I like film...(open thread)

[Sparkassenkunde]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Breakfast

 

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!

Rollei Prego Micron - Kodak 200

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Sparkassenkunde]

Staring at the sea

 

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!

Same setup

[Sparkassenkunde]

Bench

 

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!

Same setup

[Sparkassenkunde]

And the last for today:

 

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!

See above

 

[finarphin]

This is using a Leica IIIf with Portra 400 film.  I'm not sure which lens; I think it was with a Voigtlander 75mm f2.5.

 

 

 

 

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!

[gbealnz]

Wow Fin, nice shot, very nice.

Welcome to the forum.

Gary

[A miller]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Adam, 

 

I simply don't understand what you try to explain here.

Could you try again for me please?

 

Kind regards

 

Christoph

 

Christoph  - Probably b/c I didn't do good a job of explaining.  And I'm afraid I can't do much better.   But what Rod Klukas explained to me is that lenses my have different max focus distance points at infinity depending on the focus range at what they are optimized.  

For example, he explained that the summicron is optimized for street photos (and all things within that focus range) and cityscapes, and its infinity mark i set to about 1000 meters.  

The summilux, on the other hand, will have its infinity mark set to 1500-1600 meters (about a mile).

Based on this, a landscape shot of a distant subject more than 1000 meters away will have more contrast and detail with the summilux than with the summicron,

On the flip side, the summicron's focus ring will be longer in the shorter focus distances, allowing for more precise focusing at these closer distance. 

 

This makes some sense to me b/c, e.g., I notice that my old 28mm summaron (f5.6) has a long focus throw in the close distance range, say up to 20 feet, and then a tiny focus throw from 20 feet to infinity.  And it makes shitty landscape photos.

 

I would also note that the Hassy SWC has a particularly long focus throw at very close range, which suggests that is it optimized for vast compositions that range from very close to far but not extremely far (and the results are pure infinity that I get are supportive of this).

 

Rod said that there was an organization called SBIE that may have publications about this and an old book called the History of Photographic Lenses from the 50's  https://www.amazon.com/History-Photographic-Lens-Rudolf-Kingslake/dp/0124086403) that may shed more light on this.

 

Sorry but that is about the extent of my understanding of this! 

Edited September 25, 2016 by A miller

[A miller]

Extremely hot salt  

(in juxtaposition to the icy blue )

Velvia 50

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!

 

 

[janorun974]

Nice and great picture

I like the smile of a girl

Thanks for posting

Best

Henry

 

thanks Henry, an other for You, do You remember this beer?  Pan400 + Rodinal 1/25 + voigtlander heliar 50/2

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!

Edited September 25, 2016 by janorun974

[gwpics]

If ever anybody was in any doubt about the viability of film and Leica film cameras this thread would prove beyond all doubt that film is still alive and very well thank you.

 

Gerry

[janorun974]

If ever anybody was in any doubt about the viability of film and Leica film cameras this thread would prove beyond all doubt that film is still alive and very well thank you.

 

Gerry

Hello Gerry, 

 

Just viewed all your gallery, it's splendid! 

[janorun974]

This is using a Leica IIIf with Portra 400 film.  I'm not sure which lens; I think it was with a Voigtlander 75mm f2.5.

 

great portrait, superb expression and tones ! 

[christoph_d]

Christoph  - Probably b/c I didn't do good a job of explaining.  And I'm afraid I can't do much better.   But what Rod Klukas explained to me is that lenses my have different max focus distance points at infinity depending on the focus range at what they are optimized.  

For example, he explained that the summicron is optimized for street photos (and all things within that focus range) and cityscapes, and its infinity mark i set to about 1000 meters.  

The summilux, on the other hand, will have its infinity mark set to 1500-1600 meters (about a mile).

Based on this, a landscape shot of a distant subject more than 1000 meters away will have more contrast and detail with the summilux than with the summicron,

On the flip side, the summicron's focus ring will be longer in the shorter focus distances, allowing for more precise focusing at these closer distance. 

 

This makes some sense to me b/c, e.g., I notice that my old 28mm summaron (f5.6) has a long focus throw in the close distance range, say up to 20 feet, and then a tiny focus throw from 20 feet to infinity.  And it makes shitty landscape photos.

