Great vid on sharpness. About a week ago, I asked another Leica shooting you tuber why Leica? The reply was because I said so. What you start saying about Leica lenses & color somewhere around the 3+ minute mark is why he should refer anyone who ask why Leica to this video. Looking forward to watching your B&W video. Thank you.
So glad I watched this , perceived sharpness and the final print ! Etc just bought your ebook, very common-sense approach, I just wish people would stop pixel peeping.
Enlightening video. My biggest takeaway is "Don't believe everything they(camera industry) tell you." Things they can quantify may not be what we are looking for. Micro contrast is one of the keys to making pictures pop out(sharp). Pictures taken with Lumix S 50 1.4, Canon EF 50 1.2, Leica, Zeiss Loxia+Batis & Sigma Foveon x3 start growing on me.
For what it's worth finally the first person I've come across who explains camera tech in a way I can perfectly digest. Don't change a thing about the style of your channel. Respect
Beautifully said, Thorsten! It seems like nowadays everyone is looking at pictures at 100% and getting rid of those that aren't sharp when we should be looking at them holistically. Thank you for speaking truth, Thorsten! This is so liberating to me as a photographer!
The sum of all elements is what makes the photo. If you look at all parts individually, you miss the ...big picture. I've sold all my digital cameras and gone back to 35mm. OM1 still does it. Turns out though, as a student, it was a creative move I can barely afford hahaha! Love your reviews and insights! New subscriber!!
The Angry Photographer sent me here. He didn't fail me. Subscribed to you sir! Greetings from Germany! i mean seriously at last i find another good photographer like you, who actually explained in a very easy way what sharpness is. I always found it hilarious that almost all TH-cam Photographers zooming 100% on each photos they are capturing and say this one is focused and this one is not.
Well said! I work in the camera industry and we are always dealing with customers who zoom in 100% on the PC when looking at their photos and claiming it is not sharp Enough!
What a fantastic explanation of a very simple concept, its the end product that counts not all the tech that is involved in producing that final image!
Thankx for your insight as a professional ! I am an amateur and I shoot mainly Canon. My perception was that when I look at photos on flickr or other sources, the sharpness of the new lenses for mirrorless cameras is very impressive but almost kind of "clinical" and I nearly always preferred the look and the rendering of the older EF Canon glass which at the moment a lot of people want to get rid off. I recently bought an old Canon 5D 12MP camera from 2005 and eventhough getting the photo is a bit more cumbersome, the result if you nail it is just amazing, the colors, the rendering, everything. I have to tweek the photos of my mirrorless quite a bit for them to look like the ones coming from the 5D.
Thank you so much for your video! I called myself an enthusiast amateur. But I have been shooting film for years with Nikons and Minoltas, Nowadays I use Pentax and Ricoh, but I just ordered a Leica c-lux. Looking forward to enjoy Leica quality! Adn definitely, a good picture does not have to be tack sharp. Composition matters the most.
I followed a link here from another TH-cam channel, and I'm so glad I did. You've reminded me a little of the art philosopher Gombridge, who's essays and books I'm very fond of reading, particularly Art And Illusion. I often feel that too many photographers get hung up on how many megapixels or dpi there are in an image, rather than enjoying it for what it is. Thank you for this. I feel mentally invigorated.
He does that intentionally - as well as putting it upside down - to show the audience that those Leicas are tools to be used and not to be locked out inside a vitrine haha
Ken, thanks for enlightening us to the meaning of "sharpness", and for introducing Mr. Overgaard. His presentation was most interesting, and did expand my photographic knowledge and perspective...as do all of your videos!
