The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Lenses with that Special Character

irakly

New member
lens signature does not add to the image automatically. it's what you make of it.

Looking at the three sample images purely from a "character " viewpoint, the hektor seems to have an unusual and distinctive bokeh. The flower image shows it best ....the background has a soft ..almost smudged look . With a pastel background with some highlights ..this adds to the image IMHO . By selecting a rose colored flower ..the soft glow (which would generally be viewed as a weakness in a modern optic) gives an attractive rendering. In the two B+W images ..the "character" is less apparent. In image one ...Reflection...there is very little tone separation ...this does make it look somewhat timeless.. The unique signature isn t as apparent. In the portrait ...this is what I see ...sharpness limited to the eyes ? limited tone separation ? bokeh doesn t add anything? From the examples ...I see a real value using the lens in color but much less so in BW. This is not a critique of the images as I know they were offered up as examples of the "signiture" ....what I am questioning is "how does the signiture add to the image"?
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
lens signature does not add to the image automatically. it's what you make of it.
agree 100%..what I was trying to say is that the two BW don t seem to showcase the potential of the signiture. The picture of the flower seems to use the signiture to an advantage using the unusual bokeh to compliment the flower and the overall softness to let the colors dominate. Am I missing something as I am assuming that the intended use of the images was to showcase the signiture. Sorry if I am assuming too much .
 

cmb_

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I think the black and whites show off a nice feature of some of the older designs - the low contrast. This coupled with the "overall softness" and the transition from the sharpness plane to the unsharpness blur is what I find compelling about some of the older designs. I particularly like the rendering of images even when the highlights are blown. I noticed this immediately with my 5cm 1.5 Summarit. Even when you add contrast in post the images can still retain a nice feel to them. In Irakly's first image, the whites in the top right third of the image have a softness I find appealing, same with the highlights on the left side of the woman in his second image. Same thing is happening in Jack's image to some extent.
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
I think the black and whites show off a nice feature of some of the older designs - the low contrast. This coupled with the "overall softness" and the transition from the sharpness plane to the unsharpness blur is what I find compelling about some of the older designs. I particularly like the rendering of images even when the highlights are blown. I noticed this immediately with my 5cm 1.5 Summarit. Even when you add contrast in post the images can still retain a nice feel to them. In Irakly's first image, the whites in the top right third of the image have a softness I find appealing, same with the highlights on the left side of the woman in his second image. Same thing is happening in Jack's image to some extent.
Thanks for pointing this out as it wasn t obvious to me and I am interested in learning. When I started this thread I was thinking about the way a Noctilux renders and how useful it is in certain situations. The smooth out of focus areas , the lower contrast that opens the shadows and the "glow" from the highlights. So I had a preconceived viewpoint on whats special and now I know a little more. Softness and low contrast alone are not enough for me ...I still look for sufficient microcontrast to separate the tones and I think the examples all show the limitations of the lens. But thats what its all about ... selecting lenses that provide the special character that compliments your photographs. .......UPDATE ON THE PREASPH LUX.....what a great all around lens for street shooting..almost a dial in the look you want....I found it especially useful in high contrast evening light...I can adjust the amount of contrast by just selecting 1.4 low, 2.8 med and 5.6 high. Thanks to all that pushed me to try it.
 

cmb_

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Roger - I'm just learning and this is just some of my very inexperienced observations.

My update on the 50 pre-asph - I bought the chrome one from Rangefinderforum, the one you passed on. Ditto what you say, what a great lens. I am just heading out for a walk with that mounted and one other lens along for the ride.
 

