leica007 Posted December 4, 2009 Share #1 Posted December 4, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Could people in the know kindly suggest a few flary and low contrast lenses [basically, which produce 'old school' look] ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Hi leica007, Take a look here Flary, low contrast lenses. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lars_bergquist Posted December 4, 2009 Share #2 Posted December 4, 2009 The prime example in the Leica line is the first version (pre-ASPH) 35mm Summilux. Any un-coated old Leica lens would also do, with a proper bayonet adapter. Avoiding this hassle, a first version collapsible 50mm Elmar 2.8 will give you a pleasantly old-fashioned image at 2.8 to 5.6, and can be had for a song (oh well, a Leica song). The old man from the Uncoated Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted December 4, 2009 Share #3 Posted December 4, 2009 Any lens with no coating and many air-glass surfaces, especially if there are fine scratches from cleaning on the front surface. The 5cm Summar is a good example. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynp Posted December 4, 2009 Share #4 Posted December 4, 2009 What do you think about the 73mm Hektor? I am in the search of a soft portrait lens? Thanks, Yevgeny Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPH1962 Posted December 4, 2009 Share #5 Posted December 4, 2009 Does this look old? 35 Lux non asph on M9 Good night JPH Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/105756-flary-low-contrast-lenses/?do=findComment&comment=1140455'>More sharing options...
leica007 Posted December 6, 2009 Author Share #6 Posted December 6, 2009 Thanks for the replies and the beautiful photo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theodor Heinrichsohn Posted December 6, 2009 Share #7 Posted December 6, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) What do you think about the 73mm Hektor? I am in the search of a soft portrait lens?Thanks, Yevgeny Writing from memory - I have not used my Hektor 73mm on either the M8 or the M9 - it is not a particularly "soft" lens. The 85 Summarex fully open and the 90mm Thambar are softer, especially the latter. I have also used the 125 Hektor 2.5 with a Visoflex and it is soft wide open, becoming sharp at smaller f stops. Teddy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcoombs Posted December 6, 2009 Share #8 Posted December 6, 2009 Could people in the know kindly suggest a few flary and low contrast lenses [basically, which produce 'old school' look] ? Look for a 50mm Summar. Hard to find in clean condition, as the front element was pretty soft and so got easily scratched in cleaning. They are inexpensive, though. Doug Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted December 6, 2009 Share #9 Posted December 6, 2009 The Jupiter-3 is probably the most flary, low-contrast lens I've ever used. It produces very muted color also - probably all of this because of a lack (or paucity, at least) of lens-coating. I posted some example images here a while ago. The lens is also very cheap - I bought mine on the b@y for about 100 bucks, or so - so it's perfect for beach vacations, or rough neighborhoods. Seriously, at that price I can't see a reason for not adding it to the stable, if you like the soft, muted 'vintage' look. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted December 6, 2009 Share #10 Posted December 6, 2009 Two flare-prone Leicas for very different looks (and I love them both on film and digital): 21 Elmarit (any version pre ASPH). Wow. Look at that thing wrong and it flares. But boy-oh-boy it's a beautiful look. Old Tele-Elmarit 90 (FAT) version from Canada. A lower contrast tele Leica has never made. But it's still sharp. Tons and tons of flare too, especially opened up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted December 6, 2009 Share #11 Posted December 6, 2009 Out of curiosity I just checked back on what I actually paid for the Jupiter, and I actually see that it was nearer 200 bucks. But still amazingly cheap for anything you can put on a Leica body! I also have the 21 Elmarit that Jamie mentions, and though I don't think the look i particularly 'old-fashioned', I agree that it's a great lens. Another lens I like for the muted, low-contrast look (though don't dare to use on the M8) is the old collapsible Elmar 50. Apparently fine to use on digital Ms - you just have to be braver than I am. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scsambrook Posted December 6, 2009 Share #12 Posted December 6, 2009 Two flare-prone Leicas for very different looks (and I love them both on film and digital): Old Tele-Elmarit 90 (FAT) version from Canada. A lower contrast tele Leica has never made. But it's still sharp. Tons and tons of flare too, especially opened up. Oh dear, mine must be faulty ... can't see the flare ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted December 7, 2009 Share #13 Posted December 7, 2009 What Lars said except I disagree with 50 2.8 original . It is not really fashioned as mine match my DR and Rigid lenses from the same era. So they are all modern or old depending on how you look at it, but no matter what they do not produce an image that screams old look. Not moderm asph, but cetainly not 1930 