 

I would also note that the Hassy SWC has a particularly long focus throw at very close range, which suggests that is it optimized for vast compositions that range from very close to far but not extremely far (and the results are pure infinity that I get are supportive of this).

 

Rod said that there was an organization called SBIE that may have publications about this and an old book called the History of Photographic Lenses from the 50's  https://www.amazon.com/History-Photographic-Lens-Rudolf-Kingslake/dp/0124086403) that may shed more light on this.

 

Sorry but that is about the extent of my understanding of this!

 

Adam,

 

Thank you for your effort. I still can't say I fully comprehend, but, what for me is emerging from the shadows is the following:

 

There are lenses of comparable focal length that have different focus throws.,My assumption would be that lens designers would take the following aspects into account when deciding on focus throw:

maximum aperture, higher speed lenses may need a longer focus throw to focus accurately

rangefinder accuracy, it would not make sense to design a lens with a highly accurate long focus throw for a rangefinder such as in the Olympus XA.

focal length, a wide angle lens, due to its relatively larger depth of field at a given distance and aperture, needs a relatively shorter focus throw to focus accurately than a lens with a narrow angle of view.

lens range, within a given lens range, it may make sense to align the focus throw for, say the 28mm, 35mm and 50mm lenses, so that a person working with different lenses would get used to the focus throw. I heard some Leica lenses are designed like this. The focussing knob pointing downwards then may mean a focal distance of, say, 4 m on all lenses.

Intended use of the lens. Lenses intended for journalism, where quick focussing is required, may have a shorter focus throw than lenses intended for other uses.

 

Your friends other point of lenses being optimised at different "infinity points" I would interpret as follows. I do believe, (as Erwin Puts states in one of his books) that lenses are designed to have good image quality over their image capture area at all distances and all apertures. That aim cannot always be achieved, and lens designers therefore consciously choose the optimum dependent on the intended use of the lens. A macro-lens, for example is designed to have the optimum image quality at close distances, a portrait lens at medium distances etc.

 

Oh well, I think I stop rambling about this stuff now, the sun's coming up, I better go out and take a few pictures

 

Have a nice Sunday,

 

Christoph

[A miller]

Adam,

 

Thank you for your effort. I still can't say I fully comprehend, but, what for me is emerging from the shadows is the following:

 

There are lenses of comparable focal length that have different focus throws.,My assumption would be that lens designers would take the following aspects into account when deciding on focus throw:

maximum aperture, higher speed lenses may need a longer focus throw to focus accurately

rangefinder accuracy, it would not make sense to design a lens with a highly accurate long focus throw for a rangefinder such as in the Olympus XA.

focal length, a wide angle lens, due to its relatively larger depth of field at a given distance and aperture, needs a relatively shorter focus throw to focus accurately than a lens with a narrow angle of view.

lens range, within a given lens range, it may make sense to align the focus throw for, say the 28mm, 35mm and 50mm lenses, so that a person working with different lenses would get used to the focus throw. I heard some Leica lenses are designed like this. The focussing knob pointing downwards then may mean a focal distance of, say, 4 m on all lenses.

Intended use of the lens. Lenses intended for journalism, where quick focussing is required, may have a shorter focus throw than lenses intended for other uses.

 

Your friends other point of lenses being optimised at different "infinity points" I would interpret as follows. I do believe, (as Erwin Puts states in one of his books) that lenses are designed to have good image quality over their image capture area at all distances and all apertures. That aim cannot always be achieved, and lens designers therefore consciously choose the optimum dependent on the intended use of the lens. A macro-lens, for example is designed to have the optimum image quality at close distances, a portrait lens at medium distances etc.

 

Oh well, I think I stop rambling about this stuff now, the sun's coming up, I better go out and take a few pictures

 

Have a nice Sunday,

 

Christoph

 

Thanks for ramble, Christoph.  I guess there is more enlightenment and education out there waiting for both of us to absorb!!  Happy shooting!

