Lenses that inspire you to take photos

[Guest Nowhereman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Steven said:

The reason why I shoot wide open, or one of the reason, because there are many, is that I think lenses are meant to be used wide open...

 

I've always had trouble with this statement. "Fast" (f/1.4) lenses were developed because film was slow and, when ISO 400 B&W film was pushed to ISO 1600, the contrast increased, mid-tone gradation decreased and huge grain was created — and color film could be even more problematic. Then, photographers noticed that they often liked the look of the out-of-focus background that their 50mm f/1.4 lenses produced. By the time we get to the f/1.0 Noctilux we have a lens that most people thought was not worth buying, because of its cost, unless they were going to use it a good amount of the time for its look at f/1.0. Still that's far from saying that lenses were meant to be used wide often: even the Noctilux was considered a good lens at smaller apertures.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

[Advertisement]

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

[ianman]

1 hour ago, pippy said:

As I say; hardly a great snap ()

You are too modest... don't tell me that this is not your 21st century interpretation of The Long Man of Wilmington 

 

[pippy]

6 minutes ago, ianman said:

You are too modest... don't tell me that this is not your 21st century interpretation of The Long Man of Wilmington 

Too funny! And very well spotted, Ian; a Tick and a Star are in order!

Philip.

Edited June 1, 2021 by pippy

[Danner]

Lenses do make a difference in the vision/ image.  Shooting the exact same scene with my 50 'Con v5 at f2 and my Summitar 50 at f2 produce remarkable difference looking images.  Which is better?  Depends...  This actually gives me an idea for a fun project 🙂

[ianman]

32 minutes ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

...they almost never shoot wide open, except out of NECESSITY.

I thought Peter Karbe told us to!

 

[pgk]

Cinematography and stills photography are entirely different. Trying to apply the same ideas to both is not relevant.

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

The only thing that will render a photographer’s work unique is his eye and talent. Not  how a lens renders...

Excuse me but the above statement is demonstrably untrue.

Philip.

Edited June 1, 2021 by pippy

[Guest Nowhereman]

31 minutes ago, pgk said:

Cinematography and stills photography are entirely different. Trying to apply the same ideas to both is not relevant.

Really? You gotta be kidding: One doesn't inspire the other at all?

So the Pawel Pawlikowski and his DP were completely off the wall when they said that they studied the look of Ralph Gibson's photography when they were deciding the look of their brilliant B&W film, Cold War? And so were the makers of the several films whose color cinematography was inspired by the look of William Eggleston's photography.

EDIT:
Here is a quote from Richard Brody. “Everything Is Cinema: The Working Life of Jean-Luc Godard", on the making of A bout de souffle (Breathless):

In order to film at night without added lighting, Godard drew on [cinematographer] Coutard’s earlier experience as a still photographer and asked him to name his favorite kind of film for low-light still photography. Coutard chose a film produced by the British firm of Ilford, but Ilford did not manufacture it in the 400-foot rolls that were standard movie stock—it was sold only in small canisters of 17.5 meters (approximately 46 feet), which fit 35mm still cameras. Godard went to a photography supply store to buy out the store’s inventory. He and Coutard extracted the rolls from their containers, and on location, two assistants were employed to load and unload the movie camera’s film magazines with the tiny spools (which could be used for approximately thirty seconds’ worth of filming). After the shoot, Godard and Coutard used lightproof changing bags to splice the many short rolls together into longer ones so that they could be processed by the film laboratory.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

Edited June 1, 2021 by Nowhereman

[pgk]

47 minutes ago, Nowhereman said:

Really? You gotta be kidding: One doesn't inspire the other at all?

That's a completely different topic. A stills photograph has to stand up to be scrutinised for far longer than a moving image, and compositionally it can be very different. I'm a stills photographer. I've shot 'moving images' for production companies but by nature I am a stills photographer and I can see that there is a significant difference in approach and so I no longer shoot anything but stills. The crossover, if that is what you might call it, is perhaps in studio work where the photographer has great control over lighting. But with more general photography of the type undertaken by portable still cameras (like Leicas) there is a world of difference between the images being created and cinematography. The whole point about your quote above is about recreating a style and evoking a specific look which is what cinema is good at. As I don't care for Eggleston's work any cinema based on his 'style' would in any case be wasted on me.

Lenses are important in cinematography for many reasons which are far less relevant in stills. Changing from aspheric to spherical designs would potentially grate as the character of off backgrounds shifted in what is usually trying to be coherent and sequential viewing. Still images can have a lens style but generally speaking, this is a relatively minor importance even within an exhibition. If you have ever viewed a Wildlife Photographer of the Year exhibition you will see the results of many lenses, styles and techniques on display. They are viewable as a whole simply because each image is viewed separately and they do not have to flow together as a movie does.

[Herr Barnack]

On 5/25/2021 at 6:33 PM, capo di tutti capi said:

Without an object for inspiration, any lens, even the most loved one, will lie on the shelf.

The reason for me to create photography is to learn the tricks of film and art. 

When you begin to understand, the equipment ceases to be in the first place.

The artist can create the picture with his elbows.

