Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > Cameras in the Movies / TV / Media

Cameras in the Movies / TV / Media If you are a photographer, it's difficult not to appreciate movies too. In this forum you can discuss movies, as well as the cameras used in them. What camera used in what film / TV show etc has long been a topic of discussion at RFF. Whether the Exakta and 400mm Kilfitt lens in Hitchcock's Rear Window or the Nikons in Eastwood's Bridges of Madison County, cameras are tools which reflect the time and technology of the film.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Stanley Kubrik and THAT lens
Old 11-27-2014   #1
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,954
Stanley Kubrik and THAT lens

Yesterday while driving back from helping a mate do some maintenance on his yacht, I stopped by a coastal shopping strip for a bite of lunch and in a small store selling old vinyl records and CDs together with some DVDs, I found a copy of Stanley Kubrik's "Barry Lyndon".

I had been looking for it for a while as while I have seen it years ago on TV I did not own a copy. (I am a film buff and probably own about 600 DVDs of movies). And apart from anything I wanted to view the scenes shot with the famous f0.7 Zeiss lens which had been built for NASA and sequestered by Kubrik who was intent on getting the film's "look" just so! Many will already be familiar with the story that Kubrik specifically wanted to use this rare lens to film candle light scenes in the movie. I had not previously realized it but as it turns out, pretty well most indoor scenes which are illuminated by candles in various scenes are really illuminated by candles in the film - with this lens doing the heavy lifting. I had thought there was only one or perhaps two scenes of this type. The result is fabulous and sumptuous.

Then I went searching for more info and, courtesy of Mr Google, found this Youtube video in which some people who were involved in the original filming talk about the events leading to his choice of lenses. Enjoy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmSDnPvslnA#t=206

Some other articles/ videos on the subject.

http://www.urbanglass.org/glass/deta...kers-obsession

http://filmmakeriq.com/2012/10/decon...-barry-lyndon/

http://www.cinematographers.nl/GreatDoPh/alcott.htm
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #2
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 7,395
When I saw that movie in the theater I knew something was different, but couldn't figure it out. At the time I was into my f1.4 Super Takumar 50mm and shooting everything I could wide open. Thanks for giving us a look into this lens.
  Reply With Quote

En Grisaille
Old 11-28-2014   #3
Dektol Dan
Registered User
 
Dektol Dan is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 878
En Grisaille

Very interesting, however, I still have a hard time understanding what Kubrick's goals were. Was it capturing low natural light or emulating the medium and techniques of the day?

Way back when I was in art school, and from what my father had taught me, there was always the notion that art progressed exactly at the same rate as technology.

Chiaroscuro and en grisaille are often confused. The former being light out of dark (i.e. as an image lit by candle light), and latter a technique of painting.

At the root of both is the technology of the day. At that time artists made their own paints, their formulas were kept as trade secrets.

The materials for pigments, and many of the oils and varnishes and driers, were very expensive. Rembrandt's paintings show no blue because he couldn't afford the lapis lazuli, which in the day was a gem stone.

So, glazing techniques were use whereby earth tones (cheap), where covered with thin glazes of color (expensive).
The painting was drawn tonally in umbers, blacks and siennas and ochres. This was followed glazes of any pigment that approached spectral hues. Tube paints and aniline dyes didn't appear until the time of Van Gogh.

I suppose a fast lens would provide both the look and soft focus he was trying to achieve.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #4
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
 
Gabriel M.A.'s Avatar
 
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,976
Oh the heated debates other directors would have had about shooting wide-open...
__________________
Big wig wisdom: "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --Harry Warner, of Warner Bros., 1927

Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).



My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #5
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,079
How can I get such a lens ....
This was my second thought after reading up on this topic. The first thought was "this is beautiful".

Thanks for posting this thread.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #6
mretina
Registered User
 
mretina is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Milan, Italy
Posts: 330
Nice article here as well. (Mostly in Italian)

http://www.marcocavina.com/omaggio_a_kubrick.htm
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #7
johannielscom
Leica II is The One
 
johannielscom's Avatar
 
johannielscom is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Universitas Terre Threntiae
Posts: 6,909
Probably not the NASA lens, but have a look at the scenery and the transition from focus point to unsharp far distance in the scene were Barry's niece is courted by the English officer.

