<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Lens Comparison</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.japanexposures.com/2009/02/25/lens-comparison/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.japanexposures.com/2009/02/25/lens-comparison/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=lens-comparison</link>
	<description>a personal introduction to Japanese photography</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 02:06:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dirk</title>
		<link>http://www.japanexposures.com/2009/02/25/lens-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-1413</link>
		<dc:creator>Dirk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Feb 2009 12:22:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.japanexposures.com/?p=2497#comment-1413</guid>
		<description>Unfortunately I do not own a Leica 50 to compare them to, otherwise I would have had it run alongside with the others.

As for grays and tonality, it is difficult to judge. I tweaked the levels in PS so that the images would all look similar enough to compare general rendering properties at various apertures. I don&#039;t think this comparison and the process (scanning, adjustment etc.) can say much about the tonality or contrast of these lenses.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unfortunately I do not own a Leica 50 to compare them to, otherwise I would have had it run alongside with the others.</p>
<p>As for grays and tonality, it is difficult to judge. I tweaked the levels in PS so that the images would all look similar enough to compare general rendering properties at various apertures. I don&#8217;t think this comparison and the process (scanning, adjustment etc.) can say much about the tonality or contrast of these lenses.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Dougan</title>
		<link>http://www.japanexposures.com/2009/02/25/lens-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-1412</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Dougan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 12:16:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.japanexposures.com/?p=2497#comment-1412</guid>
		<description>For me the Hexanon looked the best. I just feel it produces smooth grey&#039;s and a nice range. There is an obvious difference between the Planer 45 G and the Hex and Planer 50 ZM. How do these all compare to a Leica 50?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For me the Hexanon looked the best. I just feel it produces smooth grey&#8217;s and a nice range. There is an obvious difference between the Planer 45 G and the Hex and Planer 50 ZM. How do these all compare to a Leica 50?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

