View Full Version : Lenses with the most "character"?
Lord Fluff
02-03-2008, 08:41
I know the Noctilux is one.....
But I've read the Summarit 50/1.5 is another......
Any other offers? I'm talking "indefinable quality" here, not sharpness. I have a nice range of Canon EOS gear for "performance" - I'm erring towards "feel' for my Leica collection, which is in its infancy at present. Rather than just head down the Summicron/etc route, I really fancy lenses that can do stuff my Canon gear can't, in terms of the overall look of the image.
Thanks all
M. Valdemar
02-03-2008, 08:45
Just buy any M-mount lens and rub the front element with a little sandpaper.
The pre-ASPH Summilux. A bit on the soft side but unique images.
anything with a bit of fogging or haze.
The really unique lens in M-mount is the C Sonnar 50/1.5 - it is a combination of a modern lens and a lens from the thirties - be careful about the focus shift. And if I may correct you, there's no lens in the Canon line which can compete against the best RF lenses in the 0 to 50mm range.
The really unique lens in M-mount is the C Sonnar 50/1.5 - it is a combination of a modern lens and a lens from the thirties - be careful about the focus shift. And if I may correct you, there's no lens in the Canon line which can compete against the best RF lenses in the 0 to 50mm range.
The Sonnar is a brilliant lens and I feel like the focus shift has been blown way out of proportion. It has been pretty much glued to whatever I've been shooting with since I got it.
But from what I've read about this lens, it changed design at some point, as a result of user feedback, so do you have the early one or a recent one?
The Sonnar is a brilliant lens and I feel like the focus shift has been blown way out of proportion. It has been pretty much glued to whatever I've been shooting with since I got it.
Gabriel M.A.
02-03-2008, 09:35
Just buy any M-mount lens and rub the front element with a little sandpaper.
I hate to say it, but Mr. Valdemar is right.
I have a Contax mount 50mm f/1.5 Zeiss-Opton, and as much as I love that lens in spite of its quirky handling (you focus, and sometimes the aperture ring gets rotated, if you're too focused on the image, and not the lens)...it has some fog:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2037/2237580715_ee3b12333a.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/2237580715/)
Leica M8 + Zeiss-Opton 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar (Contax mount)
But when there is no strong source of light, the true character of this lens comes out:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2036/2238370310_dec9c3b0b7.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/2238370310/)
Leica M8 + Zeiss-Opton 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar (Contax mount)
Both of these are shot "wide-open". Notice how one image is rendered with that "glow" (which I call "haze") that brings out the best of people in online discussion boards.
Any lens that is not in spic-n-span condition will exhibit virtually the same character: soft.
This Summarit (the real 50mm f/1.5 Summarit) has a slightly different character than the 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar, and this sample is clean and scratchless:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/182/364107475_281677085c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/364107475/)
Leica M8 + 50mm f/1.5 Summarit
The design is always the same, the focus calibration may be different, but having actually both versions, I think Zeiss is wise to insist on selling the "F2.8" one, and changing the calibration only on request. Or actually, they would be wiser, if they made the lens with an additional correction mechanism, to maintain the focus precise across the f-stops. It would probably cost more, but it would sell like hot cakes.
It did not change design, Ted. Some lenses have the RF cam rotated by 180 degrees, to optimized for f1.5 instead of f2.8. A possible modification part of and foreseen in the original design. I still insist that the original 2.8 optimization is more usable - not all of us shoot wide open all the time. And if you do there might be better lenses.
And the issue is blown way out of proportion - Thousands of PJ photos exist shot with other Sonnars, with similar design, and nobody ever complained before the internet existed.
Glad you like your lens, Carl :)
But I think the OP was considering Leitz lenses mostly.
I would add the Summitar and Summar.
If non-Leitz lenses are OK, any 50 Sonnar variant will be great, with a unique signature. Like the Canon 50/1.5 and Nikkor 50/1.4. Or Gabriel's Opton.
Roland.
Gabriel M.A.
02-03-2008, 09:38
And a quick one with the Summitar:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/155/377513248_077cef4363.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/377513248/)
Leica M8 + 50mm f/2 Summitar (coated)
It's a clean, flawless Summitar. Exhibits some flare with strong light sources in its own way:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2163/1861681487_e642df8c6a.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/1861681487/)
Leica M8 + 50mm f/2 Summitar (coated)
Does anybody how to clean a Contax-mount 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar, btw?
Mine is optimized for 2.8,
I have no problems with the focus of the lens,
It seems like something that got a lot of people way to excited and become a much bigger deal then it actually is.
