Brick vs Summicron-R (color/bokeh comparison)

I shot this comparison some time ago, and thought this may be interesting to share.

- This is not a sharpness comparison.
- Camera is a 5D2.
- Both shots are raw SOOC (Lr3 defaults).
- White balance has been aligned (6100K).
- Same lighting (shots made almost at the same time).
- Lenses were shot wide open at MFD.
- The MFD of the Summicron is shorter, so framing is slightly different. The 24-70 shot has been slightly cropped for this reason.
- In the upper right corner, there is a mosquito net. This spoils the bokeh in the 24-70 shot.

Hope this helps.
Any comment is appreciated.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Nice photos. Can not wait to use my Leica 35 mm and 50 mm.

I've often wondered if it was my 24-70L not rendering the colors right, especially when shooting my orchids! I have one Dendrobium that is so dark purple and it's color is so difficult to capture. Hmmmm...

Here's a shot of another orchid with a difficult color to capture correctly and shot with the 24-70L.

^- I've had that problem with Canon lenses and red subjects not rendering right...Though i also heard someone say it can be the body too...

In general, Canon lenses do favor the warm colors. Leica are more neutral. Not sure it is fair to compare a zoom to such a wonderful prime though.

KenjiS wrote in post #11251879
^- I've had that problem with Canon lenses and red subjects not rendering right...Though i also heard someone say it can be the body too...

Yeah, I've found that if I underexpose by 1/3 to 2/3 of a stop I get a better and more true representation of reds. Red Roses drive me NUTS!

And yeah, not really a fair apples to oranges comparison, but still it's interesting.

I own many different brands of lenses and everytime I go out and do a side by side test where one of them is a Leica or a Zeiss, guess which one has the colors I prefer? Now, testing a Zeiss vs a Leica? A real horse race. Boils down to personal opinion I guess.

Thank you! Very nice! The zeiss is def the winner for me.

ChasWG wrote in post #11252438
Yeah, I've found that if I underexpose by 1/3 to 2/3 of a stop I get a better and more true representation of reds. Red Roses drive me NUTS!

And yeah, not really a fair apples to oranges comparison, but still it's interesting.

I think it's more a sensor issue though certain brand lenses do minimize the tendency for over saturation of reds.

ChasWG wrote in post #11251119
I've often wondered if it was my 24-70L not rendering the colors right, especially when shooting my orchids! I have one Dendrobium that is so dark purple and it's color is so difficult to capture. Hmmmm...

Here's a shot of another orchid with a difficult color to capture correctly and shot with the 24-70L.

Here it looks to be a fucsia when to the eye it is really a darker Red.

Nice compairison and good work. I perfer the Summicron! But is that reality, which is a truer representation?

Same here.

Depending on the subject, pictures with the 24-70L may be difficult to fix in pp. Sometimes I have the feeling some color hues have been irremediably lost (not clipped, just never made it to the final image).

While in some cases this issue may depend on the sensor, my subjective opinion is the 35/2 has deeper, more real colors.

BTW: Nice shot.

emitecaps wrote in post #11253307
I think it's more a sensor issue though certain brand lenses do minimize the tendency for over saturation of reds.

I agree.
Anyway this is not the issue here as I made sure no sensor element reached saturation.

JelleVerherstraeten wrote in post #11253172
Thank you! Very nice! The zeiss is def the winner for me.

Thanks Jelle.
You mean Leica (I wish I had a Zeiss 35 to compare as well ).

BTW: It seems the new Zeiss 35/1.4 (Q1 2011) is going to be a great lens. But all comes at a price.

Leica (modern line of lenses) and Canon have a relatively similar design philosophy - to make lenses that are free of optical aberrations and that have a rendering that is as neutral as possible. The difference between them is that Leica spends much more money per lens on exotic glass types and subsequently their lenses are closer to the optically ideal result. Leica lenses are also far more expensive.

Zeiss is a completely different story. It's not neutral. It asserts a certain rendering style and you have to live with it. I personally love the Zeiss rendering style but there are plenty of people that don't and find it too contrasty and too direct and blunt.

CheshireCat wrote in post #11254491
BTW: Nice shot.

Thanks!

gasrocks wrote in post #11252995
Now, testing a Zeiss vs a Leica? A real horse race. Boils down to personal opinion I guess.

There is probably some scientific way to compare color fidelity (transfer functions, et cetera).

But after all, I agree that personal opinion is what really matters.

For instance, the same Summicron 35 used for this comparison has a heavy field curvature (may also depend on the adapter). This will produce horrendous results on any scientific test. But I love the effect.