I've always considered that image rendering almost large format lens-like, and of stunning beauty.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHCw...w&spfreload=10
__________________
www.johanniels.com | flickr | instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #8
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
How can I get such a lens ....
This was my second thought after reading up on this topic. The first thought was "this is beautiful".

Thanks for posting this thread.
Oh Raid you are a worse lens addict than I am. :^)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #9
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is online now
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 66
Posts: 3,349
Leonard Rossiter ... looks like that scene was shot at Windermere too.
Interesting thread ... thanks for posting Peter.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #10
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
Oh Raid you are a worse lens addict than I am. :^)
Well, Peyer, having such a lens would make other lenses obsolete in 75% of all situations. Use it on a M4/3 for HD video.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #11
robbeiflex
Registered User
 
robbeiflex's Avatar
 
robbeiflex is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Luxembourg
Posts: 997
And a great movie beginning to end as well. Pay attention to the story, and you will be rewarded to an even greater extent than from only these (albeit fantastic) candlelit scenes. ;-)
__________________
"They say, ‘If you use this digital camera, you can take a clear picture in the dark’. The dark should stay dark. You can’t really see that much, and you don’t really want to see that much anyway.” Nobuyoshi Araki 2006

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #12
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,954
"Very interesting, however, I still have a hard time understanding what Kubrick's goals were. Was it capturing low natural light or emulating the medium and techniques of the day?"

I think it was more of the latter.

From what I read over the past few days in particular as I read about this film, Kubrik was a man who was almost insane (the words of one commentator) for authenticity. He insisted that the clothes be authentic in every detail for example. They used the correct fabrics and buttons and so forth of the day. All of which had to be manufactured. If you look at the colors in the uniforms for example they are not the bright reds we use today. In the 18th century, they did not have bright synthetic (aniline) dyes in those days, as these were not discovered till the industrial revolution in the mid 1850's perhaps almost 100 years after this film was set. So the dyes used were plant or animal based, probably cochineal (from an insect) which is the authentic color used by people in this era.

That's one tiny example of Kubrik's insistence on authenticity. Kubrik's determination to use natural lighting was his reason for using that lens as without this lens there was no way to get the natural lighting he wanted onto film. I gather he had heard about the lens earlier in his career and made inquiries about it for this purpose. When he got his hands on one it would not mount on the cinema camera he was to use as the register distance was all wrong - the lens was designed to have a tiny register distance to the film plane. So they had to basically destroy the camera (which was rare and worth many, many thousands of dollars) and rebuild it to create a mounting for this lens. Afterwards the camera would not have been able to be restored to its original condition.

He is also quoted as saying he wanted the images in his masterpiece (and it is a kind of masterpiece) to look like paintings of the day. I think the camera would have originally been a reflex camera (not sure about this) so the mirror box would have to go so the lens could be mounted at the correct distance from the film plane. In any event the camera needed huge modification and with it would have gone the means of focusing the lens accurately. Imagine being the focus puller and being called upon to focus an f0.7 lens wide open with a sliver of a sharp focusing zone and having no way to do it. So they had to accurately measure distances and position actors accordingly in the scene. The slightest movement would throw the focus out with no way of knowing focus had been missed until the rushes were viewed. And that would mean reshooting another day. You will notice that all the scenes in which the lens was used tended to be very static ones.

As an aside here is another example of his manic nature and quest for authenticity. In "The Shining" at one point the mad character (a writer) played by Jack Nicholson was found to have typed over and over and over the words "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" on hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of pages of paper. Most directors would have had someone type this down a single page as many times as it would fit, then photocopy as many pages as needed. Not Kubrick. He made his assistant sit in front of a typewriter and type these words over and over all day every day for months and months to get the number of pages required. Apparently he felt it gave authenticity, even though no one in the world would have known or noticed or cared for that matter. That's the kind of director he was. That's why he used this lens.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #13
Nokton48
Registered User
 
Nokton48's Avatar
 
Nokton48 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,823
When Shelley Duvall flipped through those pages, with the tension building, with the psychotic (but playful) typings, and Jack coming right around the corner..........