Gabriel M.A.
02-03-2008, 09:41
The design is always the same, the focus calibration may be different, but having actually both versions, I think Zeiss is wise to insist on selling the "F2.8" one, and changing the calibration only on request. Or actually, they would be wiser, if they made the lens with an additional correction mechanism, to maintain the focus precise across the f-stops. It would probably cost more, but it would sell like hot cakes.
This is something that intrigues me (I've read about this issue in other places/threads), because the Zeiss-Opton that I have is spot-on. Whether it be wide open or at f/2.8, f/4. I don't have any images taken with this lens, shot stopped-down, uploaded, but I don't have this problem with mine.
I'm actually afraid of having my lens CLAd because I'm afraid that this "calibration" may be thrown off if anybody opens it.
This is something that intrigues me (I've read about this issue in other places/threads), because the Zeiss-Opton that I have is spot-on. Whether it be wide open or at f/2.8, f/4. I don't have any images taken with this lens, shot stopped-down, uploaded, but I don't have this problem with mine.
I'm actually afraid of having my lens CLAd because I'm afraid that this "calibration" may be thrown off if anybody opens it.
You don't "see it" because:
- you don't shoot measureing tapes and rulers :)
- older Sonnars have less contrast and the effect is less prominent.
Roland.
Gabriel M.A.
02-03-2008, 09:46
You don't "see it" because:
- you don't shoot measureing tapes and rulers :)
- older Sonnars have less contrast and the effect is less prominent.
Do nipples count? :o
Anyway, that's interesting to know: contrast affects this issue with the f/1.5 Sonnars? How's that?
OK, thanks for the clarification mfogiel, Roland, and Carl. I am going to have to check one of these Sonnar C's out.
Gabriel, I know about the original Summarit 1.5, I wish I never sold mine, but the hood solution (which this lens needs) was pretty tricky with the odd filter size, and high cost of the originals.
Do nipples count? :o
Shifting what ? :D
Anyway, that's interesting to know: contrast affects this issue with the f/1.5 Sonnars? How's that?
Let me show you:
Nikkor 50/1.4 at f2:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/64292964-M.jpg
Nikkor 50/1.4 at f1.4:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/64292955-M.jpg
Same film, postprocessing, etc.
C-Sonnar 50/1.5 at f1.5-f2.8:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/156464267-L.jpg
In the Nikkor, contrast "smears out", any focus shift is hardly visible. In the Sonnar, contrast stays the same, in parts due to modern glass, different #elements and better coating.
This looks dramatic for the Nikkor, but in practice it is great for portraits wide open and sharp, too.
Roland.
Gabriel M.A.
02-03-2008, 09:58
ooooh. I see it; that's interesting.
Well, I guess the very unscientific tests (compared with graduated rulers, no less) I did a few years back will need to be redone, for a broader, office- and family-friendly audience.
All I need is a ruler. My measuring tape died a month ago.
Sorry Lord Fluff, to hijack the thread; but this is part of the character of some lenses, isn't it? :o
Roland, so it appears that with no correction the lens front focuses wide open, which can be nice at times. I see a bit of low contrast at 1.5 on my monitor.
Anyone have good experiences from "Joyful Japan" ? [ the camera store.. on *ebay]
NickTrop
02-03-2008, 10:02
Interesting thread. In my comparatively small (not to mention comparatively cheap) collection of lenses, hands down it's the Leica M39 50/2 Summar. That lens is nothing but "character". Has enough of whatchya call "character" for any ten lenses.
Distant runners up is the Ashi Super-Takumar M42 screwmount with the radioactive element and the Jupiter 9, 2/85.
|
Shooting in open shade is optimal for the older lenses. In strong light, newer design lenses with better coating perform better.
Interesting thread. In my comparatively small (not to mention comparatively cheap) collection of lenses, hands down it's the Leica M39 50/2 Summar. That lens is nothing but "character". Has enough of whatchya call "character" for any ten lenses.
Distant runners up is the Ashi Super-Takumar M42 screwmount with the radioactive element and the Jupiter 9, 2/85.
|
Nick,
Do you mean the 50mm/1.4 SMC as the "radioactive" lens?
The Summar is great for photos without strong light sources. In open shade, it gives you very pleasing results. My J-9 isnew to me, so I cannot comment on it yet.
you were so blinded by the national geographic subject matter coming to life, you didn't realize some slight out of focusness :p
Pretty sure that somewhere Zeiss (Cosina) acknowledges the focus shift, explaining they wanted a true reproduction, but would adjust users lenses on request.
ooooh. I see it; that's interesting.
