[LRflex] Re: Good Photographers -&- Good! NOT Bad Lenses
- From: Richard Ward <ilovaussiesheps@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 02:05:42 -0800 (PST)
Hello Peter,
I would like to volunteer to help you clean your dust collecting shelf
cameras. Pack them off to snowy west michigan, I'm at the third house from the
corner. I'll promptly contact you once they're properly dusted and ready for
service! Ought not to take more than a few months, well, maybe four at most. :-)
More seriously though, thank you for the feedback on the equipment you shoot
with. While I am dearly fond of my 20D, I have no issue with others not caring
for it. I recently decried another list member (tongue in cheek style) for
conducting lens tests at 800iso with his. No sense taking NO photographs
because I just ain't got that woeful EOS 1D Canon should be kissing my feet to
take off their hands!
Your noting the f2 pancolar reminded me that my friend actually had 3 exacta
bodies. Two of them were 'later' ones probably circa 1950's ??? with removable
pentaprisms and were ferociously triangular when lookiing down from above at
them. The other was exceptionally early and instead of a prism had a pop-up
shade to peer down into the camera to the image formed by the reflex mirror on
ground glass a'la rolleiflex tlr style. The engraving and metal work on the pop
up parts makes me think it was definitely out of the 1930's, but alas my
photography is much better than my memory.
Query: do you use any Leica M lenses on your G1? I hear there is a nice
adapter for them available for Micro 4/3rd cameras.
Richard in Michigan
________________________________
Leica R Lenses.
They R worth it -
They R what I Use -
They R the Answer.
Just Not 4 every ?.
________________________________
________________________________
From: pwerner <pwerner@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thu, February 18, 2010 4:27:58 AM
Subject: [LRflex] Good Photographers -&- Bad Lenses
my post was not at all to contradict you, it just shows that different
photographer have different preferences. BTW, the Pancolar you are writing
about, if I understood you post well, is the later f/1.8 version that is
considered to be vastly inferior to the original f/2.0 version.
> Peter, I wonder if you might have any info or forums to find opinions
regarding
> lens adapting and the Sony A900/850 cameras?
Sorry, I do not follow the Sony forums, as I have no intention to acquire
one.
I am very happy with my m4/3 equipment; I have had the G1 for over a year
now and my other cameras - Nikon D700, Leica M8, DMR and Digilux2 - are most
of the time catching dust on the shelves. I used to have a 20D but was not
satisfied with its color rendition and sold it soon after acquiring the DMR.
Color rendition of the G1 is excellent, very Leica-like. Color fidelity is a
very important criterion for me when selecting a camera: I do a lot of
orchid photography; to test color fidelity, I often put the actual flower
near the screen for comparison. In term of color fidelity, my ranking is
1) Leica DMR & Digilux 2
2) Panasonic G1
3) Panasonic FX01
4) Nikon D700 & D200
5) Canon 20D
I do not include the M8 in the comparison as it cannot be used for macros.
Cheers
Peter
----------------original message-----------------
From: "Richard Ward" ilovaussiesheps@xxxxxxxxx
To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 22:51:24 -0800 (PST)
-------------------------------------------------
> Hi Peter!,
> I hope the images I shared, the comments I wrote, and the followup post
responses I
> made, communicate that my coming to dislike the Pancolar was a personal
decision
> based upon my individual photographic methods and results leading the
Pancolar
> away from being the beloved goto lens in my bag. Heck, my flickr account
is named
> Zeissfan for good cause! :-)
> In retrospect, my original post could have been worded a bit differently,
but
> while I thought carefully about the post and I worked not to rush it to
completion,
> it was never written to be a dissertation on the Pancolar. I wanted to say
> something about NOT overlooking the inherent values of the equipment one
has at
> hand. The primary variable is the photographer in any image, not the
> photographic equipment in their hand or on their tripod. If there was not
value
> and goodness intrinsic to my Pancolar Fifty, the 'shadows & ice' image I
posted
> could not have achieved the technical qualities it demonstrates.
> I actually wouldn't mind at ALL giving the fast 80mm version a whirl, but
it's got
> collectors as well as users chasing them on eBay so those times I was able
to bid on
> one, back in another life it seems, the prices got out of hand in the end.
