bill Posted June 13, 2012 Share #81 Posted June 13, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Actually, they are. It is the weighting that you personally accord to them that varies. Regards, Bill Sent from another Galaxy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 Hi bill, Take a look here 50mm fingerprints: Summicron vs Zeiss Planar?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
giovanni Posted June 13, 2012 Share #82 Posted June 13, 2012 The OP asked about Voigtlander bodies. The answer is that they are good enough for Lee Friedlander.... I don't know if it makes any sense to answer a question asked some years ago but, just in case, my opinion is that Voigtlander bodies are good enough for non professional photographer and maybe for some professional photographer, according to the specific use they would make of them. I own a R4A and to me it seems to be quite well done; in terms of building quality it is aligned to the average semi-pro reflex bodies. Compared to my M2, the R4A: - is lighter - seems less tough - has noisier shutter (electrically operated, no emergency manual speed) - has a better viewfinder (M2 is darker but maybe it needs servicing); - has a (good) lightmeter - manual frame selector is only manual (less confortable) - has a 21 mm frame - has smaller rangefinder base. In terms of specs, however, it would be better to compare it to M7, which unfortunately I don't own. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjames9142 Posted June 13, 2012 Share #83 Posted June 13, 2012 I would claim that some opinions carry more intrinsic weight than others. About taste there is no point in arguing. De gustibus etc. But if I have a brain tumour, the opinion of a brain surgeon has more weight than that of a pork butcher. When the US ratings agencies were called before the Congress to explain their utterly useless and venal ratings of sub-prime junk, they all said, in unison, but they are only "opinions." They weren't, of course, they were professional evaluations for which they were handsomely paid, but they tried to weasel out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjames9142 Posted June 13, 2012 Share #84 Posted June 13, 2012 Bill, ]I would claim that some opinions carry more intrinsic weight than others. About taste there is no point in arguing. De gustibus etc. But if I have a brain tumour, the opinion of a brain surgeon has more weight than that of a pork butcher. When the US ratings agencies were called before the Congress to explain their utterly useless and venal ratings of sub-prime junk, they all said, in unison, but they are only "opinions." They weren't, of course, they were professional evaluations for which they were handsomely paid, but they tried to weasel out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjames9142 Posted June 13, 2012 Share #85 Posted June 13, 2012 I don't know if it makes any sense to answer a question asked some years ago but, just in case, my opinion is that Voigtlander bodies are good enough for non professional photographer and maybe for some professional photographer, according to the specific use they would make of them. They work fine for Lee Friedlander, and another fine photographer and friend , Henry Wessel. The specific use they make of them is to make intelligent photographs of high quality. It doesn't get much better in my book. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Reading Posted June 13, 2012 Share #86 Posted June 13, 2012 What about this lens for the budget conscious? http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/shop-by-brand/voigtlander/lenses/voigtlander-40mm-f1-4-vm-nokton-sc-black-lens.html They also do a multi-coated version. I was led to believe that 40mm was a much more natural focal length for 35mm full frame exposures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stack62 Posted June 13, 2012 Share #87 Posted June 13, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) For what it's worth, here's a shot with my M3 and 50mm Planar ZM at about f/5.6 with Fuji Reala. Nikon 5000 ED scanner no sharpening. Recently I did a simple test with the 50mm ZM and 50mm Summicron R (E55 Canada version) Both at '250 at f/4 Delta 100. Did 11x14 F.F. prints of each in the darkroom and saw no difference what so ever between the two, same contrast, sharpness, etc. I like doing "real world" tests when trying out different lenses. I would think the 50mm summicron 'M' Canada version would be at least as good as the R version. Have not tested both side by side, yet, with colour...that's for another day. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/94206-50mm-fingerprints-summicron-vs-zeiss-planar/?do=findComment&comment=2039570'>More sharing options...
