farnz Posted April 20, 2012 Share #21 Â Posted April 20, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Didn't Stanley Kubrick have three 0.72 lenses made for when he made Brian Lyndon.I seam to remember that Zeiss made them. Brian It was "Barry Lindon", Brian, unless there's a lesser-known version, which featured your good self. Â Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 20, 2012 Posted April 20, 2012 Hi farnz, Take a look here f/0.72. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
luigi bertolotti Posted April 20, 2012 Share #22  Posted April 20, 2012 It was "Barry Lindon", Brian, unless there's a lesser-known version, which featured your good self. Pete. Yes, it's the Monty Python version... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 20, 2012 Share #23 Â Posted April 20, 2012 Yes, it's the Monty Python version... Â I believe they also used them in "life of Brian" Â Seriously I am sure Sean Reid discussed Stanley Kubrick having these lenses made in one of his extremely good essays. At the present I am away from home and only have an iPad with me which means no adobe flash so no Reid Reviews for me to check my info. Brian Have a good weekend friends Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted April 20, 2012 Share #24 Â Posted April 20, 2012 Yes I've heard it before too, Brian, and Wikipedia agrees with you here. Â Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted April 20, 2012 Share #25 Â Posted April 20, 2012 Here is narrative & some images taken with exotic lens faster than f1 N Click Review on the left and than Need for Speed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted April 20, 2012 Share #26 Â Posted April 20, 2012 It looks like a traffic light lens. I have two and hope to use them for my rear tail-lights in the sports car. Â Pretty good ant-burners. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindolfi Posted April 20, 2012 Author Share #27 Â Posted April 20, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thanks for the contributions! It looks like that Planar 50/0.7 has a Modulation Transfer of 0.5 at 10 to 15 linepairs per mm. I'll do an MTF test with the crystal ball, but I think it will be no more than 0.5 linepairs per mm at a modulation of 0.5, so in that case no competition for the Planar. Â Interesting design, that Planar: That whole stack of glass, just to handle aberrations at these extreme apertures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpalme Posted April 20, 2012 Share #28 Â Posted April 20, 2012 Specifically made for ugly lady portraits. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted April 20, 2012 Share #29 Â Posted April 20, 2012 Challenges the old 'bottom of a bottle' benchmark! Â Â Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted April 20, 2012 Share #30  Posted April 20, 2012 It was "Barry Lindon", Brian, unless there's a lesser-known version, which featured your good self. Pete.  Kubric accessed Zeiss f0.7 lenses designed for NASA to film the candlelight scenes. These articles, which I remembed from years ago, are still on the net and are quite interesting, especially how the lenses were adapted to fit the cinema cameras and how they dealt with non-existent DOF.  Untitled Document Untitled Document  This is of course part of one of the Apollo conspiracy theories: that man never landed on the moon but that it was secretly filmed in a studio by Kubric:rolleyes:. Kubric threatened to tell the world if NASA didn't lend him their precious fast lenses:rolleyes: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted April 22, 2012 Share #31  Posted April 22, 2012 Specifically made for ugly lady portraits.  Not quite legendary Thambar but something like this perhaps.  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/177237-f072/?do=findComment&comment=1990729'>More sharing options...
Lindolfi Posted April 22, 2012 Author Share #32 Â Posted April 22, 2012 Interesting picture, mmradman, but quite impossible to see in real life. The lady is not impossible, but the combination of her two images is. An almost cylindrically shaped glass forms a negative lens only in a horizontal plane and not in the vertical plane. Therefore her image should not be reduced in vertical direction, yet this is what the picture shows. Â I do like the idea behind the image, however, and that idea deserves a better realisation, I think... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted April 22, 2012 Share #33 Â Posted April 22, 2012 Interesting picture but quite impossible to see in real life. Â If you drink enough everything is possible. Hint, empty glasses in the image. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
myinoshi Posted April 25, 2012 Share #34 Â Posted April 25, 2012 The hunt for faster and faster lenses continues! Today I found a lens with an aperture of f/0.72. It has a focal length of 130 mm and here you can see it mounted in front of my M9:Â Â The spherical and chromatic aberrations are considerable, but the light gathering capacity of this lens is fantastic. Â Here you can see an image taken with this lens of my 8x10 inch Gandolfi next to an image taken with a Summilux 50/1.4 asph. from the same location but cropped to match the viewangle. Â Â Wow, I love how incredibly THIN that DOF is! Talk about thinner than paper thin! Just, where is the focus? I can't seem to find it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.