Jump to content

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, Kl@usW. said:

Thank you Charles for your  poetic comment. Quite fitting the place and the landscape. If the photo deserved it, the comment might be called congenial.  I don't know if the name of Friedrich Hölderlin has crossed your path--he was born just two miles away in the direction of the photos view. FH was and is one of the pivots of german romanticism and had a close connection to the beginnings of the german idealism. Interesting your words tune in to this so well. 

Klaus, I went searching and enjoyed my journey. Discovering Friedrich Hölderlin through his words came images, your Winter walks #11 rings of the feeling I had on reading "Tinian" for instance. I'll continue delving for there is much joy there. Thank you for directing my path.

Edited by Bateleur
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mamiya 7 80 mm red filter. HP5 in a mixture of HC110 & Rodinal standing 50 min

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!

  • Like 15
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, John Robinson said:

I have the same Zeiss lenses in Hasselblad mount and have had some superb results (on film and more recently using a Phase One back, completely off-topic for this thread).  Are the Rollei versions better, or is it that you prefer the way the 6008i operates?

Thanks John. First off, I think I might have told you all a pack of porkies. The lenses are NOT Zeiss, looking at them now I see they are made by Rollei and have Rollei's HFT coating rather than Zeiss T*. I understand they are very closely related, though. I used to, like you do now, have both 80mm and 150mm as Hasselblad Zeiss lenses. I am ill-qualified to judge whether one is better than the other, but I assume they are pretty close. Rollei market their 6000 range in competition with Hasselblad, at a higher price-point, so I'd strongly assume their lenses were at par with those offered by Hasselblad. Lenses aside, I much prefer the form factor of the Rollei. It has a grip that makes handling - for me at least - so much preferable to the Hasselblad. Plus it has well thought-out engineering from the start - built-in dark slides, metering (averaging, spot, multi-spot), automatic exposure in various guises, exposure information via LED just with the WLF, a built in, quiet motor etc etc. I find these things help me when I'm out and about photographing. So, in answer to your question, and nothing against Hasselblad - I've had two and liked them very much but yes, I prefer the way the Rollei operates.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, stray cat said:

Thanks John. First off, I think I might have told you all a pack of porkies. The lenses are NOT Zeiss, looking at them now I see they are made by Rollei and have Rollei's HFT coating rather than Zeiss T*. I understand they are very closely related, though. I used to, like you do now, have both 80mm and 150mm as Hasselblad Zeiss lenses. I am ill-qualified to judge whether one is better than the other, but I assume they are pretty close. Rollei market their 6000 range in competition with Hasselblad, at a higher price-point, so I'd strongly assume their lenses were at par with those offered by Hasselblad. Lenses aside, I much prefer the form factor of the Rollei. It has a grip that makes handling - for me at least - so much preferable to the Hasselblad. Plus it has well thought-out engineering from the start - built-in dark slides, metering (averaging, spot, multi-spot), automatic exposure in various guises, exposure information via LED just with the WLF, a built in, quiet motor etc etc. I find these things help me when I'm out and about photographing. So, in answer to your question, and nothing against Hasselblad - I've had two and liked them very much but yes, I prefer the way the Rollei operates.

Lenses are fascinating.  If you research the history of the connections between Zeiss, Contax and Rollei, you can find enough information to keep lens nerds happily comparing performance for days or weeks on end (without even getting started on the differences between Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad V-series and the Fujinon versions for H-series).  I think for someone interested in image outcomes it becomes much more subjective.  With the advent of mirrorless (SL with various adapters) I was able to compare a number of Zeiss lenses.  Comparing the Contax Zeiss Planar 1,7/50 (made in Japan) with the Rollei Planar 1,8/50 (made in Singapore), I preferred the way the Rollei draws.  Comparing a German-made Zeiss Distagon 2,8/35 in Rollei mount with a Japanese-made Contax Zeiss Distagon 2,8/35, the Contax produced stunning images and the Rollei merely acceptable.  I finally concluded that the benefits of putting Leica lenses on the SL and triggering Leica's profiles outweighed any difference in optical performance but there are occasional surprises.  The Japanese Contax Zeiss Distagon 2,8/28 is an extraordinarily-good lens (some say the f/2 is even better, particularly in demand by video cinematographers) and it runs rings around the Summicron-M 2/28 ASPH (did I just utter heresy?) on the SL, perhaps because of the stronger retrofocus design (one of the reasons the native SL lenses are so much larger).  But then, the Summilux-M 1.4/50 ASPH absolutely kills the Zeiss Planar 1.4/50 (and most other 1.4 50s for that matter) on the SL.  On the other hand, putting Contax Zeiss lenses onto a Leica M, unless it has live view, is a classic example of doing something over again hoping for a different outcome.