Hence the old expression "@$$holes and elbows" as a euphemism for frenetic activity.

Edited June 1, 2021 by Herr Barnack

[Capuccino-Muffin]

1 hour ago, Steven said:

I'm pretty sure I've heard Peter Karbe say before that lenses should be enjoyed wide open. 

And he is? A master photographer? A teacher? A curator? A member of Magnum? An artist?

For what I know, he is pushing his own product, the Leica katalog, the Leica kultur. Norhing to do with the art of photography. Go tell any good photographer out there that “peter karbe advises you should hold your camera...” and they’ll ask you “who is that guy?”

[Capuccino-Muffin]

1 hour ago, pippy said:

Excuse me but the above statement is demonstrably untrue.

Philip.

If you plan to demonstrate it by mixing large format and medium format lenses versus 35mm format lenses, then yes. Otherwise, if you stick to the 35mm format, I can’t see how this can be demonstrated. Please do so, show us.

[Capuccino-Muffin]

2 minutes ago, Steven said:

And you, who are you ? A master photographer? A teacher? A curator? A member of Magnum? An artist?

I will answer that I am not a shoemaker, nor a lens designer, both if which are irrelevant to teach others about the art of photography. 

[astrostl]

Invoking Karbe is necessarily an appeal to authority rather than an argument and thus fallacious.

A quote from him on the subject: "But most importantly, with the Noctilux-M 1: 1.25 / 75mm ASPH you no longer have to stop to get the best performance. It is part of our understanding of values that the lenses we deliver today are fully functional wide open. In this way, we offer the photographer every opportunity to make full use of the depth of field in his images – without compromise."

He is referring to newly-designed Leica lenses and seems to mix his own arguments: I would agree with him that modern Leica lenses are fully functional wide open, but disagree that you no longer have to stop to get the best performance because it's still very evident that doing so still improves things outside of the center.

In any case, his views should not be generalized as an argument for anything but his views (while also noting that they are unable to be separated from employment).

[astrostl]

4 minutes ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

If you plan to demonstrate it by mixing large format and medium format lenses versus 35mm format lenses, then yes. Otherwise, if you stick to the 35mm format, I can’t see how this can be demonstrated. Please do so, show us.

My ZM 35/1.4 and VM 35/1.4 II MC render much differently wide open, to the extent that a layperson can and will easily note the difference (e.g. prominent soap bubble bokeh).

[Herr Barnack]

10 minutes ago, Steven said:

You say what you're not, but you don't say what you are. Maybe because you're nothing. What you definitely aren't is in a position to teach me about photography. Encouraging taking photo with a lens closed down was a good thing, IMO. But pissing on people who shoot wide open was just not intelligent. 

No wonder my shoes are suddenly wet.

If I may, I would like to gently suggest that we commit to doing our pissing either in the nearest toilet or in the woods and not on each other. 

[Capuccino-Muffin]

10 minutes ago, Steven said:

You say what you're not, but you don't say what you are. Maybe because you're nothing. What you definitely aren't is in a position to teach me about photography. Encouraging taking photo with a lens closed down was a good thing, IMO. But pissing on people who shoot wide open was just not intelligent.

Talking about intelligence, how can you say that I am not in a position to teach you if I haven’t answered you what I were, to begin with? 

 

[pgk]

27 minutes ago, Steven said:

Anyway, we should stop arguing about this and just agree to disagree. Some people are more impacted than other by the choice of lens. Some people put the accent somewhere else, such as light, composition  .....

Accent? I think that you will find that subject, lighting and composition are primary. Given that lenses have changed hugely since photography was invented, then lenses are clearly secondary .......

Enough, yes, agree to disagree. Not much point doing anything else.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pippy]

1 hour ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

The only thing that will render a photographer’s work unique is his eye and talent. Not  how a lens renders...

...if you stick to the 35mm format, I can’t see how this can be demonstrated. Please do so, show us.

Both images were snapped by the same 'Artist'. Both images snapped within a few seconds of each other on the same body with the same settings.

Do these images look the same to you? Do you think they were both shot using the same lens? Does the rendering look identical?

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!

Just rattled these snaps off a short time ago and hardly 'Great Art' but creating 'Great Art' wasn't the point of the exercise.

Philip.

Edited June 1, 2021 by pippy

[ianman]

1 hour ago, Steven said:

Some people are inspired to take pictures with the 28 summaron because it's so compact. These same people would not feel like going out on walk with their camera if they had the 28mm Summilux.

Who are these people? I don't believe for a second that anyone is "inspired" by the size of a lens... or that others would buy a lens and not feel like going out for a walk with it.

1 hour ago, Steven said:

Some people are more impacted than other by the choice of lens. Some people put the accent somewhere else, such as light, composition and story. No one is wrong, no one is right.

You get first prize for diplomacy   but seriously don't you think that the seeing and using the light and composition are a tad more important than the choice of lens? So when you are walking and see an incredible scene with rays of sunlight shining through the clouds, illuminating the far away mountain top and sweeping majestically across the hills you think.... nah, my lens is too big.

Of course the choice of lens is important depending on the subject you are going to photograph, it's experience and knowledge that then guide that choice.