@magicoflight : interesting point of view, thanks for sharing it. When it comes to film resolution, what are your sources ? I do have found clear explanation and film resolution is way higher than the figures you have presented here. Here is a short excerpt : « Fuji Velvia 50 is rated to resolve 160 lines per millimeter. This is the finest level of detail it can resolve, at which point its MTF just about hits zero. Each line will require one light and one dark pixel, or two pixels. Thus it will take about 320 pixels per millimeter to represent what's on Velvia 50. 320 pixels x 320 pixels is 0.1MP per square millimeter. 35mm film is 24 x 36mm, or 864 square millimeters. To scan most of the detail on a 35mm photo, you'll need about 864 x 0.1, or 87 Megapixels. » From my own perspective that is also the way I feel it, since I am shooting both film & digital. Could you please tell us more about your sources and method of calculation ? Source : - www.kenrockwell.com/tech/film-resolution.htm - www.fujifilm.com/products/professional_films/pdf/velvia_50_datasheet.pdf
Just starting your video's and I have to say they are incredibly informative, I am picking up many tips all of which are very useful. I am going to enjoy working my way through your collection of video's. Thank you for taking the time to film and post these informative video's they are greatly appreciated.
What you have said is really true...but today with marketing gimmicks & with DXO MARK everybody is running towards Sigma ART Lenses & Zeiss OTUS, just to get every pixel out of their sensors...for me, I choose the lens has got great Micro-Contrast, it will give my photograph life, Leica are Legendary Lenses, not because how sharp they are but how much life they put in the photographs taken with them....
VERY good video. Your explanation about sharpness changed my understanding. Thank you. Everybody crazy about sharpness and only few understand what sharpness actually is.
I am glad that you share your knowledge with us here, thank you very much! It will be superb if you share some of your experiences about film photography! Best regards from Sweden.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts, they give me an anchor to peg my photographic philosophy. This is why I love Europeans. Americans are great with technology and information, but Europeans, I find, are the soul of everything I've come to appreciate in this world (as well as the Japanese too). From cars and automobile design, to visual arts, to literature and philosophy. Thank you again, and keep doing videos such as this, please.
You better hurry up and get over to Europe because it's disappearing fast. Muslims and Africans are being imported by the treasonous elites and the European birth rate has crashed below replacement. You can't have Europe without Europeans.
Very inspiring indeed. Im always upset with the sharpness on the eyes when zoomed in but you really made a point here that made me understand that youre not supposed to zoom and zoom. Thank you
Thanks Thorsten. You have a very interesting perspective on sharpness. I agree with Fauxma that you need a bigger desk when moving your camera and lenses. Well done.
Very interesting and so true about what is the perception of sharpness but moreover artistic quality of an image. Since I got my first Leica (M8) last year and M lenses, I can feel it even when I look at the rear screen of the M8 which is so poor in definition. But all is so obvious, micro contrast are where the focus is and then all goes so smooth that if strengthens the sensation of sharpness and make the photography looks great. I'm wondering about switching to the M9-P or M-P(240) to get the full sensor sise. What would be your advise if I can ask.
Hello Maestro. The picture you've took with the legendary Digilux 2 is just amazing. I have one of this, I exploide it on the side walk in Paris 3 years ago, then I can't get along with the idea to not have it any more with me, so I buy an other one, and I agree about the sharp fact. When the camera is in the right hands, the sharp side is existing where it have to be. I would love to know your set up you will recommend to use the Digilux 2, I mean something around... let's say the perfection, like on the picture you took. Best regards, Olivier
I shot Leicas and Hasseblads during the film years. I now own another brands of very high mp cameras. I'm never really satisfied with the results. Many camera manufactures do come close, but once you shoot with Leica Cameras, you will be spoil for life.
For some things, high resolution makes sense, but it's actually very specialized. Most of us can choose cameras and lenses that makes us happy and makes photography fun and worthwhile.
Thank you for clarifying a simple thing made complicated by the camera manufacturers (I mean, how else will they be able to push new cameras every year?)
I am relatively new to photography and enjoyed this video. If I print a certain amount of photos in 8x10 format it helps me improve as I can now hold my photograph in my hands. It gives me a sense of creative ownership that I would not normally feel just looking at a monitor. Thanks again.
Yes, that is so true. I have professional printers make prints for galleries and such, but I also have a simple Canon Pixma printer (the simple one with five color catridges) for printing 8x10" prints on glossy glossy paper for anything I just want to put on a board or give to my kids friends. Sufficient quality and it's great to see what you did on a wall, and it's intersting to see what others see and say when they see a print. I had a workshop student who had a box on his sofa table with 8x5 prints of his newest/best photos, then guests could take the box and go through the photos. Smart way of making it real and have your own little gallery exhibition at home for family and friends to see.
