinced of the ETC with wide or normal lenses.

I don't remember if you did a video testing of the Sigma 30 with ETC in comparison with the 42.5 Leica. I will check now.

Thanks again, very kind of you.

 

 

[PannySVHS]

@jonpais, Jon, do you also own the 15mm 1.7? Would love to see that in the mix.  I think your testing shows off lenses exellently. Thanks again for that. One suggestion, maybe keep the ratio of expanation and showing an even 50 to 50 to have a perfect balance of the two.

@cantsin  looks like a fun lens definately. What´s up with the sound at 7.50 with the DJane holding the cellphone, is she recording off the amp?