Very very scary. An absolute powerhouse. It's attention to detail.

I'm a great fan of Kubrick. Have his entire collection on DVD. And the documentary that your youtube clip came from.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #14
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,079
What is the cost of this lens? $20,000? More?
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #16
yesaroos
Registered User
 
yesaroos is offline
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 74
I adore this movie, my favourite scene is when the chevalier playing card with prince of Tübingen.. the way how the room lit, seems simply setup.. but won't happen without the lens.. imo
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #17
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by yesaroos View Post
I adore this movie, my favourite scene is when the chevalier playing card with prince of Tübingen.. the way how the room lit, seems simply setup.. but won't happen without the lens.. imo
There are lots of great scenes in the movie - even the little inconsequential ones. For example just after Barry Lyndon marries Marissa Berenson's character, a very rich widow of noble birth, they are riding in carriage and he is smoking a pipe which is obviously distressing her. She asks him quietly and politely if he will stop at least for a while. At which he blows smoke in her face. Instantly I thought "This is not going to end well for anyone". You knew exactly where this film was heading with that one tiny detail which revealed his character.

The other scene amongst many that really spoke to me was early in the movie with his first love in Ireland, when he was still innocent, before he became debauched. It captured exactly memories of my own first love - intoxication, nervousness, desire, headiness. I have never before seen this level of passion captured in a movie in a scene in which almost nothing happens. It is all suggested. That is great movie making. WOW.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #18
benmacphoto
Registered User
 
benmacphoto's Avatar
 
benmacphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Age: 29
Posts: 919
A great visual movie, as with most of Kubricks films.

The lens mentioned was available to rent, but appears to no longer be available.
http://petapixel.com/2013/08/05/zeis...ses-ever-made/
__________________
Instagram

Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #19
YYV_146
Registered User
 
YYV_146's Avatar
 
YYV_146 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Durham, NC
Age: 30
Posts: 1,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
What is the cost of this lens? $20,000? More?
Last time I heard of one on sale was an auction in Hong Kong where it went for ~$35,000.
__________________
Victor is too lazy for DSLRs

Sony A7rII Kolari mod

Noctilux ASPH, 35lux FLE, 50 APO ASPH, 75 APO cron, 21lux, Sony/Minolta 135mm STF

500px
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #20
kuuan
plays with lenses
 
kuuan's Avatar
 
kuuan is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: right now: Ho Chi Minh City
Age: 56
Posts: 1,496
http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/sk/ac/len/page1.htm
http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/sk/2001a/bl/page1.htm
you want to try it out? see: http://www.kubrickcollection.com/camera-package.html
__________________
my photos on flickr: : https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #21
rumbliegeos
Registered User
 
rumbliegeos's Avatar
 
rumbliegeos is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 243
Peter, thank you for posting this information. I had read about Kubrick's use of the very fast lens so that candle-lit interiors shots would be as authentic as possible, but it is very interesting to get more background. I thought Barry Lyndon was a trip for the mind and the senses because of the way it was made. Kubrick was capable of extremely bold moves to achieve visual effects: one example is a scene from Paths to Glory when Kirk Douglas walks and walks along a WWI trench while tension builds - it would seem to have been impossible to shoot in the days before steadicams. Another amazing scene is from Spartacus when the Roman imperial army advances on the slave army, and although the sequence breaks about every film-making rule of the time, it is breath-taking in its effect.
__________________
Gerry
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #22
Tony Whitney
Registered User
 
Tony Whitney is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by YYV_146 View Post
Last time I heard of one on sale was an auction in Hong Kong where it went for ~$35,000.
As an indicator, a set of Leica Summilux-C cinema primes costs more than $260,000, so imagine what the Kubrick lens would cost today...TW
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #23
rumbliegeos
Registered User
 
rumbliegeos's Avatar
 
rumbliegeos is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 243
Correction: "Paths of Glory"
__________________
Gerry
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #24
yesaroos
Registered User
 
yesaroos is offline
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
There are lots of great scenes in the movie - even the little inconsequential ones. For example just after Barry Lyndon marries Marissa Berenson's character, a very rich widow of noble birth, they are riding in carriage and he is smoking a pipe which is obviously distressing her. She asks him quietly and politely if he will stop at least for a while. At which he blows smoke in her face. Instantly I thought "This is not going to end well for anyone". You knew exactly where this film was heading with that one tiny detail which revealed his character.

