Nocti and the 75mm lux Image look compare

[timothy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It's like when I wanted some years ago to shoot something in a Ralph Gibson style, and never succeded when I was thinking about that, and then one day shot the following Gbson-type picture when I was thinking about it consciously.

 

That's a great picture, and you certainly succeeded in achieving a Gibson-esque aesthetic.

 

Did you mean to say, "[. . .] when I was thinking about it unconsciously"?

 

Philosophical questions: Do you ever impose a concept on your shooting? Perhaps my suggestion is too imposing, but aren't we always imposing to some extent? For instance, choosing deep focus (as I will call it now). Here's a picture of mine to illustrate my imposing deep focus. Did I impose any other concepts?

 

I know what you mean though, you have to let the unconscious work. Go with the flow. Be sensitive. Be spontaneous. And all that.

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!

[Guest guy_mancuso]

I have to ask this. When you are out there shooting why are we trying to emulate what others have done. i know there are some great past shooters from the day but why are we not trying to make your own style and vision. little OT here but should we not be making images for yourself that you derive pleasure from than simply copying a style from someone else. Blunt comment here but are we not just stealing from them in a sense. Not as harsh as it sounded but see my point. Not sure i would want anyone that maybe i teach in a workshop to follow the absolute path of a Ansel Adams or a Avedon. Maybe use there style and twist it to create your own. You know we talk about sometimes the over use of bokeh and such , do we not feel the same way about the grungy look also. i mean sometimes i like to see grain and sometimes maybe not in a image but the grungy look to me sometimes just looked overcooked too. Just a thought

[wattsy]

I have to ask this. When you are out there shooting why are we trying to emulate what others have done.

 

I don't think anyone seriously attempts to copy the work of the past (or present) 'greats'. However, anyone even vaguely interested in the history of art and photography is likely to find that the work that they admire will eventually inform and influence their own work.

[gdeliz]

C'mon Guy, many Leica users enjoy fantasizing that they are the Great Photojournalist stalking those definitive shots capturing the drama of the Human Condition. The ones that will strike just the right chord with the beautiful people, who will go gaga over them and invite the GP to stylish parties where he will be the center of attention and his sublime shot of the slum toddler playing with the dog turd will be blown up wall-sized and displayed in the most central location.

Don't spoil it for them by asking them to produce mere snapshots. LOL

 

George Deliz

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Ian maybe copy was the strong word and influnce probably the correct one but do we think sometimes we conciously try and push it in that direction. for me i have a some of my favorites folks that i admire like Avedon, Penn and folks like Pete Turner for his color work and such but i know i don't think like them when I shoot. It seems though some hobbyists actually try and be like some of them in a way. I know many study art history and all that but i would think one may get a mix of feelings from them and create there own. Guess what i am driving at is what makes you shoot a certain way sometimes than others say it looks like HCB what about the guy that shot it, does it not look like his style or are they just rehashing what some of the godfathers did. I hear this often in the Leica forums about some of the greats and folks trying to model there own shooting after them. when I hear that it bothers me sometimes and why not go shoot for yourself and create your own.

 

i just find those comments somewhat interesting when folks talk like that and wonder what they are thinking.

 

I guess it is like young basketball players saying they want to be like Micheal Jordon, but I think i would rather here them say, i want to play as good as him but be a better 3 point shooter or something that maybe different than what he did so well.

[Guest malland]

Did you mean to say, "[. . .] when I was thinking about it unconsciously"?

Yes, the two-finger typist strikes again. Sort of like film vs digital: when I see a draft prinetd out on paper I see the typos right away, but on a monitor my eye just scans past them.

 

--Mitch

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

C'mon Guy, many Leica users enjoy fantasizing that they are the Great Photojournalist stalking those definitive shots capturing the drama of the Human Condition. The ones that will strike just the right chord with the beautiful people, who will go gaga over them and invite the GP to stylish parties where he will be the center of attention and his sublime shot of the slum toddler playing with the dog turd will be blown up wall-sized and displayed in the most central location.

Don't spoil it for them by asking them to produce mere snapshots. LOL

 

George Deliz

 

 

I have been laughing for about 3 minutes now , non stop. that made my day George

[Guest malland]

I have to ask this. When you are out there shooting why are we trying to emulate what others have done.

I don't normally try to emulate what others have done, but, sometimes, when I see a photographer that I didn't know I look at how he shoots and then, sometimes, try the same type of thing to see how it looks in my photography. It's a way of internalizing different approaches.

 

Painters have always done that. Gauguin copied the use of a strong outline from Claude Bernard (cloisonisme) who went around after that complaining that Gauguin was copying him: but the trouble was that Gaugain's paintings were so much better.