Time to put the lens nerd cap back in the lens cupboard I think.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

Different Rolleiflex - 2,8F, with Zeiss Planar 80mm, Velvia 50

  • Like 19
Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, John Robinson said:

Lenses are fascinating.  If you research the history of the connections between Zeiss, Contax and Rollei, you can find enough information to keep lens nerds happily comparing performance for days or weeks on end (without even getting started on the differences between Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad V-series and the Fujinon versions for H-series).  I think for someone interested in image outcomes it becomes much more subjective.  With the advent of mirrorless (SL with various adapters) I was able to compare a number of Zeiss lenses.  Comparing the Contax Zeiss Planar 1,7/50 (made in Japan) with the Rollei Planar 1,8/50 (made in Singapore), I preferred the way the Rollei draws.  Comparing a German-made Zeiss Distagon 2,8/35 in Rollei mount with a Japanese-made Contax Zeiss Distagon 2,8/35, the Contax produced stunning images and the Rollei merely acceptable.  I finally concluded that the benefits of putting Leica lenses on the SL and triggering Leica's profiles outweighed any difference in optical performance but there are occasional surprises.  The Japanese Contax Zeiss Distagon 2,8/28 is an extraordinarily-good lens (some say the f/2 is even better, particularly in demand by video cinematographers) and it runs rings around the Summicron-M 2/28 ASPH (did I just utter heresy?) on the SL, perhaps because of the stronger retrofocus design (one of the reasons the native SL lenses are so much larger).  But then, the Summilux-M 1.4/50 ASPH absolutely kills the Zeiss Planar 1.4/50 (and most other 1.4 50s for that matter) on the SL.  On the other hand, putting Contax Zeiss lenses onto a Leica M, unless it has live view, is a classic example of doing something over again hoping for a different outcome.

Time to put the lens nerd cap back in the lens cupboard I think.

Oh, boy! Then you start getting into the nitty gritty of lens design, coatings, format and all the rest of it. No thank you! I do find your above insights fascinating, though, and of course it is of interest to practitioners the characteristics of the tools they are using especially, for photographers, insofar as the ways different lenses differentially render the picture they are going to put their name to. In that way it's a very personal creative decision.

I had, for a while, a Contax G2 with 28mm, 35mm, 45mm, 90mm and a zoom - I think it was 35-70. Beautiful lenses, extraordinary. But for my tastes, too perfect. Same with a Canon 85mm f1.2L lens I had. Glorious lens. Better than anything red-dotted (oops, there's that heresy again!). But again, too perfect - I way prefer my 90mm Summicron or Nikon 105mm, warts and all. And where does Rog's Thambar fit in? These Hasselblad Zeiss and Rollei lenses that we're talking about in MF - they're for all intents and purposes, perfect. Including the ancient 1960 lens on my wife's 2,8F. And even in their perfection, perhaps it's in part due to it, there seems to be character - whether the lenses are by Zeiss, Bronica, Mamiya or whoever. But there is something about MF that says, for me, that perfection is actually a good trait. I don't know why, but I think it is. So, mind you, is imperfection in MF - I am a sucker for Diana and Holga pictures. Perhaps MF is a more catholic format? I think, from what I've witnessed, that LF most certainly is.

As you say, lens-nerds can argue for hours about it. And not just lenses. I've noticed that in a lot of the digital forums there is a lot of to and fro about sharpness and IQ (the lens' I gather, not the photographer's), dynamic range and yada yada yada. Which is all very well, but next year it will all be different. Shock, horror, something better will come along and the discussions will have to start all over again. It used to be much the same in film-land when there wasn't any digital but I sense that nowadays, in this thread at least, photographers are pretty much content to leave the sharpness/IQ debates to others. Which is not to say that people don't talk about lens character, witness the discussion between Klaus and Marc (Benqui) on the previous page about the 50mm Summicron Apo, and you alluded to it yourself discussing the way a lens draws.

No criticism leveled at anyone in the above - hey, whatever floats your boat. We all seek different things out of our photography and choose our weapons accordingly. I actually find much of the nerd-talk very helpful, because I can skip to the conclusion and not have to worry about the meat of the debate, as someone else has done all that for me!

 

Edited by stray cat
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stray cat said:

[....]

Which is not to say that people don't talk about lens character, witness the discussion between Klaus and Marc (Benqui) on the previous page about the 50mm Summicron Apo, and you alluded to it yourself discussing the way a lens draws.

[...]

 

If the choice of camera/sensor/film is the canvas, the lens is the brush.  The fascination of studying different lenses is about finding the brush that works to make the image you seek.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I have something special for you, another chapter in my "Forgotten film roll" series. I recently bought a Lumiere Lumirex folding camera - only for the roll of film I saw in the online offer for the camera. The film was a Kodacolor II 620 film. Internet sources say it was produced between 1972 and 1980. I developed this film in Cinestill C 41 and was happy to get some glimpses into the life of the last users of this camera. The colors are, as I expected, totally off, but with a little help from Adobe Lightroom I managed to get the following portrait. I don't have any hope to get information about the pictured man but have the feeling I brought something back to life, like archeologists do:

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!

 

  • Like 16
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, stray cat said:

Canadian Bay Yacht Club 2021

Rolleiflex, 80mm, Velvia 50

Movie buffs might recognize this as the setting for a scene featuring Gregory Peck and Ava Gardner in Stanley Kramer's "One the Beach" from 1959. Hasn't changed much.

Excuse me, while I drag the green oxygen tank closer so I can catch my breath. The Rx of a new-to-the-kit Rollei certainly has the paramedic with the paddles yelling, "Clear!", as the heart of creativity rules out flatlining. This On the Beach moment is one that an auteur director (are any left?) would wait hours, maybe days (David Lean + Freddie Young) to capture.

8 hours ago, stray cat said:

Different Rolleiflex - 2,8F, with Zeiss Planar 80mm, Velvia 50

Challenging the tyranny of the rectangle, this one has it roped.

7 hours ago, stray cat said:

"... The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls and tenement halls.." 2021

Rolleiflex 2,8F, Velvia 50

With grass or without grass, I go with the green complementing the red in this over-the-top Mondrian meets Pollock! The play of primaries and the counterpoint of textures in a composition that defines how the classic square can push the abstract. Good show! (Chorus of finger snapping.)

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...