Originally posted by paulh Very nice, CR - that 3rd shot has an interesting 3D look.
The M 50 1.7 is a very interesting lens. Asahi really got it right with that one. It's got this quality wide open that is wonderful - sharp at the point of focus, with just a bit less contrast and color than just a half click down - from which it starts to be perfect. But even though it has a bit less color/contrast wide open, the "reduction" occurs in a very artistic way. Also, if you just boost a bit of contrast in PP, and perhaps add a bit of fine sharpening, you get that 3D look a bit more accentuated.
I could not get my SMC-A 50 1.7 to behave like this, so I sold it. I also have an SMC-F 50 1.7 which I use for my kids games and it's phenomenal at f2, but at f1.7 it is just slightly less awesome than this M series.
I thought "I must have a really good copy of this M lens" but then a couple years ago I bought a K1000 locally which came with another M 50 1.7 and... it was just as awesome as the one I already had. I sold the other one and kept my old trusty one that has a barrel that has been abused, and someone scratched some letters on the barrel as well, so I figured it's not worth selling as it would be considered an "Ugly" lens. What could I get for it, 10 bucks? But it looks like a thousand bucks to me, when I look at the pictures
Quote: Darktable seems to suit you nicely. I'm still using RawTherapee with Amaze presets and "film-like" tone curves. Occasionally I'll play with the film emulations.
I like Darktable. A lot.
It is however too heavy for my computer. It locks up all the time and everything takes forever. I only have 8GB of RAM and it's my work computer, so I'm not allowed to open and put in more memory...
I go back to RawTherapee sometimes because it's much easier on my computer, but I just can't get the same results... And now with the new "filmic" module which replaces the "base curve" (which was already great) with a more film-like and naturally looking base to work on, and the retouch, which makes it so easy to remove blemishes... it's hard to not use it.
Quote: I like the 18-135 very much - it's definitely a step up from my trusty kit lens, and the silent focusing is a pleasure. On the minus side, it's a bit heavy (but not bad) and I've run into some minor CA issues I wasn't expecting. It's manageable for sure, and the overall IQ improvement is worth the extra hassle. It's a very capable all-rounder. I still love my 16-45, and the extra 2mm comes in handy at times, for example at car shows. The sharpness and rendering are great as always.
Thanks for the evaluation. I wonder if it's worth keeping both once you have the 18-135...
But the problem is that I love the rendering of my 16-45 so much. I don't know if it's my copy, but it has something, especially in the 45mm end, that even my primes can't match (they're also good of course, and usually a bit sharper). It's not all-out sharpness as I said (though it's plenty sharp!) but it's the way it depicts its subjects with strong, bold colors and makes everything look much better than it actually does in reality! And when I put a circular polarizer on it... oh my, it's instant art, at least to my non-trained non-artsy eyes
On top of that, at 16mm it's prime-like sharp.
Quote: From March with the Super Tak 35/3.5:
Very nice... now that's another lens that has been on my radar for a long time (the K version, I'm not going down the M42 rabbit hole
)... super sharp, renders everything beautifully.