[Leica] IMG: Vegetable Market

[henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff)]

At 10:11 PM -0500 11/20/06, Robert Schneider wrote:
>I convert all my RAW files with Adobe Camera Raw.
>
>I am curious about Greg's experience with the 24 1.4L, since he was 
>implying that it is substandard.  I wonder in what circumstances it 
>has failed him.  I find its performance at all apertures at least 
>very good (f/1.4) and mostly excellent (f/2 and beyond).  Being able 
>to narrow the DOF with a 24 is a treat as well.  The only downside I 
>experience from time to time is flare.  I don't have a single Canon 
>EF lens, however, that handles flare as well as the majority of 
>Leica M lenses.  But flare wasn't/isn't the issue with Tina's shot.

I've had the 24/1.4 for quite a few years, and have used it with 
film, the 1.6x bodies and FF bodies. I've also shot with one other 
sample, and found it to be the same.

There is definitely a falloff in performance towards the edges, and 
they don't get really good ever, but are very decent at f/5.6 and 
smaller.

That said, the shot that you posted, Tina, shows a greater falloff in 
performance than my sample shows at f/1.4 at those distances from the 
center. Something else must be the matter.

I find the best 24 from Canon to be the 24-105 at 24, but it has very 
noticeable vignetting at that focal length. And it's only an f/1.4.

I've also tried the 24-70 and I have the 24TSE. The latter is quite 
even in performance, but hardly outstanding. The only other 24 shift, 
the Olympus, is unfortunately no better.

When I tried the M8 the quality of the M wides compared with the 
Canon wides again jumped out at me.

The widest Canon I have that's really good is the 35/1.4.

-- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com