Well, I guess the very unscientific tests (compared with graduated rulers, no less) I did a few years back will need to be redone, for a broader, office- and family-friendly audience.
All I need is a ruler. My measuring tape died a month ago.
Sorry Lord Fluff, to hijack the thread; but this is part of the character of some lenses, isn't it? :o
NickTrop
02-03-2008, 10:27
Nick,
Do you mean the 50mm/1.4 SMC as the "radioactive" lens?
The Summar is great for photos without strong light sources. In open shade, it gives you very pleasing results. My J-9 isnew to me, so I cannot comment on it yet.
Yes. The older ones had it. Up to a certain serial number (forget now, had that lens for a little while now...) The 50/1.4 is what I'm talking about but mine isn't "super" multicoated. The lens I own is 50/1.4 super tak prior to their super multicoating. One of the all-time great 50's.
Use that J-9! Loverly portrait lens, and post some examples when you do - please. Love to see the J-9 in the hands of one of the masters here, (this means you Raid :D
Thank you, Nick.
I have several SMC lenses and a few Takumar and Super Takumar lenses. I have rediscovered how wonderful lenses they are.
As for using the J-9, I certainly will do it. I have few lenses in Contax mount, and that's why I recently added a J-9 and a Sonnar 13.5cm to the CZJ 5cm/2 Sonnar.
Ronald M
02-03-2008, 14:08
A clean Summarit with shade first or Summitar second.
Third is the Zeiss Sonar now being sold new, 1.4 or 1.5. Be sure it focuses at 1.5 instead of 2.8 as the originals did.
I have a soft spot for the Summitar. Its sharp enough and has nice rendition especially with black and white. I have been tempted to buy a Summar (which is even more character ridden) from time to time but have resisted the temptation on the basis that the Summitar is the same on steroids. That is similar but technically a better lens. Besides its hard to get a Summar in good condition. To my way of thinking the Summitar produces an image that has a nice 1950s "look." A bit like some recent examples posted of James Ravellious's picture taking efforts. He was renowned for using "old glass" becuase of the look it gave. Not sure if he used a Summitar but my feeling is that shots I have taken with the Summitar have more or less this kind of look. I have a Summarit as well but prefer the Summitar.
http://www.jamesravilious.com/
PS I am not sure what the design type of the Summitar is, but in general that where I have seen photo examples taken with Sonnar types of lenses (various focal lengths) I am very favorably impressed.
The original Zeiss Jena Sonnar 5cm/2 gives me very nice looking results. The glass results in warmer color tones, but in a pleasing way. Among Leica lenses, I like the Summar and the Summicron V1.
Steve Williams
02-03-2008, 15:31
The pre-ASPH Summilux. A bit on the soft side but unique images.
Same here. Wide open in the right kind of light and the image has a glowing halo around sharp edges. I thought I would have to pay extra for that....:angel:
For me these lenses are the Summitar (coated), 21mm Super-Angulon-M, Summilux 35mm pre-ASPH and Noctilux. All of them have some special character (at least for me). :)
bluelight
02-03-2008, 19:00
I have a Nikkor 1.4 and noticed a strong tendency to flare ( or veiling flare or coma).
Would you please post more pictures with the Nikkor as I am learning to explore the potential of this lens.
Thanks
thomasw_
02-03-2008, 19:23
If the OP is looking for L brand lenses, then besides the summitar, summar, summarit and pre-asph summilux already mentioned, I would recommend trying the Summicron 50/2 DR; it is a lens that I wish I still had in my bag....
You can usually find a good specimen for much less than a summilux:)
yep. seller's remorse.
One of my favourite lenses with character is the 1930 Hektor 50mm f2.5. It is a bit soft at 2.5, but ii has a great "feel" to it. Smooth tones and it is also one of the best looking of the collapsible screw-mount lenses. Difficult to find with clean glass and they can have sticky aperture controls.
The Summar is a hoot - it was a bit of a sensation when it came out, but it has look all its own. Soft and "pearly" type highlights. Usually comes with a scratched front-element which adds to its character.
The Summitar is very nice. It is smooth as silk and it is also one of the lenses that even looks good. It also has one of the most impressive sets of aperture blades. Nice "bowl" shaped bunch of petals when you stop it down.
Of the modern (post war) lenses, the 105f2.5 Nikkor LTM/S-mount/F-mount is a classic. Not the sharpest of them, but does it ever "draw" well.