 

—MItch/Potomac

[Guest malland]

C'mon Guy, many Leica users enjoy fantasizing that they are the Great Photojournalist stalking those definitive shots capturing the drama of the Human Condition. The ones that will strike just the right chord with the beautiful people, who will go gaga over them and invite the GP to stylish parties where he will be the center of attention and his sublime shot of the slum toddler playing with the dog turd will be blown up wall-sized and displayed in the most central location.

Don't spoil it for them by asking them to produce mere snapshots.

Really, do you want to give an example of people you know that are like that?

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

[Guest malland]

That's a great picture, and you certainly succeeded in achieving a Gibson-esque aesthetic.

Thanks for the kind words , Timothy. This is one of the pictures that could drive me back to film, of which I haven't shot one frame since I got my first digital camera, the Ricoh Gr-D, exactly a year ago.

 

It was shot with an M6 on Tri-X with the Summilux-50 (pre-ASPH). It's a lens whose bokeh I like more than the later ASPH version, and, in many cases, more than that of either the Summilux-75 and, in most cases, more than the Noctilux. To come back to the point I was making in the post with the batch of pictures above, the bokeh of the Noctilux and the Summilux, at their wider apertures, is either too smooth or has no detail of the object left: I prefer t see the shape of the objects more cleary in the bokeh, like that produced by the Summicron-35 (pre-ASPH), and have therefore been thiking of selling both my Noctilux and Summilux-75. In any case, if I were using an M8, I would consider both lenses too long-focus, most of the time, for a camera with a 1.33x crop factor.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

[Guest guy_mancuso]

I don't normally try to emulate what others have done, but, sometimes, when I see a photographer that I didn't know I look at how he shoots and then, sometimes, try the same type of thing to see how it looks in my photography. It's a way of internalizing different approaches.

 

Painters have always done that. Gauguin copied the use of a strong outline from Claude Bernard (cloisonisme) who went around after that complaining that Gauguin was copying him: but the trouble was that Gaugain's paintings were so much better.

 

—MItch/Potomac

 

Mitch was not exactly pointing at you but it reminded me of some of the conversations i have read on photo.net about artists and there shooting styles and it made me wonder about it. yes i can see someone trying a style and see if that is something they can work off of but do we get to involved i wonder into what so and so did and maybe strech it to far. Now i say that but those kinds of comments seem to be leica related and i don't know why so much on leica compared to canon forums as it does not come up as much. More a observation on my part than anything else

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Thanks for the kind words , Timothy. This is one of the pictures that could drive me back to film, of which I haven't shot one frame since I got my first digital camera, the Ricoh Gr-D, exactly a year ago.

 

It was shot with an M6 on Tri-X with the Summilux-50 (pre-ASPH). It's a lens whose bokeh I like more than the later ASPH version, and, in many cases, more than that of either the Summilux-75 and, in most cases, more than the Noctilux. To come back to the point I was making in the post with the batch of pictures above, the bokeh of the Noctilux and the Summilux, at their wider apertures, is either too smooth or has no detail of the object left: I prefer t see the shape of the objects more cleary in the bokeh, like that produced by the Summicron-35 (pre-ASPH), and have therefore been thiking of selling both my Noctilux and Summilux-75. In any case, if I were using an M8, I would consider both lenses too long-focus, most of the time, for a camera with a 1.33x crop factor.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

 

You actually maybe better off with the 75 cron if the creaminess is too much . The bokeh on the cron would favor a more abrupt transistion betwen sharp and OOF area's compared to the 75mm lux

[Guest malland]

You actually maybe better off with the 75 cron if the creaminess is too much ...

It's funny: I used to like the Summilux-75 precisely for it's creaminess but lately have been more attacted to a less exaquisite look and a looser shooting style. Ones tastes do change, and I can certainly understand why people are often so taken with the look of the Noctilux and the Summilux-75. Habe a look at the short slideshow of Bangladeshi photogarpher Munem Wasif: select "slideshow" and look in particular at pictures #1,2,6,9 for the type of bokeh that I was referring to in the last posting, a bokeh in which you still see the shapes rather clearly:

 

Lightstalkers :: "Workers are taking bath inside the mill. Crescent jute mill, Khalishpur, Khulna." ©Munem Wasif

 

While you're at it, go to his other galleries at:

 

Lightstalkers :: Munem Wasif, Photographer

 

This is a fantastic B&W photographer. You might also want to look at:

 

Tainted Tea :: Munem Wasif

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

[BerndReini]

This guy is incredible!!! A real master of black and white photography. Thanks for introducing me to this.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Agreed i do like his work , just a touch dark on some images. i tend to like a white look more white but very nice stuff. I think subject matter on his images lends itself more to B&W too.

