Some Loxia 50mm Images

[Guest all8]

Slowly collecting some images from this lens to catalog its behaviour, wide open is quite interesting, in some cases lots of CA (which is easily visible while focusing at 5x mag), but in these two everything was OK. The focus movement is now, after some months of light usage, buttery smooth - its really nice to use.

 

These are at f2.0, color is accurate (I took care to use correct white balance, Auto-white-balance was a long was off).

 

See 500px for higher res.

 

 

 

 

[Guest all8]

This is at f5.6, which is giving nice 3d effect considering the aperture which was necessary to keep both trunks in sharp focus.

 

https://500px.com/photo/138372243/fagus-sylvatica-by-tim-rule

 

 

[Guest all8]

At f2.0 this shot is nice, focus is near to infinity and all foreground detail is slightly blurred, the corners especially so. The same shot at f8.0 had all the foreground grass sharp all the way to the corners. After a lot of thought I decided to keep the f2.0 image.

 

https://500px.com/photo/138810257/forest-viveiro-do-parque-da-paz-by-tim-rule

 

 

[Guest all8]

F4.0 for this traffic sign which is rendered very sharply indeed. The details on the sign are quite wonderful to look at, very sharp indeed.

 

https://500px.com/photo/141138457/norway-sign-by-tim-rule

 

 

[Guest all8]

Sharp all over at f8.0, really not much to it at this aperture ... what a great lens, the only real downside is the CA which occurs wide open - not always a problem though, but does make some subjects difficult. Photos of people wide open are wonderful, although I don't post any of those here, the CA is more a problem with trees, branches and structures.

 

Otus 55 solves that   

 

 

https://500px.com/photo/110378541/gilje-by-tim-rule

 

 

[Kami_sn]

I like the last and third to the last one the most, great photos.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest all8]

Here is one I got today, taken at f2.0 and really looks nice. I have one at f5.6 which I will post later, useful for comparison. Using Lee Seven5 Big Stopper, 25 seconds, ISO 100. PP was WB correction (Big Stopper has slight blue cast), some minor exposure/constrast curve/sharpening - but overall not very much.

 

 

https://500px.com/photo/141237005/hörschbach-waterfalls-by-tim-rule

 

 

[Guest all8]

Here is the image at f5.6. Biggest difference is the increased sharpness in the corners and away from the focal point (which is just below center on some rocks above the last/first fall). And less vignetting of course.

 

Which one is better? Well, the f5.6 image is sharper overall in a nice way, but the f2.0 image is a bit more dreamy (I think there is a Lee filter which helps with that; Soft or Mist).

 

https://500px.com/photo/141247513/loxia-sample-hörschmach-wetterfalls-at-f5-6-by-tim-rule

 

 

[Guest all8]

Here is one I got today, taken at f2.0 and really looks nice. I have one at f5.6 which I will post later, useful for comparison. Using Lee Seven5 Big Stopper, 25 seconds, ISO 100. PP was WB correction (Big Stopper has slight blue cast), some minor exposure/constrast curve/sharpening - but overall not very much.

 

 

https://500px.com/photo/141237005/hörschbach-waterfalls-by-tim-rule

 

walkabout-0378.jpg

 

 

I also took a shot of the falls with a Batis 25mm at f2.0, after moving about halfway towards the front face. Quite a bit different, but still somewhat similar.

 

https://500px.com/photo/141865079/batis-sample-hörschbach-wasserfall-by-tim-rule

[Guest all8]

Some early spring ...

 

 

[Guest all8]

And a tractor!