If memory
> serves (not guaranteed!) the last one I saw went for upwards of $400usd.
Whew.
> As for the links you shared - quite interesting. A friend I had for many
years shot
> with a very early Exacta SLR with it's uber cool lens side shutter
release/stop
> down button switches. I must also say that the micro 4/3rds cameras (i
think your
> lumix is one) has great appeal to me for lens adapting, but that 2x crop
factor is a
> big impediment. My 20D has the 1.6x factor which isn't very spectacular
either,
> but in practice hasn't bothered me much. A 50mm lands at the 80mm focal
length I
> like and the 80-90mm lenses land comfortably close to the commendable
135mm
> focal length I find I enjoy, as well.
> To again turn a circle back to my ongoing thesis of 'it's the
photographer, not the
> equipment', my friend with the Exacta also had a Rollei SL outfit with
Zeiss
> Primes, a Rollei TLR with a very nice Schneider Lens, and a 4x5 field
camera with a
> STUNNING Voightlander APO Lanthar 150mm. His equipment was exceptional
> optically, his craft very sound, and his exposures and film choices and
subjects
> equal to the quality of his equipment. Unfortunately he took the most
incredibly
> boring pictures. Other than technical esthetics of micro contrasts, colors
and
> tonalities, and the display of obvious photographic craftsmenship - there
> never seemed to be an angle, a composition, a moment, or a person's
personality,
> captured or expressed in any way to be considered inviting or visually
> interesting. Quite sad actually.
> Peter, I wonder if you might have any info or forums to find opinions
regarding
> lens adapting and the Sony A900/850 cameras? I am heavily impressed with
the
> EOS-1Ds option, but due dilligence and just plain curiousity calls for
> exploring the Sony option as well. My initial google searches gave pretty
> marginally useful results. The only useful link was tangental at best with
a long
> thread on "the first lens" people bought for their a900 where R Lenses
were
> passingly discussed.
>
> Thanks
> Richard in Michigan
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> Leica R Lenses.
> They R worth it -
> They R what I Use -
> They R the Answer.
> Just Not 4 every ?.
> ________________________________
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: pwerner
> To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Thu, February 18, 2010 12:56:12 AM
> Subject: [LRflex] Re: Good Photographers -&- Bad Lenses
>
> I definitely would not agree with classifying the Pancolar 50/2.0 as
second
> class. It was my standard lens in my Exacta time, some 40 years ago and I
> made some excellent photos with it. The later f/1.8 version is not as
good.
> I recently bought one again on ebay in Exakta mount (camera body included)
> for peanuts just to see whether my previous experience would be confirmed
in
> this digital age. I compared it with my preferred macro lens, the Kern
Macro
> Switar 50mm/1.9 and the results can be seen here:
>
> http://www.leicaphoto.net/discus/messages/10/5148.html?1241426654
>
>
> For portraits, I prefer the Zeiss Ultron 50mm/1.8
>
> http://www.leicaphoto.net/discus/messages/10/5219.html?1241947482
>
>
> and the 70 year old Leitz Hektor 73mm/1.8
>
> http://www.leicaphoto.net/discus/messages/7/4694.html?1237836500
>
> Cheers
> Peter
>
> ----------------original message-----------------
> From: "Richard Ward" ilovaussiesheps@xxxxxxxxx
> To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 14:35:07 -0800 (PST)
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>
>> Thank You for your compliments Aram & Philippe.
>> It is entirely possible that 'Shadow & Ice' is the highest quality image
> I've ever
>> made with a Digital Camera. There are some 35mm, TLR, and 4x5 images I've
> made in my
>> past which could surely give it a run on 'internal' image quality
> measures, but
>> they wouldn't be any more successful as 'images' than this one with the
> Pancolar
>> Fifty.
>> Analagous to what one of you has already said is that I'd never of had
> this image to
>> share if I'd just sat on my hands lamenting not having a Summi Fifty to
> shoot with. I
>> got that image because of making the active decision to be a
photographer.
> I was
>> able to then capture some of the wonderful photographic magic wafting
> through
>> the air that chilly afternoon.
