Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/07/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Roger B wrote: >> The 35/1.4 ASPH and 50/1 take pictures that look quite different. There is >> the depth of field issue, and the incredible lack of flare that the Noct >> pictures have. The 35 is sharper, and the only difference between f1.4 and >> f8 is the depth of field; in the Noct pictures, partly because of the >> softness due, I believe, to sperical aberration, and partly due to the >> vignetting, f1 pictures are hugely different than the f8 pictures, and a >> long way from pictures taken with the 35. > >What's your take, Henning, on the following hypothetical... > >Move up with the 35/1.4/ASPH until the field is the same as that of >the 50/1 and shoot a subject with the two set at 1.4. What are the >likely differences in the pics? Apart from the fact that the field is only the same at one distance, and the depth of field of the out of focus areas means that elements not in the plane of focus will be sharper and considerably more intrusive in the 35mm shot, the differences will be that the 35 shot will be a bit sharper and more evenly illuminated, the out of focus areas will be smoother (better 'bokeh') in the 50 shot, there will be better shadow separation in the 50 shot, and as with the pre-ASPH 35/2, there will be a _very_ slight hint of light spread (a 'glow') around bright objects, and you still have one more f-stop to go to give you a better shutter speed, or more shadow detail, and even more separation of your subject from the background. * Henning J. Wulff /|\ Wulff Photography & Design /###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com |[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com