The other scene amongst many that really spoke to me was early in the movie with his first love in Ireland, when he was still innocent, before he became debauched. It captured exactly memories of my own first love - intoxication, nervousness, desire, headiness. I have never before seen this level of passion captured in a movie in a scene in which almost nothing happens. It is all suggested. That is great movie making. WOW.
Great movie making for sure & so many great scenes in the movie.. Another I like is the manic scene when Lord Bullingdon & his step brother walk into the middle of recital and so on till Barry get loose control.. I see it as 'elegantly chaotic'
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #25
YYV_146
Registered User
 
YYV_146's Avatar
 
YYV_146 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Durham, NC
Age: 30
Posts: 1,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Whitney View Post
As an indicator, a set of Leica Summilux-C cinema primes costs more than $260,000, so imagine what the Kubrick lens would cost today...TW
I stand corrected. The Hong Kong auction is much earlier than this auction from westlicht:

http://www.westlicht-auction.com/index.php?id=62

Apparently the hammer price was 90,000 euros, much higher than expected...

P.S I thought 35 grand wasn't too bad. If I sell all of my Leica lenses I only need a few grand extra to go...Now my folly is clear
__________________
Victor is too lazy for DSLRs

Sony A7rII Kolari mod

Noctilux ASPH, 35lux FLE, 50 APO ASPH, 75 APO cron, 21lux, Sony/Minolta 135mm STF

500px
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #26
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,954
For those who have not seen it, Paths of Glory is a superb and powerful movie. In fact I think it would have to be close to being one of Kubriks' very best pieces of story telling. It was very unsettling. Others here have mentioned it I imagine for much the same reason. It is based on a true event that happened in the French army in WW1. Incompetent generals sent men over the top to their near certain death. Many were killed in the first few yards. So before the next attack, instead of learning from their mistakes the generals decided it was the men's fault and that the way to deal with it was by randomly selecting some survivors of the last attack, having a kangaroo court and shooting them for cowardice. Apparently this was designed to stop the others from cowardly dying so quickly the next time they attacked the German machine guns and heavy artillery. Kirk Douglas played the front line officer selected to act as their defence counsel (unsuccessfully of course given the result was a foregone conclusion). Very powerful.

A typical scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPtVNDvwGMo

An aside. I love the character of the early Australian Anzacs. The Australians on the Western Front were renowned for their skill and fighting spirit and as a result tended to be used much more than they should have been as shock troops. The cost in Australian lives was extraordinary and as measured as a percentage of its tiny population Australia lost one of the highest proportions of men amongst all the allies. Towards the end of the first war, so many had died on the Western Front that a decision was made to amalgamate some Australian battalions to bring them back up to fighting strength. The men objected on the grounds that it would be disrespectful to the memory of their mates who had died under the flags of those battalions that were now to be disbanded. So they went on strike! Of course in military terms that is called a mutiny.

General Pompey Elliot, an Australian commander who was a good and competent leader and who was respected by his men but who was renowned for his hot temper and strong language lined the men up and told them very bluntly that unless they obeyed the order to join the new amalgamated battalions he would follow the example of the French and randomly select men to be shot. This was an empty threat as Australian authorities were unlikely to approve it but by then tempers were frayed. At this, a voice came from the ranks "We've got guns too, you *******!" I love it - that just sums up the Aussie spirit of that time. These men were real individuals who were dedicated to each other and damn the authorities if they got in the way. (Eventually cooler heads prevailed and the situation was defused but I think some of the leaders were still disciplined for this "mutiny".
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #27
filmtwit
Desperate but not serious
 
filmtwit's Avatar
 
filmtwit is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: West Coast
Posts: 2,539
Two of the lenses in question