Hello Mr. Overgaard, thank you for sharing, it's an interesting approach. Would there be a difference in sharpness between film and digital? Let's say, you make a digital image with an M240 and 50 Summicron. Then you make the same picture with the 50 Summicron, on film, and scan the negative. Would the sharpness of both images be perceived differently on screen?
That's a good question, in terms of overall sharpness. But the micro details (that makes up the overall picture) for sure would be more prominent, detailed and sharp. Film images are actually quite detailed, so it's not impossible. But back int he 1960's and 1970's you could special order film on glass plates for large format cameras so as to get a very precise surface. As film will never be as plane as glass, that's why. With digital sensors we basically got "glass negatives" so that's why with digital you can get overall sharpness and detail to a degree you can't with film. It would depend on the viewing medium (screen, print, etc) how much the micro-details would be visible from a distance. In my opinion it's like high fidelity in music: You may not be able to distinguish the micro details and the precision with which they are delivered in a great high fidelity stereo, but in the overall presentation you would sense it very clearly. Having said that, it's the light in the image that will make it pop or not - also in the micro details.
I think you're right - its the look of the imagery. I get attached to the look when I find it and will usually stick with that camera for a long time and always regret it when I sell.
Fully agree, it's called the Art of Lenses. You may try to compare for example a Leonardo painting where sharpness is intact dissolved because that is how light technically works, while the 15th 16th cent. Dutch school of panting interpreted sharpness as distinct contrasts which is not how light technically operates.
Yes, there was a proud school of light to accentuate, show colors and emotions. Da Vinci was one who spent a lot of time noticing how colors changed by different types and levels of light.
some people call this mircro contrast. When you use only 3 to 5 elements in a lens you have more abberation, less sharpness but way more contrast in the details and more natural colors. Its that simple.
I have a 55mm F2.0 Auto Rokkor-PF lens that I purchased in the 1960s with my Minolta SR-1 35mm film camera. Today I use this lens on an Olympus EM-10 MkII. I was wondering if there is a way to focus any lens to achieve an effect similar to the Leica lens effect that you just discussed in your video. Thank you. walt
The look of soft but detailed is very Leica. Not that other lenses can't have that similar thing, but it's definitely a Leica look. Focus can be sharp, and/or clear in appearance. Leica has mainly the clear in appearance as the feature. That's what makes the details and everything look alive.
Just have to add to the many comments about your straightforward approach. very nice and without all the "hype" of those other "picture-takers" ;) on the web. Thanks
Loved it, very pleasant to watch, It made perfect sense to me, you are a person who knows what he is talking about and you explain in a way that the general viewers can understand, it is what it boils down to, nothing fancy. :-)
Dear Thorsten von Overgaard. Just saw your video (from #Angry Photographer), which made my day. As I always said, its a question of perception and viewing distance. Thank you very much for your well expressed video. Will share it.
I am greatfull for this post in that I am most confused about lens. Why some people like vintage lens and other don't think too much of them, why the significant price difference in lens cost. Why camera bodies decrees in values while lens seems to hold their price. It's all mysterious to me, however this post clears up the sharp and not so sharp factors.
Great video. Some call it micro-contrast. Most people are only worried about, as you said, LPI, or how sharp is it. There is much more to a pleasing photograph. If you want best of both sharpness and micro-contrast shoot large format film and drum scan it...or even better someone who knows what they are doing use a darkroom. Keep up the good work.
You can actually get second-hand Leica R lenses and retrofit them to Nikon bayonet. Some hare not that expensive. But I find that Nikon also has some great lenses. I used to have a 50/1.2 Nikon, that was a fun one.