gjames9142 Posted June 14, 2012 Share #88 Posted June 14, 2012 Stack, I think you are basically correct. The technical level of nearly all modern lenses outstrips the abilities of most people to get the best out of them. We have all the tools we need. I do fine with a version 4 35 Cron and a version 4 Elmarit 28 mm. I bought aZeiss Biogon F.28 35 mm and it is too contrasty for my taste -- outstanding resolution, a fine technical performer, but I long ago figured out that technical specs are not everything, It's how the print looks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted June 14, 2012 Share #89 Posted June 14, 2012 I agree with the observation that "the technical level of nearly all modern lenses outstrips the abilities of most people to get the best out of them." The technical level of all my 'modern' Leica M lenses (21mm Super-Elmar ASPH, 35mm Summilux ASPH v.2, 50mm Summilux ASPH, 90mm Elmarit-M, 135mm Apo-Telyt) do outstrip my ability to focus and hold them – and my subjects' ability and willingness to hold their breath … And we are talking of the technical ability only, while the photographer's ability to see and capability to capture the telling picture are what make the picture telling. "Sharpness is the fetish of boring photographers." (Mahatma Duffel's Collected Wisdom) The old man from the Age of the Box Camera Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giovanni Posted June 14, 2012 Share #90 Posted June 14, 2012 They work fine for Lee Friedlander, and another fine photographer and friend , Henry Wessel. The specific use they make of them is to make intelligent photographs of high quality. It doesn't get much better in my book. They do work properly for some (and maybe for most), but maybe do not for all. I mean that they are finely designed and made, but not as Leicas, that are more tough and seem to be more suitable to hard conditions. Also, what is an intelligent photograph? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjames9142 Posted June 14, 2012 Share #91 Posted June 14, 2012 If you look at the work of Friedlander, or Hank Wessel, you will in each case, see a singular style, a sense of working within (and sometimes against) a tradition, formal acuteness and inventiveness, and mastery of technique. They produce bodies of work, not pictorial snaps, though both are also aware of the power of vernacular photography. Does that make any sense ? Lars, I entirely agree with you. Most of the posts here are about gear, and while technical decisions have aesthetic consequences, there is little discussion of what I think photography is about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lucan Posted November 24, 2016 Share #92 Posted November 24, 2016 I can't accept that. If that were the case Leica would never sell any Summicrons. I don't know the lens you are referring to but if it is half the price then you can bet it is half the quality. These are Germans we are talking about here I disagree with your logic regarding cost. I have 9 Leica lenses three of them are R. They are all good. I also have some ZM and Konica M lenses and they are also very compitent. Despite the fact that some non Leica lenses are also first rate,they,for whatever reason,do not get enough appraisal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted November 24, 2016 Share #93 Posted November 24, 2016 kenneth's post is 17 year old. His impression might be different today if his information included some of the horror stories of QC failure on a few Leica lenses in the past 17 years. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 25, 2016 Share #94 Posted November 25, 2016 kenneth's post is 17 year old. [...] My memory seems to be going... Did we post really 17 years ago? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted November 25, 2016 Share #95 Posted November 25, 2016 kenneth's post is 17 year old. Well, 7 years, but still old by gear standards. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 26, 2016 Share #96 Posted November 26, 2016 Given that Kenneth hasn't been active on the forum for over two years, I rather doubt that he will see the response to his post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelwj Posted November 26, 2016 Share #97 Posted November 26, 2016 Maybe we need a warning when you quote an old post: "This post is over 5 years old, are you SURE you want to reply?" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
orc999 Posted December 17, 2016 Share #98 Posted December 17, 2016 I had zm 50 planar and summicron 50 v4. The summicron is sharper in the center at f2, but looses outside the center, where the planar ist better. Flare resistance goes to the Zeiss, the summicron flares terrible even without hood. As for the rendering I can show photos from 2 shootings, sadly not same light conditions: Zeiss 50 planar, I think this one shows typical zeiss zm rendering very well: http://www.valentino-photography.com/elle-cactus-on-koh-larn-island/ Summicron v4, in low light. http://www.valentino-photography.com/helen-on-street/ currently I own the 50 planar and the 75 cron apo. the ZM seems to show less depth in skin and looses a bit in the tones against the apo, compared to each other. A model might prefer the zm, I feel like its almost looks like the skin has been smoothed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.