__________________
Instgram
https://www.instagram.com/filmtwit/

The Flickr Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/filmtwit/


The Blog (Boring Sidney, Boring)
http://jeffthomasallen.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2014   #28
telenous
Registered User
 
telenous is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
For those who have not seen it, Paths of Glory is a superb and powerful movie. In fact I think it would have to be close to being one of Kubriks' very best pieces of story telling. It was very unsettling. Others here have mentioned it I imagine for much the same reason. It is based on a true event that happened in the French army in WW1. Incompetent generals sent men over the top to their near certain death. Many were killed in the first few yards. So before the next attack, instead of learning from their mistakes the generals decided it was the men's fault and that the way to deal with it was by randomly selecting some survivors of the last attack, having a kangaroo court and shooting them for cowardice. Apparently this was designed to stop the others from cowardly dying so quickly the next time they attacked the German machine guns and heavy artillery. Kirk Douglas played the front line officer selected to act as their defence counsel (unsuccessfully of course given the result was a foregone conclusion). Very powerful.

A typical scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPtVNDvwGMo

...


The execution in Paths of Glory echoed somewhat the Roman practice of decimation (literally "removal of a tenth"), a form of military discipline intended to punish capital offences committed by large groups of soldiers (e.g. desertion, mutiny). Even obdurate, thick-skinned military men of the ancient world like the Romans did not use it that often, and the practice largely fell into oblivion until Crassus revived it in his successful campaign (the so-called Third Servile War) against Spartacus. It's a coincidence (but a curious one nonetheless) that Kubrick's next filmic assignment right after Paths of Glory was Spartacus .

The random nature of decimation is naturally shocking, if not downright incomprehensible to us, even in as an absurd situation as in a war. But it seems it has been performed now and then and as recently as during WWII.


.
__________________
- Alkis

flickr

"We stopped a bit further down from Amchit and looked at the sun sinking in the quiet Sea of Phoenix. Yet, why is it that sometimes one sees things clearly -- I mean to say, as when the camera is appropriately set." George Seferis
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-27-2016   #29
agmo
Registered User
 
agmo is offline
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post

As an aside here is another example of his manic nature and quest for authenticity. In "The Shining" at one point the mad character (a writer) played by Jack Nicholson was found to have typed over and over and over the words "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" on hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of pages of paper. Most directors would have had someone type this down a single page as many times as it would fit, then photocopy as many pages as needed. Not Kubrick. He made his assistant sit in front of a typewriter and type these words over and over all day every day for months and months to get the number of pages required. Apparently he felt it gave authenticity, even though no one in the world would have known or noticed or cared for that matter.
I don't think this is an example of Kubrick's perfectionism - remember that the movie was made in 1980 and photocopiers were nowhere as good as they are now. The sheets are shot quite closely and you would have been able to recognise photocopies of the era. Also, every sheet seen is typed differently anyway!
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-27-2016   #30
Nokton48
Registered User
 
Nokton48's Avatar
 
Nokton48 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,823
My favorite Kubrick is "Paths of Glory".
I have them all on DVD. I also have a wonderful DVD documentary on Kubrick;
In it the optical genius/repairperson extraordinaire explains how they had to completely "ruin" two Mitchell 35mm BNC rear projection motion picture cameras (the only two of their kind in the world and absolutely priceless) in order to accomodate the 50mm T/0.7 Zeiss Planar NASA satellite lens. Stanley didn't care about the BNC cameras; He said "Do It" and the rest is history. Barry Lyndon is amazing and I need to watch it again (it's a long one).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPtVNDvwGMo

Interestingly, this lens could not be accurately focused with the reflex viewfinder (if the BNC's even had one, they were tri-color cameras!). The lens had to be scale-focused, and as a result the lens was literally marked out in inch-increments on the focusing helical. A lot of testing and talent was required to use this thing. Amazing the amount of work required to get the results they did with it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2016   #31
santino
eXpect me
 
santino's Avatar
 
santino is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Autriche
Posts: 751
It's time for a Lomo remake of that lens 10k would be a fair price...
__________________
Vivent les télémétriques ! -
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:17.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.