I would look at forums what others have played around with and perhaps also Flickr (which is good for seeing how specific lenses render). I use 50mm lenses mostly, so I would for sure do a little investigation on 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor lenses through history and see which ones I like. Might not be the expensive ones, particular if they are not rare. For example, the Leica 50mm Summicron-M f/2.0 "Rigid" from the 1960's is not a rare lens, but is really outstanding. It's gone up again a bit, (some of it is my fault) but is still available for $400-800. Now, you can't really fit that on a Nikon, but it shows that special and great lenses are around that are not being reviewed, but are in fact amazing pieces.
just after this, you say: "when you photograph in colors ..." i'm thinking we are always photographing in colors as the real world is in colors. My curious mind wonders the impact of lens design decisions by manufacturer on both color film/sensor vs the impact on B&W film. (I guess my mind is distinguishing a difference in terms of the blue, green, and that 'aberrant red' impact on both color receptacle VS the impact on B&W film.
Great video...Thanks Thorsten!
Fascinating video and a discussion rarely covered thank you
Really enjoying your channel
Thank you for sharing your knowledge!
Most welcome 🙂
Great vid on sharpness. About a week ago, I asked another Leica shooting you tuber why Leica? The reply was because I said so. What you start saying about Leica lenses & color somewhere around the 3+ minute mark is why he should refer anyone who ask why Leica to this video. Looking forward to watching your B&W video. Thank you.
Great video! One often get carried away in the ”sharpness wave” Thanks!
So glad I watched this , perceived sharpness and the final print ! Etc just bought your ebook, very common-sense approach, I just wish people would stop pixel peeping.
Thank you SIR
Enlightening video. My biggest takeaway is "Don't believe everything they(camera industry) tell you." Things they can quantify may not be what we are looking for. Micro contrast is one of the keys to making pictures pop out(sharp). Pictures taken with Lumix S 50 1.4, Canon EF 50 1.2, Leica, Zeiss Loxia+Batis & Sigma Foveon x3 start growing on me.
It was the best definição I found. Tks
For what it's worth finally the first person I've come across who explains camera tech in a way I can perfectly digest. Don't change a thing about the style of your channel. Respect
Thank you very much for the kind words!
Dude I agree there too many idiots here spouting opinion without slightest subject knowledge
Beautifully said, Thorsten! It seems like nowadays everyone is looking at pictures at 100% and getting rid of those that aren't sharp when we should be looking at them holistically. Thank you for speaking truth, Thorsten! This is so liberating to me as a photographer!
Solid info. Thanks.
Excellent, Thorsten! Lots of endless conversation boiled down to the essence of what is real. Thank you!
Glad you liked. Good comment!
Half of me learning a lot, the other half having an anxiety attack for seeing how close that leica is to the edge of the table!
As always, a very helpful and detailed episode! Love your no frills, no drama approach on sharing knowledge.
Every photographers should watch this video. Thank you !
The sum of all elements is what makes the photo. If you look at all parts individually, you miss the ...big picture. I've sold all my digital cameras and gone back to 35mm. OM1 still does it. Turns out though, as a student, it was a creative move I can barely afford hahaha! Love your reviews and insights! New subscriber!!
Well said and about time too. It's the feeling, atmosphere and emotion that a photograph conveys that matters
Thank you :-)
Some quality information right here! Thank you for taking the time to share these insight.
Thank you!
The Angry Photographer sent me here. He didn't fail me. Subscribed to you sir! Greetings from Germany! i mean seriously at last i find another good photographer like you, who actually explained in a very easy way what sharpness is. I always found it hilarious that almost all TH-cam Photographers zooming 100% on each photos they are capturing and say this one is focused and this one is not.
Aha, thanks for explaining! I'll pay him a visit. Glad to know there are more grumpy people than I :-)
Just today I came across this vid. It's really helped to put all the hassle around sharpness into perspective. Thank you
Film is 18-20 MP per color I think. RGB that is.
So its actually 54-60 MP, where as 36Mp digital is the total mp.
Venlig hilsen Keith
Truly remarkable way of explaining concepts, Thank you for producing this videos.
You are welcome. Thank you for the comment.