Chuck Jones

Subscriber Member
Real easy answer to that problem. Take the IR cut filter OFF! I hardly ever use the things anyway, and only under artificial lights which I try to avoid to start with!


lovely shot! i love it when a skill and equipment match :)

oh, i love 21 SA! could you tell me how to deal with cyan offset? i cannot get rid of that bloody thing when the IR-cut filter is on.
 

irakly

New member
Real easy answer to that problem. Take the IR cut filter OFF! I hardly ever use the things anyway, and only under artificial lights which I try to avoid to start with!
i used my m8 without IR filters for two months. no, i am not taking it off :)
 

irakly

New member
Thank you Cindy! All my previous attempts to use it failed because I was to lazy to read that I actually needed a gray card to create profiles. I'll give it another try.
Also, LIghtroom 2.0 supports plugins. Have you thought of making it LR compatible?
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Looking at the three sample images purely from a "character " viewpoint, the hektor seems to have an unusual and distinctive bokeh. The flower image shows it best ....the background has a soft ..almost smudged look . With a pastel background with some highlights ..this adds to the image IMHO . By selecting a rose colored flower ..the soft glow (which would generally be viewed as a weakness in a modern optic) gives an attractive rendering. In the two B+W images ..the "character" is less apparent. In image one ...Reflection...there is very little tone separation ...this does make it look somewhat timeless.. The unique signature isn t as apparent. In the portrait ...this is what I see ...sharpness limited to the eyes ? limited tone separation ? bokeh doesn t add anything? From the examples ...I see a real value using the lens in color but much less so in BW. This is not a critique of the images as I know they were offered up as examples of the "signiture" ....what I am questioning is "how does the signiture add to the image"?
Roger:

My .02 is that on the second B&W portrait image of Irakly's for example, while the bokeh in that particular shot doesn't appear to help it, it definitely doesn't hinder it --- and unfortunately we don't know what a modern 75 would have done unless Irakly shot the same shot twice...

My experience however, is the combination of oof rendering AND residual aberration "glow" all but feathers the distractions out. To my view, that is the perhaps the singular characteristic of this lens and why I treasure it.

Cheers,
 

irakly

New member
have you had enough time to figure out if this is what you thought it was? are you pleased?
i cannot say for sure yet. need to shoot more with it. this is definitely a lens with a special character, and it will take more than a couple of quick snaps to learn how to capitalize on its special qualities.
 

Jeremy

New member
Thought I'd throw a couple of shots out there:





These are wide open with the Pentax 31mm f/1.8 Limited.
 

cam

Active member
i cannot say for sure yet. need to shoot more with it. this is definitely a lens with a special character, and it will take more than a couple of quick snaps to learn how to capitalize on its special qualities.
thank you, irakly. i can already tell that it is special.

and that Jack is totally smitten :p

as to glenerrolrd's comment that it does not work for b/w, i heartily disagree. Jack's image transfers beautifully to b/w and irakly's showed other nuances of the lens. sharpness is not the be all and end all to me. i want character, i want glow, i want all the things that people say are utter bull when you talk about the specialness of older lenses... call me fey, but i believe in the magic of lenses. it's up to the photographer to make other believe as well.
 

helenhill

Senior Member
Okay thought I would put this shot up
My first shot w/the summitar 50 1.5
Charles 's work had inspired me
so i traded my 50 Elmar 3.5 and abit of dough
Do love my first shot w/it ...:bugeyes:
trippy, eh :ROTFL:

(but think I'm really a Zeiss gal at heart /lusting for the Zeiss IIKON /Film)
 

Jeremy

New member
i want all the things that people say are utter bull when you talk about the specialness of older lenses... call me fey, but i believe in the magic of lenses. it's up to the photographer to make other believe as well.
I know the feeling; I've got some old glass for the large format I just love.

 

Cindy Flood

Super Moderator
Helen,
Did you mean Summarit f/1.5? Summitar is an f/2 lens, I believe.
Congratulations on the new lens.:thumbup:
 

cam

Active member
I know the feeling; I've got some old glass for the large format I just love.
ooh, Jeremy. that lens is just exquisite! she's wearing blur like a an elegant shawl which one?

and Helen, dreamy city shot! love the zircles!

on a side note, i've completely missed your change over to Zeiss. which lenses do you have???

btw, would people please stop bidding up that Hektor? it's mine!!!
 
Last edited:
Top