[Doc Henry]

Adam and Christoph bravo to both of you . Interesting point of view and synthesis. Thanks

 

 

Day of departure 2 ( departure 1 : I have posted in color)

 

 

Kodak TMax100

(dev home pure Kodak D76)

Leica MP

Summilux 50 Asph

this lens is also good for landscape as portrait

 

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!

 

I posted again in color Kodak Portra 160 - Leica M7 - Summilux 35 Asph

(dev C41 home 38°C)

 

 

Which you prefer ? color or both ?

may be color for the color of sunset

 

Best

Henry

[A miller]

Adam and Christoph bravo to both of you . Interesting point of view and synthesis. Thanks

 

 

Day of departure 2 ( departure 1 : I have posted in color)

 

 

Kodak TMax100

(dev home pure Kodak D76)

Leica MP

Summilux 50 Asph

this lens is also good for landscape as portrait

 

Image3danairpkodtmafesrllfht+++900.jpg

 

I posted again in color Kodak Portra 160 - Leica M7 - Summilux 35 Asph

(dev C41 home 38°C)

 

Image32airportkp160la35feclfht++++-3-900.jpg

 

Which you prefer ? color or both ?

may be color for the color of sunset

 

Best

Henry

 

clearly color, Henry.  But are you not sure that there weren't more red hues in the color palette.  Even this way, it is very lovely

[Fotoklaus]

Christoph, thank you for your enlightened opinion .

A lens, we can say that this is the image , so the choice seems to me important.

It has long time I wish to have a second 35 mm .

As I have 4 cameras , I would like to have the choice when shooting like you said.

I'll see depending on my financial means, what I want to do

but the weight of the lens is important to me. This is one of a selection criteria

I have two Leica SLR with R 6 lenses that I'm not using more, 

it is now too heavy for me   I will give to my children if they want them.

The Summicron 35 Asph is significantly lighter than the same Summilux 35 Asph

it's really compact.

I would like to test the Summicron version 4 called the "King of Bokeh" just to compare

Best

Henry

For me "Leica M" means portable, high quality photography. So I'd go for a Summicron, with no thoughts about prices so far.

To the point of image- quality: A lot of people want to be the cool war- reporter- guy without using light meters and so on.

Perhaps a proper exposure and developing would bring more advantage than buying an expensive lens ( that's not for you, Henry!).

If your pictures are shaky and bad developed, probably the last few improvements of an MTF- curve are not noticeable ;-)

The other point is our beloved hobby and we are all searching for reasons to buy new stuff (but there are none, really...). So if you just want a new lens just for

fun, just do it! :)

[christoph_d]

Adam and Christoph bravo to both of you . Interesting point of view and synthesis. Thanks

 

 

Day of departure 2 ( departure 1 : I have posted in color)

 

 

Kodak TMax100

(dev home pure Kodak D76)

Leica MP

Summilux 50 Asph

this lens is also good for landscape as portrait

 

Image3danairpkodtmafesrllfht+++900.jpg

 

I posted again in color Kodak Portra 160 - Leica M7 - Summilux 35 Asph

(dev C41 home 38°C)

 

Image32airportkp160la35feclfht++++-3-900.jpg

 

Which you prefer ? color or both ?

may be color for the color of sunset

 

Best

Henry

 

Henry,

 

Colour for me too, not primarily because of the colour, but because of the larger angle of view, which IMHO suits the subject better.

Just comparing colour vs B&W impression, I prefer colour too due to the subtle hues in the sky. The B&W may have benefitted from an orange filter or the like to add contrast.

 

Best regards

 

Christoph

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Doc Henry]

clearly color, Henry.  But are you not sure that there weren't more red hues in the color palette.  Even this way, it is very lovely

No Adam almost yellow color.  It's why I took this picture of sunset

Normally you're right a little red but not in this case. It's tropical latitude

Thanks for watching and commenting

Best

Henry

Edited September 25, 2016 by Doc Henry

[Doc Henry]

This is using a Leica IIIf with Portra 400 film.  I'm not sure which lens; I think it was with a Voigtlander 75mm f2.5.

 

Wow Fin, nice shot, very nice.

Welcome to the forum.

Gary

Fin I agree with Gary nice portrait

color is perfect IMO

Welcome to our thread

Have you more ?

Thanks for posting

Best

Henry