Mmm I only have the kit lens. Maybe I can get some good pictures out of that too 😎😎😎😎😎😎
The preview text translated saying my name is Jose!!!!! Haha
Bought some Christmas gifts. Thank you, can't wait to put it to use
Well said! I work in the camera industry and we are always dealing with customers who zoom in 100% on the PC when looking at their photos and claiming it is not sharp Enough!
Love this new Magic of Light channel!
Glad to hear that!
Great video! Always to the point, not complicated and interesting. Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us.
What a fantastic explanation of a very simple concept, its the end product that counts not all the tech that is involved in producing that final image!
Thankx for your insight as a professional ! I am an amateur and I shoot mainly Canon. My perception was that when I look at photos on flickr or other sources, the sharpness of the new lenses for mirrorless cameras is very impressive but almost kind of "clinical" and I nearly always preferred the look and the rendering of the older EF Canon glass which at the moment a lot of people want to get rid off. I recently bought an old Canon 5D 12MP camera from 2005 and eventhough getting the photo is a bit more cumbersome, the result if you nail it is just amazing, the colors, the rendering, everything. I have to tweek the photos of my mirrorless quite a bit for them to look like the ones coming from the 5D.
Thank you so much for your video! I called myself an enthusiast amateur. But I have been shooting film for years with Nikons and Minoltas, Nowadays I use Pentax and Ricoh, but I just ordered a Leica c-lux. Looking forward to enjoy Leica quality! Adn definitely, a good picture does not have to be tack sharp. Composition matters the most.
I followed a link here from another TH-cam channel, and I'm so glad I did. You've reminded me a little of the art philosopher Gombridge, who's essays and books I'm very fond of reading, particularly Art And Illusion. I often feel that too many photographers get hung up on how many megapixels or dpi there are in an image, rather than enjoying it for what it is. Thank you for this. I feel mentally invigorated.
Thank you. I agree to a large degree.
Thank you. I hope many of the TH-cam reviewers watch for video.
When you moved the M-D closer to the edge at 4:48 i had a mini heart attack
He does that intentionally - as well as putting it upside down - to show the audience that those Leicas are tools to be used and not to be locked out inside a vitrine haha
A danish photographer has no such worries. Like a honey badger.
Thank you Thorsten, very true and enlightening.
Greatest words I've heard in photography! Enjoyed this so much! Thank You!
Welcome!
Ken, thanks for enlightening us to the meaning of "sharpness", and for introducing Mr. Overgaard. His presentation was most interesting, and did expand my photographic knowledge and perspective...as do all of your videos!
very informative. thanks for taking the time to present your perspective !
@magicoflight : interesting point of view, thanks for sharing it. When it comes to film resolution, what are your sources ?
I do have found clear explanation and film resolution is way higher than the figures you have presented here.
Here is a short excerpt :
« Fuji Velvia 50 is rated to resolve 160 lines per millimeter. This is the finest level of detail it can resolve, at which point its MTF just about hits zero.
Each line will require one light and one dark pixel, or two pixels. Thus it will take about 320 pixels per millimeter to represent what's on Velvia 50.
320 pixels x 320 pixels is 0.1MP per square millimeter.
35mm film is 24 x 36mm, or 864 square millimeters.
To scan most of the detail on a 35mm photo, you'll need about 864 x 0.1, or 87 Megapixels. »
From my own perspective that is also the way I feel it, since I am shooting both film & digital.
Could you please tell us more about your sources and method of calculation ?
Source :
- www.kenrockwell.com/tech/film-resolution.htm
- www.fujifilm.com/products/professional_films/pdf/velvia_50_datasheet.pdf
Well. . . I love the rendering of images with splitting warm colors, touch of micro contrast 😋 with Rich amount of color. . . That's
Thank you so much for your time and explaination.
Welcome!
Very interesting look at the concept of sharpness. Looking forward to more videos from you.
Thank you.
You're a great teacher, thank you.
Just starting your video's and I have to say they are incredibly informative, I am picking up many tips all of which are very useful. I am going to enjoy working my way through your collection of video's.
Thank you for taking the time to film and post these informative video's they are greatly appreciated.