Of course, the 50mm f3.5 Heliar off the Bessa T is another great piece of glass. About as good as it gets in sharpness and contrast, but it has a feeling of "roundness" and 3D effect that most other modern lenses lack. A bit oddly shaped, but that is outweighed by its performance.
I like the old Summarit's, but I cant say that they have great character. They are good performers but a bit "soul-less".
Fully agree with previous statements about the Zeiss C Sonnar 50mm f1.5 - it has very much become a favourite of mine, stuck on a M2. Great performer and "signature". I have no idea if mine is a "f1.5" or "f2.8" biased one. Having taken 1000's of shots with it - I have not found anything to complain about.
The 35/1,4 pre-asph Summilux is just a damned good lens. It does have some idiosyncrasies, field curvature, a bit of "halo" effect when shot wide-open - but again. it does have a signture that is its own. I am eagerly awaiting the VC 35/1,4 SC - has been promised for this month and I want to see if it can duplictate the performance of the Classic S-lux 35.
21mm 3.4 Super-Angulon
Summarit-M 5cm f1.5
35mm summilux pre-asph
Noctilux
I own all these lenses and therefore I am biased. However, I am always astounded at how unique and different each of these lenses are. I could easily (most of the time) differnetiate them on print by just looking a few seconds.
They are unique for sure.
I am eagerly awaiting the VC 35/1,4 SC - has been promised for this month and I want to see if it can duplictate the performance of the Classic S-lux 35.
I have seen a comparison of both lenses (35 Summilux pre and the new CV 35/1.4 SC) in a Japanese camera magazine yesterday. In the article, two example shots were shown, both were taken at f/1.4 with an M8 in BW, the subject was a young lady in front of trees at daylight (high contrast). Whereas the Summilux showed some softness and a smooth bokeh, the CV was much sharper but also showed higher contrast. The bokeh of the CV was simply ugly, swirly and harsh.
In a different magazine the CV 35/1.4 MC was compared to the Summilux 35 pre. In this comparison, two photos - taken at night against strong point light sources - both at f/1.4 were shown. (Don't remember the camera) Here the Summilux showed some flare but the CV (MC) handled the strong highlights very well.
Maddoc and Ned. Have you guys been over at the mall shopping together again? :)
:D:D:D But I don't have an Summarit !!! ;)
Actually, although it is probably not what Lord Fluff was thinking about, but I believe all the same, that another lens with a unique look is the Biogon 21/4.5 - not for the softness or glow, but for how it can render tiny details and for its total absence of distortion. It is a virtual replica of the Hasselblad SWC in 35mm format. A lens which is in my opinion certainly superior to the C/Y Distagon 21, so much sought after by all FF Canon users.
Lord Fluff
02-04-2008, 00:40
Thanks for all the responses so far.
A few points arising -
When people say "pre-asph summilux" do they always mean the 35 or does it apply to the 50 too?
I'm not limiting this debate to just Leitz either - I and my wallet will cheerfully accept non-Leica suggestions.
And mfogiel - I can't resist this though I don't want to hijack my own thread - I did say "performance" - there are many Canon lenses that out-perform any RF lens simply by existing - how about the 16-35 and 24-70 constant f2.8 zooms for example? And who says you get to limit it to 0-50? :) My ultimate Canon lens is the 85 f1.2 - a lens with a phenomenal amount of character.
Lord Fluff
I know what you mean, however I think for most RF users, this type of camera is really limited to 50mm fl, and the lack of zooms is seen as an advantage in terms of the way you learn to visualize the world in terms of your preferred fl. There are some users who still find it enjoyable with a 75mm, or even 90mm, but for obvious reasons of dof, lenses faster than, say 75/2 are hard to focus off center, so even if you find people who swear by the 75/1.4 or 50/1, I think it is better to use an SLR for this type of shooting.
mfunnell
02-04-2008, 01:44
Lord Fluff
I know what you mean, however I think for most RF users, this type of camera is really limited to 50mm fl, and the lack of zooms is seen as an advantage in terms of the way you learn to visualize the world in terms of your preferred fl. There are some users who still find it enjoyable with a 75mm, or even 90mm, but for obvious reasons of dof, lenses faster than, say 75/2 are hard to focus off center, so even if you find people who swear by the 75/1.4 or 50/1, I think it is better to use an SLR for this type of shooting.I'd suggest that the Summilux 75 has a distinctive look (perhaps rising to "character"?) even when not used at full aperture:
http://tn3-2.deviantart.com/fs15/300W/f/2007/093/4/6/George_Street_14_by_mfunnell.jpg (http://fc04.deviantart.com/fs15/f/2007/093/4/6/George_Street_14_by_mfunnell.jpg)
(click to enlarge)
I'd suggest that in use it is quite different from an SLR, as well as producing a different look (much though I'd like to try the Canon 85/1.2). And, no, I don't believe an SLR is "better" for this type of shot, at this (longer than 50mm) focal length (though they are better at others, and for other things).
