Jump to content

APO 50 FILM images


thebarnman

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I know there's slower films that can take full advantage of the APO 50, but I haven't seen any examples.  If you have any samples, please share. 

 

 

Currently I'm thinking about getting a M7 (to compliment my R9) and I'm interested to see how film can take advantage of the APO 50.  Even faster films will show off the characteristic of the new APO 50.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

x

What is Worth?  "The quality that renders something desirable, useful, or valuable."

 

Rollei RPX 25, Rollei Retro 80s, Rollei ATP (32 iso,) Svema64, Foma-R 100 iso and Ilford PanF 50 iso can take advantage of it's resolution.  And, would be beautiful particularly reverse processed.  Fuji Velvia and Provia would also be stunning.  

 

Even Tri-x can take advantage of it's characteristics. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Relative to the 50 lux ASPH...I doubt you'll get your money's worth as one might validly claim with a pixel-peeping digital M.

The chromes you mentioned all need to be scanned before they can be printed...and you'll lose some sharpness, even if it is very minor...but that's all it takes to narrow the gap b/n the APO and non-APO 50mms

There was a thread not too long ago with examples of the 50 APO with film.  I wasn't impressed given the large cash outlay.  

You can buy a mint condition has or contax 645 - just for example - with a full stable of lenses and all the trimmings for the cost of the 50 APO.  And they will give you a much better end product simply by virtue of using a larger film.

So I am not quite seeing the cost-beneficialness...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Probably a bit late to the topic here, but I had the 50 APO, and sold it after a month (for a mint Noct V1, plus change... which I'm very happy with... it has become one of my favorites).

 

The APO is an excellent lens, but it is designed for digital sensors and it worked wonderfully on the M-E (in fact the raw files were too good for me, exposing every blemish when photographing portraits; some might like this, but I hate fiddling with Lightroom and photography programs in general). When it came to film, I found the photos too sharp for my liking, and far too contrasty. Mind you, I use standard films, but if you are using films of 25 ISO, or something like that, I can see the value... but as a standard, everyday lens, the 50 Lux ASPH gives it a run for its money, at half, if not less than the money.

 

On slide film, it was particularly flat; it was like taking a digital file and burning it to film. On the plus side, it is nowhere near as bad as the 35 FLE, which was capable of producing some of the ugliest results I've ever seen on film (and I hope isn't an indication of future Leica lenses)... This was also sold for the previous version of the lens.

 

Here is a thread I started not long after getting the lens: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/232508-50-apo-and-film/

 

Hope this is helpful and sheds some light on things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I did some tests with slower speed films and then real higher resolution films like ATP1,1 , Ortho 25 in theory > 300 lp/mm were PAN F+ is even not coming half way, neither any E6 slide film  and it is alreay difficult to see the difference of a good Jupiter-8 and the standard Summicron 50mm. I am working with an M7 and have several Leica lenses but at a certain point it is finished with 24x36mm. Then I can better take my Bessa III 667 (6x6 or 6x7cm rolfilm) camera. 4,5x bigger in format and when enlarging always better then the M7 although I can make very nice 40x50cm classical prints in split grade from my Leica. That very small difference with the APO lens you won't find back on film.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For me the advantage of APO 50 is not the resolving power in good light, it's seeing more details in shadows and low light. Peter Karbe talks about this at the end of the article here.

 

My theory is that the APO 50 is well corrected and sees the shadow details better. An older less corrected lens has more "stray light" that makes the shadows block up faster.

 

I only have the APO 50 for my M7 now. Looking back at the previous four years with the Summarit-M 50/2.5 has made me delete the all older photos from the LR library, the difference is so large.

 

See this as an example on my APO 50: A modern jet at a museum (film)
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I never would delete any photo I took of the last 50 years. A good photo even doesn't  have to be technically perfect to please. But if you are very happy with your new lens it is only OK for you.

 

The failure people normally are making with a poor film development and improvement wich you can make here are much more then you can achieve with any lens improvement. But that is only my opinion of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me the advantage of APO 50 is not the resolving power in good light, it's seeing more details in shadows and low light. Peter Karbe talks about this at the end of the article here.

 

My theory is that the APO 50 is well corrected and sees the shadow details better. An older less corrected lens has more "stray light" that makes the shadows block up faster.

 

I only have the APO 50 for my M7 now. Looking back at the previous four years with the Summarit-M 50/2.5 has made me delete the all older photos from the LR library, the difference is so large.

 

See this as an example on my APO 50: A modern jet at a museum (film)

 

 

Your photo 'A modern jet....' has blocked shadows which go a long way to show that achieving great detail in shadow and low light, along previous comments made above about the APO being 'flat' or 'too contrasty on film', are all the result of the photographer, exposure, the film processing and post processing and not the lens. Both the plaudits and criticism come across equally as being poor reasons to buy a $6000 lens when a different film or developer combination would be the genuine answer in solving simple deficiencies in technique. Getting more shadow detail into a B&W negative is one of the easiest things to achieve, getting more definition in shadow areas with a digital file is just as easy, neither require an APO.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your photo 'A modern jet....' has blocked shadows which go a long way to show that achieving great detail in shadow and low light, along previous comments made above about the APO being 'flat' or 'too contrasty on film', are all the result of the photographer, exposure, the film processing and post processing and not the lens. Both the plaudits and criticism come across equally as being poor reasons to buy a $6000 lens when a different film or developer combination would be the genuine answer in solving simple deficiencies in technique. Getting more shadow detail into a B&W negative is one of the easiest things to achieve, getting more definition in shadow areas with a digital file is just as easy, neither require an APO.

 

Steve

 

Yes, this is why I usually don't advertise that I'm using the Apo 50. My results has improved a lot with the new lens compared to the Summarit. I'm using mostly C41 films developed in a Fuji machine at the local photo store, they are very consistent in developing and scanning. It makes it easier to compare lenses.

 

Edit: I have two more 9MP scans on Pan F Plus 50 here and here

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of these lens failures are valid for color so in B&W an APO doesn't improve anything. But of course it is nice to have one of the best 50mm lens on your camera. But such a quality lens is going over the possibilities for 35mm film but I would look first at the micro contrast, sharpness in the edges, full aperture results and such things.

The step from a Summarit to an APO Summicron is also bigger then a Summicron to this APO Summicron lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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