Thank you!
Holy... so inspiring...
So true.. one example I can think of is you can increase the blacks in certain photos and make it appear sharper (perceived sharpness).
Yes, generally, if you turn down exposure in edit and increase contrast (and black), that will give that effect.
Very interesting viewpoint on sharpness. Thank you for sharing.
Welcome, Carrie.
Wonderful, glad I found your Chanel, very clear instruction in a short time, thanks.
Glad to hear that. More is coming!
What you have said is really true...but today with marketing gimmicks & with DXO MARK everybody is running towards Sigma ART Lenses & Zeiss OTUS, just to get every pixel out of their sensors...for me, I choose the lens has got great Micro-Contrast, it will give my photograph life, Leica are Legendary Lenses, not because how sharp they are but how much life they put in the photographs taken with them....
you are a great photographer!
VERY good video. Your explanation about sharpness changed my understanding. Thank you. Everybody crazy about sharpness and only few understand what sharpness actually is.
Thank you. Good feedback :-)
I am glad that you share your knowledge with us here, thank you very much! It will be superb if you share some of your experiences about film photography! Best regards from Sweden.
Thank you Shahab.
I will get around film eventually.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts, they give me an anchor to peg my photographic philosophy. This is why I love Europeans. Americans are great with technology and information, but Europeans, I find, are the soul of everything I've come to appreciate in this world (as well as the Japanese too). From cars and automobile design, to visual arts, to literature and philosophy. Thank you again, and keep doing videos such as this, please.
Thank you for the kind word!
Well said, Enzo...I totally agree!
You better hurry up and get over to Europe because it's disappearing fast. Muslims and Africans are being imported by the treasonous elites and the European birth rate has crashed below replacement. You can't have Europe without Europeans.
Very inspiring indeed. Im always upset with the sharpness on the eyes when zoomed in but you really made a point here that made me understand that youre not supposed to zoom and zoom. Thank you
Thanks. Really appreciate your insights.
Thank you!
Thanks Thorsten. You have a very interesting perspective on sharpness. I agree with Fauxma that you need a bigger desk when moving your camera and lenses. Well done.
Nothing bad happened so far. I will keep an eye on it in the future so we won't have anybody suffering a stroke :-)
very good story
Following the group over from Ken's channel. I enjoyed this video very much. Keep up the good work
Very welcome!
Thank you for sharing your experience,... Beautiful and inspiring!...
Thank you!
Very interesting and so true about what is the perception of sharpness but moreover artistic quality of an image. Since I got my first Leica (M8) last year and M lenses, I can feel it even when I look at the rear screen of the M8 which is so poor in definition. But all is so obvious, micro contrast are where the focus is and then all goes so smooth that if strengthens the sensation of sharpness and make the photography looks great. I'm wondering about switching to the M9-P or M-P(240) to get the full sensor sise. What would be your advise if I can ask.
Hello Maestro. The picture you've took with the legendary Digilux 2 is just amazing. I have one of this, I exploide it on the side walk in Paris 3 years ago, then I can't get along with the idea to not have it any more with me, so I buy an other one, and I agree about the sharp fact. When the camera is in the right hands, the sharp side is existing where it have to be. I would love to know your set up you will recommend to use the Digilux 2, I mean something around... let's say the perfection, like on the picture you took. Best regards,
Olivier
Thank you for sharing your knowledge. Now I should definitely read more on perceived sharpness vs sharpness at 100% magnification.
Thanks very good information
Thanks for sharing this video about sharpness. Very interesting. I look forward to seeing more of your videos.
Thank you. They will come out with two videos a week from now.
Excellent video.
Interesting subject thanks for sharing.
I shot Leicas and Hasseblads during the film years. I now own another brands of very high mp cameras. I'm never really satisfied with the results. Many camera manufactures do come close, but once you shoot with Leica Cameras, you will be spoil for life.
For some things, high resolution makes sense, but it's actually very specialized. Most of us can choose cameras and lenses that makes us happy and makes photography fun and worthwhile.
Excellent video. Thanks for sharing.