...Mike
Lord Fluff
02-04-2008, 01:57
Nice shot Mike
I'd advise against trying the 85L unless you can afford it. It is an utterly addictive lens, hard to use but oh the results. I'd pay Noctilux prices for one if I had to - so the price they command oddly seems like good value....
Vincenzo Maielli
02-04-2008, 05:51
My personal "Leica character lenses" are Summaron 35/2.8, firts version of Summicron 35/2 (8 elements), Summicron 50/2 DR, Tele Elmarit 90/2.8 "Shorty" and Summicron 90/2 first version.
Ciao.
Vincenzo
When people say "pre-asph summilux" do they always mean the 35 or does it apply to the 50 too?I at least meant the 50mm pre-ASPH Summilux. My apologies for being unclear.
I got a Summarit 5cm/1.5 for approx. $200, and it's sure got character. It's out of focus-areas are magnificent, but it's extremely low contrast. The attached image (taken at f1.5) is adjusted with black levels +25 in LR.55470
edit: Summarit, not Summitar
The bokeh of the CV was simply ugly, swirly and harsh.
Ouch, I just ordered this hoping for dreamy and creamy bokeh. Why is it that they have images taken with the 35 in japanese magazines, whereas there's not one single sample pic on the www?
Could you please elaborate on the bokeh? Is it similar to the 40/1.4?
Thanks,
Henrik
Ouch, I just ordered this hoping for dreamy and creamy bokeh. Why is it that they have images taken with the 35 in japanese magazines, whereas there's not one single sample pic on the www?
Could you please elaborate on the bokeh? Is it similar to the 40/1.4?
Thanks,
Henrik
Everyone's greatest fear...
I got a Summarit 5cm/1.5 for approx. $200, and it's sure got character. It's out of focus-areas are magnificent, but it's extremely low contrast. The attached image (taken at f1.5) is adjusted with black levels +25 in LR.55470
edit: Summarit, not Summitar
Haanes, I think you mean summarit. The summitar is an f2 lens.
Haanes, I think you mean summarit. The summitar is an f2 lens.
Yep, it's changed. :)
tbarker13
02-04-2008, 08:13
I had one of the newer C-sonnars for a few months. Loved the lens, much more so after it made a trip back to Zeiss to the focus optimized at 1.5.
In the end, I sold it while paring down my kit.
But now that I've decided to add a 50 to my kit again, I may even end up getting another. Also, looking at the 50 pre-asp lux.
And if I may correct you, there's no lens in the Canon line which can compete against the best RF lenses in the 0 to 50mm range.
I beg to differ. The 50/1.4 can compete, because it is an excellent low-cost lens, fast, nice rendering and bokeh. I am not an MTF chart junkie but I doubt that the Summilux 1.4 is better, certainly not the eight times better that the price difference would suggest (unless you have a somewhat skewed utility function). Certainly not "better" in a way that would beyond differences of taste, or that would be descernible on 8x10 or smaller prints, let alone online. The 24/1.4 can compete. The SLR lenses are bigger, but that's a statement of the obvious; in other news, cars are bigger than motorbikes.
It seems like something that got a lot of people way to excited and become a much bigger deal then it actually is.
Welcome to the Internet.
Philipp
Maddoc and Ned. Have you guys been over at the mall shopping together again? :)
One day, me and Gabor will meet in Munich and go street shooting.
