Thambar-Crazy

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Agreed that the phrase doesn't do it justice, but the Noctilux behaves differently through its apertures range affording a variety of uses.

It's early days yet. This thread is about exploration of what the Thambar can, and can't, do. I don't expect every image and every user to demonstrate the ideal use scenario. I, for one, am happy to watch others explore, while not expecting every image to be a success.

[lik]

 

 

Hollywood Glam 

Leica MM (CCD) Thambar 90mm f2.2 LTM
©Milan Swolfs Photography

 

Milan, this portrait is absolutely fascinating!

You obviously have a lot of experience with that lens!

 

However after only 4 weeks experience - too few time to use it extensively – my imagination is to use it wide open as much as possible. Whenever I stop down to 4 or more IMO it loses the recognizable Thambar-effect. 

The portrait is really a wonderful piece of art but - wouldn’t you have done almost the same with a Cron 90? 

Am I too pragmatic or even ignorant in this? 

 

Anyway - I love the challenge of the Thambar. 

It inspires me for kind of an impressionistic approach. 

 

I’m not where I want to be, but I have an imagination of it and meanwhile I continue learning about it’s narcissistic character. 

[ECohen]

Yes, and it will be interesting to see how many sell.  Numerically, this edition may end up rarer than the original. Regards, Ron

 

They will sell every lens that they choose to make ....Leica knows exactly what it is doing.

and they have our number

Edited January 7, 2018 by ECohen

[lik]

 

 

Yes, and it will be interesting to see how many sell.  Numerically, this edition may end up rarer than the original. Regards, Ron

I wouldn't mind. Because I have one now... 

[ECohen]

I probably will not open my wallet, though I have considered it*. 

Same with the Noctilux - just as much a one trick pony, IMO, though that phrase implies a rather narrow view of both of them.

 

* I considered it several years ago, as I do have a need for a forgiving portrait lens for older faces. In the end though, a Hektor 7.3cm was cheaper and satisfies that need for the moment.

 

I'm a bit new to historic Leica. And I too have need for a less forgiving portrait lens.......currently I use PS to get my desired result.

Could you tell me a little more about your Hektor 7.3cm? ....How old is it?

Does it have an M mount.

Does it  focus with the ok with rangefinder or do you use LV/EVF?

Is it coated? ...... Hows the color?

 

Sorry to go off topic but I'm curious....thanks

[LocalHero1953]

 

I'm a bit new to historic Leica. And I too have need for a less forgiving portrait lens.......currently I use PS to get my desired result.

Could you tell me a little more about your Hektor 7.3cm? ....How old is it?

Does it have an M mount.

Does it  focus with the ok with rangefinder or do you use LV/EVF?

Is it coated? ...... Hows the color?

 

Sorry to go off topic but I'm curious....thanks

 

It's a Leica lens with a screw mount dating from the 1930s. I bought mine on the Westlicht auction for a good price; optically it is very clean, though the focus is a bit stiff - I'll send it off for a CLA eventually - and it focuses accurately with my M240 (I use a Voigtlander LTM-M adapter). It's uncoated. I use the 75mm framelines, though increasingly I'm using it on the SL. Colour is fine and neutral, but some of its softness is related to low contrast, so you shouldn't expect the sharp zingy colours that you get from the Apo-Summicron 75 for example.

 

A mature woman asked me to take some portrait shots recently. She said she wanted honest, realistic shots. I mostly used the SL with the 24-90 zoom, but she strongly preferred those I took with the Hektor (make of that what you will!). It has similar funny bokeh to the Thambar. 

[Princess Leica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm in love with the idea of the Thambar because of its shameless softness. Artists often add Photoshopped blur to their photos and then paint from these, praising the lost edges and the surprising light. The results of such Photoshopped and then copied blur are to my eye lifeless. To have a lens that "paints" for you, as Milan's Thambar does, is so appealing.

 

Yet when my local Leica dealer showed me samples of his Thambar efforts, it looked like "someone left the cake out in the rain." So my question: what is so hard about using this lens? Was it this complicated for users of the original lens? Is it that we're all so habituated to looking for sharpness that we don't see possible Thambar subjects? Or is there something like focusing problems that makes the use of this lens so tough?

Edited January 7, 2018 by Princess Leica

[M9reno]

So my question: what is so hard about using this lens? Was it this complicated for users of the original lens? Is it that we're all so habituated to looking for sharpness that we don't see possible Thambar subjects? Or is there something like focusing problems that makes the use of this lens so tough?

Have a look at the original instructions, which suggest fairly extensive experimentation with the lens, not unlike that taking place in this thread. Of course all experimentation back then was on film, with a much longer feedback loop, and even steeper learning curve.

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_id=188204

[derleicaman]

I have had my original Thambar for over 30 years, and to be quite honest, I had been so frustrated with it from my film days I had delegated it being put away at the back of one of my camera shelves. The last time I used it was in 2001, when I used it for some portraits of a bride with my M6. The bride did not like the images taken with it, so another reason to lose interest in it. There it sat until recently when I acquired the M10. I already had the M9-P and MM1, but did not try it on those cameras. I thought the M10 with the Viso 020 would finally be the answer. Not! Then Stefan Daniel told me Leica was coming out with the re-issue. Still trying with it. The Thambar is a very hard lens to master. Sort of like a horse that refuses to be tamed and keeps throwing you off. At least you don't have to worry about breaking your neck with the Thambar.