I just found this video and learned a lot more than I thought I would. Would love to meet up with you if you're ever in Vancouver in Canada!
Will be back in Vancouver later in 2017, and the lovely Revolver coffee place!
Thank you for clarifying a simple thing made complicated by the camera manufacturers (I mean, how else will they be able to push new cameras every year?)
Thank you!
Well explained. As an aside, what watch are you wearing? Thanks.
That is the karlfalk.com watch
I am relatively new to photography and enjoyed this video. If I print a certain amount of photos in 8x10 format it helps me improve as I can now hold my photograph in my hands. It gives me a sense of creative ownership that I would not normally feel just looking at a monitor. Thanks again.
Yes, that is so true. I have professional printers make prints for galleries and such, but I also have a simple Canon Pixma printer (the simple one with five color catridges) for printing 8x10" prints on glossy glossy paper for anything I just want to put on a board or give to my kids friends. Sufficient quality and it's great to see what you did on a wall, and it's intersting to see what others see and say when they see a print.
I had a workshop student who had a box on his sofa table with 8x5 prints of his newest/best photos, then guests could take the box and go through the photos. Smart way of making it real and have your own little gallery exhibition at home for family and friends to see.
Hello Mr. Overgaard, thank you for sharing, it's an interesting approach.
Would there be a difference in sharpness between film and digital? Let's say, you make a digital image with an M240 and 50 Summicron. Then you make the same picture with the 50 Summicron, on film, and scan the negative. Would the sharpness of both images be perceived differently on screen?
That's a good question, in terms of overall sharpness. But the micro details (that makes up the overall picture) for sure would be more prominent, detailed and sharp.
Film images are actually quite detailed, so it's not impossible. But back int he 1960's and 1970's you could special order film on glass plates for large format cameras so as to get a very precise surface. As film will never be as plane as glass, that's why.
With digital sensors we basically got "glass negatives" so that's why with digital you can get overall sharpness and detail to a degree you can't with film.
It would depend on the viewing medium (screen, print, etc) how much the micro-details would be visible from a distance. In my opinion it's like high fidelity in music: You may not be able to distinguish the micro details and the precision with which they are delivered in a great high fidelity stereo, but in the overall presentation you would sense it very clearly.
Having said that, it's the light in the image that will make it pop or not - also in the micro details.
Thank you for your answer. Looking forward to your next video. You have a very interesting approach.
I think you're right - its the look of the imagery. I get attached to the look when I find it and will usually stick with that camera for a long time and always regret it when I sell.
Yes, a beloved camera is the best. Not easy to stay with the same camera in the digital age though.
wonderful
Fully agree, it's called the Art of Lenses. You may try to compare for example a Leonardo painting where sharpness is intact dissolved because that is how light technically works, while the 15th 16th cent. Dutch school of panting interpreted sharpness as distinct contrasts which is not how light technically operates.
Yes, there was a proud school of light to accentuate, show colors and emotions. Da Vinci was one who spent a lot of time noticing how colors changed by different types and levels of light.
some people call this mircro contrast. When you use only 3 to 5 elements in a lens you have more abberation, less sharpness but way more contrast in the details and more natural colors. Its that simple.
Thanks for sharing! Nearly peed in my pants when the M-D was pushed so close to the edge of the table to make way for the laptop...Lol!
Those things fly around and usually take some beating without much trouble :-)
sharpness is nothing, RENDERING is everything....... so i said.
....which is basically what youre saying
is it not really a balance of several things that formulate "rendering"
Thanks for posting a link to the video today :-)
I have a 55mm F2.0 Auto Rokkor-PF lens that I purchased in the 1960s with my Minolta SR-1 35mm film camera. Today I use this lens on an Olympus EM-10 MkII. I was wondering if there is a way to focus any lens to achieve an effect similar to the Leica lens effect that you just discussed in your video. Thank you. walt
The look of soft but detailed is very Leica. Not that other lenses can't have that similar thing, but it's definitely a Leica look.
Focus can be sharp, and/or clear in appearance. Leica has mainly the clear in appearance as the feature. That's what makes the details and everything look alive.