Joe Vitessa
02-04-2008, 09:30
Just wanted to cast my vote for the Summitar. One of my favorites--sharpish when I need it and full of character, too. I'm having fun with a Zeiss Planar 50mm , too, which has a surprising amount of character for a modern lens. I don't think any of the CV lenses I've shot with have any character, other than being just plain sharp and contrasty. Good for color, but not all that interesting...
rxmd
This was not supposed to start a brand war, however, the Canon 50/1.4 is no better than the corresponding Nikkor. I tested the Nikkor against the Zeiss 50/1.4 ZF and there was no contest, I tested it against the Makro Planar 50/2 ZF and there was even less contest, and I have tested the Makro Planar against the Planar ZM, and honestly speaking, it looks to me like the ZM version is slightly ahead, This relates to overall image quality, not only to sharpness, but my Makro Planar is as sharp full open, as the Nikkor at f4.0. It may be subjective to a point, but not totally subjective - maybe you can try to shoot your Canon lens on film and compare it to a first rate RF lens on the same type of film. I tried Nikkor against Zeiss both on digital and film, and there was never any contest. This is in part due to the different construction requirement of a normal lens in case of the absence of a mirror box - it is widely known for example, that even the Planars put on the Rolleiflex cameras in the 60' come out ahead of the same (nominally) Planars for the Hasselblad of a much later production.
As far as the 24 Canon lens, I can bet a good bottle of wine, that it cannot even kiss the legs of the current Leica Elmarit 24, not to speak about the Biogon 25 - they are both f2.8 lenses, so obviously they have an "unfair" advantage, but even a bigger advantage lies in their non retrofocus construction. If you go to fredmiranda alternative lens users forum, you will find that everybody raves about the C/Y Distagon 21 - well, I bet another bottle, that the 21/4.5 C Biogon wipes the floor with that lens... So there you are, you have 2 bottles of wine to win ! This might actually prompt you to shoot more splendid photographs ! :-)
photophorous
02-04-2008, 10:03
I think my C/V 50/2 Heliar Classic has quite a bit of character. Not sure how to describe it, but the images I make with that lens stand out more often than images from any of my other lenses.
Paul
For me, I only use my m6 with Summicon 35mm pre-asph lenses. I love the buttery smooth transition from sharp to unsharp. This gives the slides a 3d feeling where so many leicaphiles are talking about ;-) The bokeh just looks like it is painted. Example:
http://www.jeroenschokker.com/afbeeldingen/web/Scan-070908-0002.jpg
Greetings,
Jeroen
ZebGoesZeiss
02-04-2008, 12:51
As far as the 24 Canon lens, I can bet a good bottle of wine, that it cannot even kiss the legs of the current Leica Elmarit 24
At three times the price and two stops vignetting at f/2.8 it should... Saying that, it is the easiest lens I've ever sold - 24mm and f/2.8 --> utterly pointless in my world.
BLUELIGHT WROTE:
>>I have a Nikkor 1.4 and noticed a strong tendency to flare ( or veiling flare or coma).
Would you please post more pictures with the Nikkor as I am learning to explore the potential of this lens.
Thanks<<
You probably won't get much discussion of Nikkors here in the Leica M forum (the Nikkors were LTM). It does flare wide open, but in controlled light can produce some wonderful images. If you stop down by about 1/3, you lose the worst of the flare and veil, and contrast picks up noticeably. I have some wide open Nikkor images on the front page of my gallery.
Brian Sweeney
02-04-2008, 13:28
Zeiss Jena Tessar "T" 50mm F2.8 in LTM.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1273/1089262784_e521cf1262_o.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1149/1089262522_7ffd94b875_o.jpg
Nobody mentioned one yet.
One day, me and Gabor will meet in Munich and go street shooting.
That is a good plan !! :)
I think my C/V 50/2 Heliar Classic has quite a bit of character. Not sure how to describe it, but the images I make with that lens stand out more often than images from any of my other lenses.
Paul
I'll second that! I've had the 50/2 Heliar Classic and it has just blown me away!
I'm also terribly fond of my CV 35/1.7 Ultron, which has a lovely blend of sharpness and moderate contrast, along with smooooth bokeh. I think it makes very distinctive "Ultron" photographs.
tbarker13, i have a friend who owns a preasph summilux, i saw pics on barite paper taken with this lens, the tones have this old leica look in b&w, and the bokeh is one of the best i've seen.
Schorki, i agree with you, the summicron preasph has a really good 3D effect, but i miss a less progressive bokeh. Even at f/2, there isn't much bokeh, i'm thinking about switching to a Summilux preasph ( already have a 35mm ASPH and a Summicron preasph ) , what do you think ?
The Summilux preasph 35mm seems to have more character ( less progressive bokeh ?, "glow" @ 1.7 ) than the summicron preasph. If you were me, would you choose the summilux preasph or keep the summicron ?
jackal2513
02-16-2008, 08:20
character..
Noctilux
Summarit
35 lux pre-asph
jackal2513, I really like the third photograph. I don't think it has much to do with the lens though.
jackal2513
02-16-2008, 08:34
Ok, thanks for the information. I'll update my records. :p
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.