 

Milan and lik have done some wonderful work here, and some others I know I am leaving out (sorry about that). It is great to see everyone's progress and I am learning quite a lot! Thank you all.

[Milan_S]

Thank you all for your lovely words about my work with the Thambar. More advice i can give for using the Thambar is using good light and take your time for your shots. 
I often explain my models that I'm using and old 1930s lens, which always is a nice story and tell them to relax because I will need to take my time to focus (with the MM CCD without live view) and even the SL i need to take my time for focusing and watching the light flare and have the wonderful glow (not too much).

 

Stopping down brings the true magic of this lens. I'm planning to do another series of photographing backstage and friends with the Thambar when I find the time to do this. Furthermore please follow the Thambar group for a lot of interesting photos taken with this lens. 

[M9reno]

Stopping down brings the true magic of this lens. 

 

Thank you, Milan.  I am persuaded that, in order to get best results from this lens, one must think very carefully about aperture, and by all means stop down where necessary.  This might entail combating the modern Leica fetish about always shooting at full aperture (often stated vulgarly as "why pay $$$ for a name-your-Leica-lens if not shooting at f/max" or "I keep my Nocti glued at f/0.95").  The Thambar does not reward this modern mindset.

 

Nor, for much the same reason, will this lens reward modern bokeh-fetishists.  Its trademark effect is the pictorialist halo.  Good light and spare, monochromatic backgrounds work better than any others in rendering this effect.

 

To put it another way, this 1930's lens rewards an entirely different and more traditional set of compositional choices.  It's like a little time-machine.

 

To be clear:  there may be situations where full aperture (or even bokeh) might work, but this lens repays careful consideration of all parameters, and in that respect is a valuable learning tool, in addition to having a unique aesthetic potential.

Edited January 8, 2018 by M9reno

[LocalHero1953]

I've just bought a (new) Thambar! Red Dot also had a couple of originals in good condition, which made an interesting comparison. I'd taken my SL along (that's what I expect to use it on, mostly), and the new version was considerably clearer for focusing than either of the oldies, probably because of modern glass and coatings. The focusing movement on both the oldies was a bit stiff, while the aperture rings were loosish (my Hektor 7.3cm is the same). Since I'm buying it to use, not as a collection piece, I have gone with the new one which has a modern easy focus movement and slightly restrained aperture ring.

 

It's well balanced on the SL, though I miss the large hood on the zooms that allows you to put the body and lens down level on a table. You have to be a bit more cautious with the thinner Thambar. 

 

Pictures to follow, so far mostly from around London and the early evening lights (lots of ugly bubble bokeh!), without the spot filter. I intend to use it mainly for portraits. 

[LocalHero1953]

First portrait.

Thambar on the SL, wide open, no spot filter, ISO400, 1/80s.

Monica Alcazar Duarte winner of the Bar Tur Photobook award for her book 'The New Colonists', taken at the book launch at The Photographers' Gallery last night. I only had a moment so I carelessly carefully placed her under a harsh overhead fluoresecent light. I show both colour and the SilverEfex conversion (high key preset).

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 February 3, 2018 by LocalHero1953

[LocalHero1953]

Thambar on SL, all wide open, no spot filter.

 

London Embankment. A typical shot with small light sources or specular highlights in the frame, producing this ugly bubble bokeh. IMO to be avoided at all costs unless you like Candy Crush Saga or are trying to entertain your grandchildren. In shots with a 'normal' lens, I am often distracted by light sources and highlights in the background; this lens will leave me in no doubt about the errors of my ways.

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!

 

London South Bank. Once one forgets about camera club sharpness, the impressionistic effect may work.

[LocalHero1953]

Thambar on SL, wide open, no spot filter.

 

London Eye. I guess one can put up with bubble bokeh as long as it forms part of the composition. But a little bit goes a long way.

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!

 

[LocalHero1953]

Thambar on SL, wide open, no spot filter

 

London Golden Jubilee Bridge

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!

 

[LocalHero1953]

Thambar on SL, wide open, no spot filter.

 

London South Bank, channelling my inner Brassai.

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 February 3, 2018 by LocalHero1953

[LocalHero1953]

Thambar on SL, wide open, no spot filter

 

Last ones.

 

London South Bank, looking across to Somerset House

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!

 

And a quick snap from 'The New Colonists' book launch last night.

[LocalHero1953]

A comment arising from just one day's use on the SL, mainly in low light.

Focusing the Thambar through the EVF in low light is not quick and easy - you have to take care to allow for flare and low resolution. Focusing with a rangefinder in these conditions may be easier, despite the longish focal length and narrow DoF.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[wattsy]

I must admit I'd put this lens right out of my thoughts of late but this Leica blog piece (and now Paul's early evaluation) have me thinking again. In truth, I still don't quite like what I'm seeing but I suspect that what I'm not liking most is the "digitalness" in many of the photographs rather than the "Thambarness". I have a feeling that, used with film, there will be fewer blown out areas of glow, more agreeable colour and a bit more bite in the texture. I particularly like this photo and also find this landscape interesting. I also agree that portraits are probably where the strengths of this lens lie and whilst not everything I have seen is to my taste, I do like this portrait. I guess I will still have to try this lens out at some point.