Thank you! Nice video!
Thank you Xtian!
Very good video. Thank you
Thank you!
Just have to add to the many comments about your straightforward approach. very nice and without all the "hype" of those other "picture-takers" ;) on the web. Thanks
Thank you for the feedback :-)
Loved it, very pleasant to watch, It made perfect sense to me, you are a person who knows what he is talking about and you explain in a way that the general viewers can understand, it is what it boils down to, nothing fancy. :-)
Thank you!
Leica sharpness is it’s price point
Dear Thorsten von Overgaard. Just saw your video (from #Angry Photographer), which made my day. As I always said, its a question of perception and viewing distance. Thank you very much for your well expressed video. Will share it.
Nows thats my excuse for out of focus shots ha ha.
I am greatfull for this post in that I am most confused about lens. Why some people like vintage lens and other don't think too much of them, why the significant price difference in lens cost. Why camera bodies decrees in values while lens seems to hold their price. It's all mysterious to me, however this post clears up the sharp and not so sharp factors.
Thank you. Glad to hear that.
Great video. Some call it micro-contrast. Most people are only worried about, as you said, LPI, or how sharp is it. There is much more to a pleasing photograph. If you want best of both sharpness and micro-contrast shoot large format film and drum scan it...or even better someone who knows what they are doing use a darkroom. Keep up the good work.
My bro big Kent sent me here, nice video, thanks!
Very welcome!
That was a really interesting video. Thank you.
I subscribed even before watching any of the videos! Do you have any other channel?
This is the one. If you bookmark www.magicoflight.tv you should be in on all what is coming. Two new videos a week.
Magic Of Light great stuff. Thanks.
WOW. brilliant information
Thank you
Great video... I love your perspective on the subject of sharpness... The reason I own Leica is the Leica Look... No other camera or lens has it...
Yes, that's right. It's very unique.
But M cameras do not have eye AF. How is it possible to take nice pictures...
Jared Polin favorite quote "yeah but its not sharp" FROOOOOO KNOOOOWWWWS
I'm imagining Jared Polin seeing Robert Capa's photos from D Day. All are blurred.
Good video. Subscribed.
The problem is I can't afford leica lenses. So for Nikon users what do recommend to buy. Thanks.
You can actually get second-hand Leica R lenses and retrofit them to Nikon bayonet. Some hare not that expensive. But I find that Nikon also has some great lenses. I used to have a 50/1.2 Nikon, that was a fun one.
Magic Of Light Thanks for reply. What about third party lenses (sigma/Tamron) do you recommend any of them for Nikon?
I would look at forums what others have played around with and perhaps also Flickr (which is good for seeing how specific lenses render).
I use 50mm lenses mostly, so I would for sure do a little investigation on 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor lenses through history and see which ones I like. Might not be the expensive ones, particular if they are not rare.
For example, the Leica 50mm Summicron-M f/2.0 "Rigid" from the 1960's is not a rare lens, but is really outstanding. It's gone up again a bit, (some of it is my fault) but is still available for $400-800. Now, you can't really fit that on a Nikon, but it shows that special and great lenses are around that are not being reviewed, but are in fact amazing pieces.
Magic Of Light Thanks for your time and reply.
If your mind is sharp and you know what you see, the photograph will be sharp. The rest is simply a tool to show that clear vision.
Hi, I signed up but cannot work out how to get the ebook. Thanks
Hope it worked by now. Else mail am@overgaard.dk for help to get it.
at 3:10 you say the ONE THING every idiot in photography today has NO CLUE about.
Thanks for noticing. Sharpness is actually defined as sharp edges and/or clarity.
Thanks for another wonderful recommendation, Ken: Thorsten.
just after this, you say: "when you photograph in colors ..." i'm thinking we are always photographing in colors as the real world is in colors. My curious mind wonders the impact of lens design decisions by manufacturer on both color film/sensor vs the impact on B&W film. (I guess my mind is distinguishing a difference in terms of the blue, green, and that 'aberrant red' impact on both color receptacle VS the impact on B&W film.