Test your eye for Leica lens "fingerprint" II

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Lex,

 

What film stock did you use?

 

The reason I went for the 75 AA is that I felt that it was shot on a rangefinder camera and the facial proportions said telephoto to me but not so long as a 90 (or 135) because the nose in particular would have been more prominent; therefore a 75 was the likely choice. I went for the APO-Summicron in preference to the Summilux because it's a higher contrast shot than I'd expect from a Summilux unless it was stopped down significantly (where the depth of focus would be deeper) and, since I'm not familiar with the Summarit, I chose 75 AA additionally for its renowned sharpness and detail.

 

I have the 2nd version of the 65/3.5 Elmar, which is said to be sharper and have higher resolution than the first, so I'm surprised that you managed to produce such a sharp shot with very good definition. I have to admit that I'm slightly suspicious because you didn't mention using bellows so to achieve such a shallow depth of focus (around 3 inches?) with a f/3.5 lens stopped down seems dubious to me. But I'm happy to be corrected.

 

Pete.

[sandro]

Hi Pete, thanks. I used Kodak Elitechrome 100, had it developed and scanned, and the result is what you see. I absolutely didn't use a bellows, and I probably wouldn't have been capable of handling that combination without a tripod and this was shot without tripod. I had been taking a few outdoor shots with the Elmar and suddenly thought I could try it for a portrait. I took 5 or 6 and this (the first picture) is the best. I stopped down until 5.6 or perhaps 8 but not more. I didn't write down the data but I remember that it wasn't wide-open but not stopped down further than 8 and I think is was 5.6.

The way you explain your choices is very helpful, thanks.

Did I take away your suspicion?

Lex