I took a few shots at f/8 in daylight today to evaluate sharpness at infinity on the M11M. My copy of the lens is well centered, and focus wide open at infinity at the hard stop is accurate in the center of the frame.
On the M11M at f/8, focused to the infinity hard stop:
Reviewed on screen at 300% magnification with mild sharpening applied to the entire image:
Central sharpness is very high
Edge sharpness is lower than the center
Corner sharpness is lower than edge
When reviewing the same 60mp image from the M11M on screen at 100% magnification with +84 sharpness (250 is max) in the C1 "Lens Correction" panel, then it's much harder to see the falloff in sharpness at the edges and corners. 300% magnification is ridiculously high and in no way representative of real life performance; however, it's required in order to reveal differences in sharpness across the frame.
I'll use this lens for vacation and casual shots with an occasional landscape, whereas the Ultron II copy I had was good enough for more serious landscape work (not that I really do serious work to begin with). It's possible I have an average copy of the Color-Skopar and had a stellar copy of the Ultron II. I feel like the images from my Ultron II had better microcontrast as well, but I no longer have it for a side-by-side test.
f/8 300% Center (left) versus middle of the short frame edge (right)
f/8 300% Center (left) versus corner (right)
f/8 Previous image but at 100% and with noted sharpening adjustments
highdesertmesa wrote:
I took a few shots at f/8 in daylight today to evaluate sharpness at infinity on the M11M. My copy of the lens is well centered, and focus wide open at infinity at the hard stop is accurate in the center of the frame.
On the M11M at f/8, focused to the infinity hard stop:
Reviewed on screen at 300% magnification with mild sharpening applied to the entire image:
Central sharpness is very high
Edge sharpness is lower than the center
Corner sharpness is lower than edge
When reviewing the same 60mp image from the M11M on screen at 100% magnification with +84 sharpness (250 is max) in the C1 "Lens Correction" panel, then it's much harder to see the falloff in sharpness at the edges and corners. 300% magnification is ridiculously high and in no way representative of real life performance; however, it's required in order to reveal differences in sharpness across the frame.
I'll use this lens for vacation and casual shots with an occasional landscape, whereas the Ultron II copy I had was good enough for more serious landscape work (not that I really do serious work to begin with). It's possible I have an average copy of the Color-Skopar and had a stellar copy of the Ultron II. I feel like the images from my Ultron II had better microcontrast as well, but I no longer have it for a side-by-side test....Show more →
In this review, I compared two great copies (Color-Skopar and Ultron), and the test shots (crops at 100%) show that the 28/2 Ultron does have a slight edge in resolution/contrast at the corners. Keep in mind that the Color-Skopar is wide open at f/2.8.
Fred Miranda wrote:
In this review, I compared two great copies (Color-Skopar and Ultron), and the test shots (crops at 100%) show that the 28/2 Ultron does have a slight edge in resolution/contrast at the corners. Keep in mind that the Color-Skopar is wide open at f/2.8.
Ok, good, I thought I remembered you showing something similar, but I couldn't remember by how much. I think you mark them at f/8 as similar in the corners, but the CS still looks a little behind to me. And I think the magnification I used plus the 60mp resolution made the CS seem worse at the edge/corners than I expected.
Overall, I think this lens is going to be the perfect walk-around 28mm solution for me.
Small and light
Satisfying aperture ring clicks
Aperture ring design that is easy to find and operate by feel
Smooth focusing
Minimalist hood
Great image quality
Low Distortion
highdesertmesa wrote:
Overall, I think this lens is going to be the perfect walk-around 28mm solution for me.
Small and light
Satisfying aperture ring clicks
Aperture ring design that is easy to find and operate by feel
Smooth focusing
Minimalist hood
Great image quality
It's incredible on the m11m. Took it out yesterday, the weight is getting close to GRIII levels!
highdesertmesa wrote:
Overall, I think this lens is going to be the perfect walk-around 28mm solution for me.
Small and light
Satisfying aperture ring clicks
Aperture ring design that is easy to find and operate by feel
Smooth focusing
Minimalist hood
Great image quality
Great summary! I would also add low distortion, as it's not very common with compact wide-angle lenses.
Are you using a filter behind the hood?
thrice wrote:
Thanks Fred, that cinches it for me. I hate that little intense vignette in the corner, reminds me of the old OM 18mm. Even though it's correctable I hate it.
Yeah, that OM 18mm ... f/11 and still vignetting those corners.
Desmolicious wrote:
Excellent test as always Fred. For me the only difference I would actually notice is the vignetting. And for that I prefer the Leica lens. But for that price difference? Thats the equalizer.
Circling back on this one ... might make a nice "backup" lens, if the vignetting is bothersome. Wondering how the vignetting would be glued on to a mono body. Still would need to be corrected (potentially), but hmmm. I can't swap the Lux from my Q2 onto my M246, but rather than getting another 28 Elmarit or the 28 Cron for the M's maybe this little guy plays in lieu of the Q2.
Of course, the new kid on the block 28/1.5 is still in the mix.
RustyBug wrote:
How's the vignetting going on it. Is this image corrected for the vignetting, or is this the level of vignetting you're getting from it at aperture?
Curious about the focusing haptics in the Type I vs. the Type II differences?
Here is the original dng, I think I shot it at f/5.6...
Fred Miranda wrote:
Great summary! I would also add low distortion, as it's not very common with compact wide-angle lenses.
Are you using a filter behind the hood?
Thanks! Edited to add "low distortion" to the post. Yes, I originally had a B+W Master clear but switched to a Leica UV. The B+W for some reason showed a very slight negative effect on sharpness at the edges of the frame that I don't see with the Leica UV (when viewed at 300% from the M11M, tested without the hood). Not sure why, but I've had this issue pop up on a few other lenses over the years with a B+W clear. I wonder if the very useful but perhaps thicker B+W MRC coatings are to blame, but that's just a wild guess. The Leica filter and the B+W Orange F-Pro filter I use have fairly thick rings, and I don't see any additional vignetting when I add the hood.
I took it down once Rusty got it. Suffice to say though, my image does have a lot of vignette added, I like vignette Im getting treatment 😀, lemme know if you still wanna take a look
highdesertmesa wrote:
Thanks! Edited to add "low distortion" to the post. Yes, I originally had a B+W Master clear but switched to a Leica UV. The B+W for some reason showed a very slight negative effect on sharpness at the edges of the frame that I don't see with the Leica UV (when viewed at 300% from the M11M, tested without the hood). Not sure why, but I've had this issue pop up on a few other lenses over the years with a B+W clear. I wonder if the very useful but perhaps thicker B+W MRC coatings are to blame, but that's just a wild guess. The Leica filter and the B+W Orange F-Pro filter I use have fairly thick rings, and I don't see any additional vignetting when I add the hood....Show more →
I mainly use B+W but have been changing to Leica filters when they come up in the correct size. That's because Lenrentals' testing showed they do transmit more and have fewer internal reflections (which basically shows up on night scenes w points of light).
Desmolicious wrote:
I mainly use B+W but have been changing to Leica filters when they come up in the correct size. That's because Lenrentals' testing showed they do transmit more and have fewer internal reflections (which basically shows up on night scenes w points of light).
It's just too bad the Leica filters have aluminum rings instead of brass
aperture?