[Guest malland]

I found the following two articles in Bangladeshi periodicals on thius 24-year old photographer:

 

http://www.thedailystar.net/magazine/2007/05/02/profile.htm

http://www.newagebd.com/slate/2007/jun/05.html

 

Also, I found that he has a flickr site, where you can see that one of his cameras is a Nikon D200:

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/munemwasif/

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

[timothy]

Many photographers talk about emulating someone else but few can do it. Many photographers talk about developing a personal vision but few can do it. Let's face it: most pictures are anonymous, and most of the pictures shown in this thread are anonymous. Guy could have shot them. Bill could have shot them. Paul could have shot them. Georg could have shot them. Hell, I could have shot them assuming I had an M8, Noctilux, and 75 Summilux to use. I realize that these pictures are shown for the purpose of demonstration. The point is that most everyone's demonstration pictures look the same. Is it not also the case that most everyone's portfolio pictures look the same? From my point of view, this is true of most professionals and hobbyists alike.

 

I do not claim to be better than anyone else here on this forum. I'm a punk kid who shoots once or twice a month. Damn, I spend more time on this forum than behind my camera. That is hardly dedicated at all. That hardly gives opportunities to evolve, to experiment, to take risk, and to learn from it. But whenever I do shoot, I attempt to make pictures that no one else makes. Do I succeed? Maybe. Sometimes. Not really. But dammit, I try.

 

My only criticism of the majority of shooters on this forum is that you don't seem to try. You're not ambitious enough. You have the tools. So, challenge yourselves to make pictures that no one else makes.

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!

[carstenw]

Timothy, you are absolutely right. I am as guilty as anyone, probably, of not pushing myself hard enough. It is really hard to find enough time between job, relationship and responsibilities to sit down and think and then go out and do. I barely have time to think much in my life at all, and when I squeeze it in, I get a headache

 

There are times for living and times for pushing the edge. The latter usually comes in spurts for me. I hope one is coming up.

 

---

 

Here is a shot with the Noctilux wide open, at 1m, the near focus limit. It gives a real sense of how narrow the depth of field is, even if the picture is unattractive. The photo is of a wall of screw-attached stone plates on the outside of a building, and this is one of the screws, about 3cm in diameter, from a quite narrow angle.

 

Well, I think I have had enough of playing with this lens for now, and will return it. I look forward to getting mine, but ultimately, it is a superior portrait and low-light lens, but I believe that I prefer either the 35 Summilux Asph or 50 Summilux Asph for general use.

 

.

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!

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Many photographers talk about emulating someone else but few can do it. Many photographers talk about developing a personal vision but few can do it. Let's face it: most pictures are anonymous, and most of the pictures shown in this thread are anonymous. Guy could have shot them. Bill could have shot them. Paul could have shot them. Georg could have shot them. Hell, I could have shot them assuming I had an M8, Noctilux, and 75 Summilux to use. I realize that these pictures are shown for the purpose of demonstration. The point is that most everyone's demonstration pictures look the same. Is it not also the case that most everyone's portfolio pictures look the same? From my point of view, this is true of most professionals and hobbyists alike.

 

I do not claim to be better than anyone else here on this forum. I'm a punk kid who shoots once or twice a month. Damn, I spend more time on this forum than behind my camera. That is hardly dedicated at all. That hardly gives opportunities to evolve, to experiment, to take risk, and to learn from it. But whenever I do shoot, I attempt to make pictures that no one else makes. Do I succeed? Maybe. Sometimes. Not really. But dammit, I try.

 

My only criticism of the majority of shooters on this forum is that you don't seem to try. You're not ambitious enough. You have the tools. So, challenge yourselves to make pictures that no one else makes.

 

 

Well said Tim and that is how you learn. Try harder. For me my personal work i simply don't try hard enough for pay and clients i do but that is different.

 

But coming from teaching yourself, schools , workshops , assistants i have done them all but the bottom line is it is inside you, just need to try and pull it out more.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[timothy]

Here is a shot with the Noctilux wide open, at 1m, the near focus limit. It gives a real sense of how narrow the depth of field is, even if the picture is unattractive.

 

Indeed, that is a narrow band of focus.

 

Did you notice that my picture above features narrow depth of field (though not exactly like the Noctilux)? The bird is in focus more or less. The background is out of focus. The camera is panning upward while the bird is flying upward. The slow shutter speed captures the movement.