style 50 2.4 Hector, 50 3.5 elmar uncoated, 50 2.0 Summar, the 50 1.5 Xenon, 28 6.3 35 3.5 Elmar 90 uncoated Elmar will all get what you want. All will flare under the right conditions, make lowish contrast pics, and have low to medium low color saturation, poor shadow detail, and the highlights will blow more easily. Most of what you want will need service as they will be dirty inside. Budget for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thompsonkirk Posted December 7, 2009 Share #14 Posted December 7, 2009 Looks to me like there are 2 answers to your question: 1. If you mean 'flary' & 'old school' in a historical sense, reaching back to early Leica photography, then the advice about uncoated lenses is sound; also about Jupiter. My personal experience is that I tried a 1930s 5cm Elmar for a while & didn't like it, because the prints looked '2D' – not much roundness of subjects, nor sense of depth in the image as a whole. I would prefer Plasticman's Jupiter 3 (see above, especially the kids in the swing): this lens practically recreates the Pictorialist style in 35mm. 2. If you mean 'flary" & 'old school' in the sense of what folks often call a 'classic' Leica look, then you need something different. Choose among the pre-aspherical lenses designed by Dr. Walter Mandler, in production from the 1950s to – in a couple of instances – the 90s. The earliest came with screw mounts, but most were from the M era. You can find a whole list of them under his name on the Wiki. The AntiqueCameras website offers lots of info about characteristics, dates, serial numbers, & versions of pre-aspherical lenses; also a rough guide to prices. The 35 & 50 Summicrons are described in detail & the brief comments make sense. For example in 35mm, the highest reputations go to the Summicron ver. 1 & ver. 4. In pre-asph 50 Summiluxes, you'd want to avoid the 1st version & might hope to find the last one with pull-out hood & 46mm filter. The general rule is that even when the optical structure is the same, the newer of the pre-aspherical versions nevertheless had improved glass & more durable coatings. In other words they offer the so-called 'classic' look without so much flare. (If my prejudices aren't clear yet, these are the ones I like!) One more suggestion: If you like to sort of flare & softness you see in Robert Frank's work, where the image is often soft & the film grain provides a sense of sharpness, look for vintage (but to him contemporary) Zeiss f1.5 Sonnar. Folks sometimes say he didn't know how to focus, but they haven't looked carefully at the prints. In many instances the focus is spot-on at wide aperetures, but the images are soft because he's taxing the limits of his 1950s lenses. Kirk PS to JPH: Wonderful shot. But is it really a photograph - or a painting by Edward Hopper? :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted December 7, 2009 Share #15 Posted December 7, 2009 Oh dear, mine must be faulty ... can't see the flare ! Seriously? Shoot with backlight, or with bright point sources (like, um, the sun). There's the flare BTW--this is all relative. Relative to any of the newer ASPH lenses the 90 FAT flares with any kind of bright cross-or backlight (and no I'm not talking about flare from sunlight hitting the lens directly). I guess relative to an uncoated lens it's not flare-prone at all Sounds like Kirk defined the big differences... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scsambrook Posted December 7, 2009 Share #16 Posted December 7, 2009 Seriously? Shoot with backlight, or with bright point sources (like, um, the sun). There's the flare BTW--this is all relative. Relative to any of the newer ASPH lenses the 90 FAT flares with any kind of bright cross-or backlight (and no I'm not talking about flare from sunlight hitting the lens directly). I guess relative to an uncoated lens it's not flare-prone at all Sounds like Kirk defined the big differences... Strange - had two of these, first one bought new when they came out in the 1960s (sold it to get a 90 Summicron) and the second (similar chrome one) acquired about five years ago. Flare has never been a problem, but I've always used a 12575 lens hood. And I've always had a UVa filter on, which according to some folks, can affect the results adversely. Although it does rain a lot here, the sun sometimes shines, so I get the odd chance to shoot cross- and back-lit shots! Still, none of that means yours doesn't do the business flare-wise! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted December 8, 2009 Share #17 Posted December 8, 2009 How about the collapsible 50 summicron? Like this: scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted December 8, 2009 Share #18 Posted December 8, 2009 How about the collapsible 50 summicron? Like this: scott What a beautiful shot! I really love all these old lenses. Pity for my bank account... (although it would be worse if I preferred the new lenses, of course!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
noah_addis Posted December 9, 2009 Share #19 Posted December 9, 2009 I like some of the results I've seen from the Jupiter-3 for occasional use in certain situations. Are there any lenses in the 28-35mm range with a similar look? And even better if it has a similar price:D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.