[rollei_list] Re: I'm looking for a Rolleiwide. Is it a sensible pursuit?
- From: Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:02:42 -0400
2/3s the price of the latest from Zeiss... a steal!
http://www.abelcine.com/store/Arri-Master-Prime-Lens-Set/
I never said I shot cheap ;-) But when you are putting together
$25-$30,000 shoot days an extra 500 bucks is not a huge deal
Eric Goldstein
--
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Jeff Kelley <jlkphoto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Here ya go...a full set of Cooke S4 prime lenses for $1000/day rental fee.
> http://www.abelcine.com/store/Cooke-S4-Prime-Lens-Set/
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Thor Legvold <tlegvold@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> yes, there are always exceptions, and in most fields there are certain
>> brands or models that distinguish themselves as being something special.
>>
>> I haven't been to the Santa Anita track in ages, thanks for bringing back
>> memories. And you're right, the short you linked to looks wonderful.
>>
>> Thor
>>
>> On 25. sep. 2012, at 22.24, Eric Goldstein wrote:
>>
>> > Interestingly enough Thor the Cooke S2 Prime series of motion picture
>> > lenses was well know for providing a high level of technical
>> > correction needed for large screen projection and the romance many
>> > directors are looking for. So one does not exclude the other...
>> >
>> > Here is an example of these exceptional lenses hung on a modern DSLR
>> >
>> > http://www.cinema5d.com/news/?tag=cooke-s4-primes
>> >
>> >
>> > Eric Goldstein
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Thor Legvold <tlegvold@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> From a practicality standpoint, you can always make a sharp lens soft,
>> >> with any number of "fixes" to acheive a wide range of results.
>> >>
>> >> However it's rather difficult to do the opposite, using a soft or
>> >> poorly-corrected lens to take a clear, contrasty and sharp picture with
>> >> little or no distortion. Sometimes that's the job - delivering sharp and
>> >> clear results. Othertimes not.
>> >>
>> >> For professionals, I would think they have and can justify the expense
>> >> of both - "character" glass with a glow or some pleasing abberations for
>> >> portraiture and the like, and "clinical" glass for counting the number of
>> >> angels on the head of a pin.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> Thor
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 25. sep. 2012, at 21.34, Eric Goldstein wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hi Jeff -
>> >>>
>> >>> Photoshop... the Saran Wrap of the modern digital shooter ;-)
>> >>>
>> >>> Again Jeff I don't want to (and am in fact going to great pains to
>> >>> avoid) sound(ing) like I am saying one lens is "better" than another.
>> >>> I happen to Iike authentically romantic lenses... I used to drive my
>> >>> DPs crazy searching for a particular series of prime lenses (Cooke
>> >>> S2s) to shoot in the film moving picture days because of the romance.
>> >>> You didn't want to be photoshopping thousands of frames of film to
>> >>> achieve a look at that point in time.
>> >>>
>> >>> Others on this list in the past have expressed their love of the
>> >>> sharpest lenses they could get their hands on without any utterance of
>> >>> a preference for any other characteristic. That's fine, too.
>> >>>
>> >>> What is not fine is leaving someone considering a Rolleiwide purchase
>> >>> with the impression that a classic Distagon is a well-corrected high
>> >>> resolution optic by modern standards. It is not. TLR or SLR, the old
>> >>> ones from the 50s/60s just were not great performers relative to
>> >>> corrections. But depending upon how you prefer to shoot, that may be
>> >>> just what the doctors ordered...
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Eric Goldstein
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Jeff Kelley <jlkphoto@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> Eric,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I agree to some extent since I have owned the 6x9 Fuji Rangefinders(
>> >>>> both
>> >>>> the 90mm and 65mm versions) and still own the Pentax 67 system,
>> >>>> (including
>> >>>> the 45mm, 55mm, 100mm macro) however, I have also honed my Photoshop
>> >>>> skills
>> >>>> over the last 20 years so that scans of shots taken with any of these
>> >>>> cameras & lenses can lead to breathtaking images without the sterile
>> >>>> or
>> >>>> clinical look often associated with this, or other, very sharp glass.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Jeff
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I have to agree with this. I feel the same way about some of the
>> >>>>> Pentax 67 glass. I also find the Fuji Wide rangefinder glass
>> >>>>> clinical,
>> >>>>> sterile, and not something I would shoot, and they are well
>> >>>>> corrected
>> >>>>> high resolution lenses.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> This is why I never say one lens is "better" than another. When
>> >>>>> someone talks about what a wonderful performer an old Distagon is
>> >>>>> under enlargement, I share my experience that these lenses are not
>> >>>>> high resolution or particularly well-corrected optics, and that this
>> >>>>> will easily become obvious at magnification. That does not make them
>> >>>>> bad lenses; that depends upon the shooters tastes and the
>> >>>>> requirement
>> >>>>> of a particular project...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Eric Goldstein
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:16 PM, CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>> 2012/9/25 <vick.ko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> So, how is it compared to the Hasselblad 50mm FLE lens? Is that
>> >>>>>>> lens
>> >>>>>>> significantly different than the 4.0FW?
>> >>>>>>> Too sharp maybe?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> The first difference for practical purposes is that the Distagon
>> >>>>>> 4/50
>> >>>>>> FLE for Rollei 6000 cameras and Hasselblad has two focusing rings
>> >>>>>> and
>> >>>>>> the FW only one focusing ring, two focusing rings make the lens
>> >>>>>> operation more complex, it happens because the Floating Lens
>> >>>>>> Elments
>> >>>>>> works to improve the lens performance for short focusing distances
>> >>>>>> and
>> >>>>>> it needs to be focused separately; the FW Schneider Super Angulon
>> >>>>>> lens
>> >>>>>> is a very modern design, it is distortion free for almost any
>> >>>>>> practical purpose and is very well corrected for optical
>> >>>>>> aberrations
>> >>>>>> even for the short focusing distances, I don't think you could find
>> >>>>>> a
>> >>>>>> significant difference about quality in the real life. Anyway, as
>> >>>>>> Peter wrote, your eyes will remain the judge.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Carlos
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> PS: Some lenses like those for the Mamiya RF are too sharp for my
>> >>>>>> taste, they can sometimes produce too hard images for B&W
>> >>>>>> specially.
>> >>>>>> ---
>> >>>>>> Rollei List
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>> >>>>>> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> >>>>>> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into
>> >>>>>> www.freelists.org
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> >>>>>> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> ---
>> >>>>> Rollei List
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>> >>>>> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> >>>>> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into
>> >>>>> www.freelists.org
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> >>>>> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> ---
>> >>> Rollei List
>> >>>
>> >>> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >>>
>> >>> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>> >>> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>> >>>
>> >>> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> >>> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into
>> >>> www.freelists.org
>> >>>
>> >>> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> >>> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> ---
>> >> Rollei List
>> >>
>> >> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >>
>> >> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>> >> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>> >>
>> >> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> >> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>> >>
>> >> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> >> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>> >>
>> > ---
>> > Rollei List
>> >
>> > - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >
>> > - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>> > in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>> >
>> > - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> > 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>> >
>> > - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> > //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>> >
>>
>> ---
>> Rollei List
>>
>> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>>
>> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>>
>> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>>
>
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