>> There is a 'Romantic' story behind that trip to the beach as well. I had
> just met my
>> girlfriend Jane online and she had shared a love for the Lake and going
> there so in
>> preperation for our First Date, I made a trip there to get an image
> specifically
>> taken as a gift for her. Wrapped up a nice 8x10 in an elegant floating
> frame as a gift
>> from 'Me' instead of flowers or chocolates. It was a risk, but paid off
> quite
>> nicely. I got the 'Wow' I had hoped for.
>> Now, as for why this lens is 'on the shelf' now. If I HAD shot it with a
> Summi, the
>> image would have been a whack load easier to shepard through to the final
> image it
>> became. Converting the Raw file was hard, getting the sharpness I like
was
> hard,
>> and it was holy hell hard sorting my curves and levels to where I was
> happy with
>> them. My active choice of shooting with an R 50mm is from actively
> experiencing
>> how much less time it takes in the Digital Darkroom to produce the images
> I like
>> making and it makes it easier to have the images which my craft is
capable
> of giving
>> me.
>> I will Respect any photographer's active choices regarding camera and
>> equipment. Choosing to use a Zeiss Pancolar is a perfectly reasonable
> decision
>> to make. Conversely I offer little respect to a Photographer who's
> equipment
>> choices are based on asking the clerk which one is the best or because
> some wag says
>> a particular NikCanLeicOlyPanSony is the king of the optical bencch
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>>
>> Be Nice To Your Children!
>> They Will Be Choosing
>> Your Nursing Home :-)
>> ________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Aram Langhans leica_r8@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Sent: Wed, February 17, 2010 4:06:34 PM
>> Subject: [LRflex] Re: Good Photographers -&- Bad Lenses
>>
>> #3, Shadow and Ice, is way cool. I don't think having a Summicron would
>> help you compose any better or use just the right exposure any better to
>> improve on this shot. Maybe if you were after a 16x20 it might have paid
>> off, but if you had waited until you had your Summicron, you would not
> have
>> been there at that time to get such a great shot.
>>
>> Aram
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Richard Ward" ilovaussiesheps@xxxxxxxxx
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 10:49 AM
>> To: LeicaReflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [LRflex] Good Photographers -&- Bad Lenses
>>
>>> Ol'a Group,
>>> I was reading & rereading some of the equipment reviews over on
>>> "Luminous Landscape" - a wonderful collection of souls who do what they
> do
>>> and write what they write quite well, well worth a look. A line I read
>>> there just keeps coming back to me again and again. IIRC It was part of
a
>
>>> review of the Sony A900 Full Frame dSLR and in regard to it's imaging
>>> quality versus the other full framer cameras it's up against. He wrote:
>>> "Ultimately, we're all just arguing over the price of Champagne in the
>>> Promised Land. They're all great."
>>>
>>> Along this line of thinking, let me present a couple of images from a
>>> lens I've grown to despise. It's an M42 mount Zeiss Pancolar 50mm f1.8
> and
>>> it's been cast aside to serve as my 'lens lecture' prop. :-) I found
> these
>>> a few days ago I was adding images to flickr and I found some very nice
>>> ones I've taken with my 'despicable' Pancolar. Really made me think
>>> about
>
>>> my switch to the Summicron Fifty having been done for specific gains and
>>> specific benefits over what the Pancolar fifty was giving me. It was NOT
>>> because the zeiss was giving nothing of value.
>>> http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2782/4357969832_c452330ea5.jpg
>>>
>>> http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2793/4357221843_1ebd7c95ce_b.jpg
>>>
>>> http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2729/4357219797_25ff0246e8_b.jpg
>>>
>>> http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4017/4357964956_7a5277e8cd_b.jpg
>>>
>>> These all gave me GORGEOUS 8x10's.
>>> As long as my craft is as sound as it is in these images, shooting them
>>> with a Summi Fifty would be better, but it won't make these worse.
>>>
>>> Anyway
>>>
>>> Peace everyone
>>>
>>> Richard
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>> Be Nice To Your Children!
>>> They Will Be Choosing
>>> Your Nursing Home :-)
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------
>>> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
>>> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
>>> Archives are at:
>>> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>>>
>> ------
>> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
>> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
>> Archives are at:
>> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------
>> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
>> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
>> Archives are at:
>> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>>
>
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>
>
>
>
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
