Keeping the Balance MFDB Vs 35mm Optics

Here are some samples of the Leica Apo Summicron-R 2.0/180

Son i had this lens for a bit and really liked it. What is the minimum focusing distance? There was some talk on another forum but using this as an alternative to the leica 100mm apo 2.8 macro but i think these two are different beasts.

Son,

Love this lens and it's a good example of just how good it can get with the right optics.

Dr. Kay,
The lens has a minimum focus distance of 1.5 meter (<4.9 feet) marked on the lens. However, it actually can focus even closer than this marking.

David,
I agree that the right optics facilitate the whole process of acquiring high standard of quality.

-Son

Yeah its a great lens but have to say how surprised I am that I am not at all wowed by it after shooting my Rollei. Images have unreal color and lack the pop I am now used to - is it the 1Ds3's fault?

EH21 said:

Yeah its a great lens but have to say how surprised I am that I am not at all wowed by it after shooting my Rollei. Images have unreal color and lack the pop I am now used to - is it the 1Ds3's fault?

Click to expand...

With post processing I think you can get pretty much any look you want from this combo. Also, noticed that these were not converted to sRGB before posting.

David and Son.. I also noticed these are not in sRGB but interestingly even on my calibrated monitors---- the web embedded images are pretty close to what i get when i download the images, which surprised me.

I think there are a few special lenses which can't be replaced by medium format lenses. Here's a sample of a Voigtländer Nokton 35mm f1.2, wide open, courtesy of www.ilktac.com

Lovely wide angle with narrow DOF. MF equivalent would have to be something like a 50mm f1.7.

mark1958 said:

David and Son.. I also noticed these are not in sRGB but interestingly even on my calibrated monitors---- the web embedded images are pretty close to what i get when i download the images, which surprised me.

Click to expand...

Some browsers are ICC compliant. If you are using Firefox 3, it is now properly colour managed.

Been thinking about a 80 1.9 old mamiya lens

Guy, I had the same thought a couple of days ago. I picked up a cheap copy at KEH to give a whirl. I'll be able to snap a few images when the back arrives. Hard to beat the $200 price to try a lens that supposedly performs well.

The thing that is strange is that i do see a difference using firefox and safari. THe safari image looks like it has a tad too much yellow, while the firefox has better skin tones. However, when i open the downloaded image in CS3- calibrated monitor x 2, I get colors that are almost identical to the safari image.

foto-z said:

Some browsers are ICC compliant. If you are using Firefox 3, it is now properly colour managed.

Click to expand...

KurtKamka said:

Guy, I had the same thought a couple of days ago. I picked up a cheap copy at KEH to give a whirl. I'll be able to snap a few images when the back arrives. Hard to beat the $200 price to try a lens that supposedly performs well.

Click to expand...

Yes let me know how it looks

My understanding is that Safari is color managed.

cmb_ said:

My understanding is that Safari is color managed.

Click to expand...

That is true.
Safari will observe a color profile if embedded.
If it is not embedded, it will interpret as sRGB.
-bob

Pham Minh Son said:

The recent medium format digital back fever has caused many members/colleagues/friends to move to a new direction and start to sell off some of their great 35 mm optics (RF and SLR). I feel that sometimes we start something new we forget what we actually already own. I believe it is great that we should try new frontier to expand our experiences and as one of my friend (Woody) would say, knowledge + experience = wisdom. However, I feel a balance is needed in our juggling of gears in the transitioning process to a new format.

Personally from my own experiences I find that some of the best optics belong to the 35 mm format systems. The medium format offers us a different looks with less spatial compression and it also has some really great optics. I hope this thread will find you all well.

Best Regards,
-Son

Click to expand...

HI Son
Lovely portraits.
It seemed to me that you were saying that one shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. That the rushed sale of 35mm equipment to move to MF is just that . . . rushed.

I've bought enough equipment twice to know exactly what you're saying. MF has real benefits and a different look and feel, but other systems have real benefits as well.

Nobody else seems to have picked up on your point, they've simply agreed that the lens produces lovely results.

Oh Well.

Jono, I completely understand (and I'm certain that most others also get the point). The entry ticket for admission to MF can be steep.

If I had access to unlimited funds, there would be quite a few lenses that would still be in my possession. It has certainly been very painful to let them go (Leica 180/2R; 80/1.4R; Noctilux; 75luxM; Nikon 24-70; Nikon Noct to name a few.) But, personally I like trying different optics and systems to understand them. I also like to see what works best for me in personal work style, etc. I'll repurchase a few lenses down the line when I have the funds. But for now, I try to remain detached as I explore a few of the alternatives out there.

Kurt

I am struggling with some of this stuff, but I think I am being sensible as does almost everyone.
All the Nikon dx lenses have gone,
I am selling some older Nikon lenses I really don't use, such as the 35-105

As for the Leica stuff I note that I have very little space in the lens cabinet and a degree of focal length redundancy some of which I want to hold on to.
Bit I am inclined to drop bits I have no real fondness for such as the 90-APO ASPH since I like the 90-pre better and I may pick up a 90 summarit to take its place in my travel kit.
The WATE is also possibly on my cut list only because I can't seem to pat my head and rub my tummy without getting confused. It is a handy lens but a bit too
The 35 lux is off to DAG for its "last chance" to see if it can be salvaged for M8 work.
Anyway, I have some lenses that WILL NOT be on the block such as the 28/2, the 50/1,4-pre the 90/2-pre and the 12/2.8
I haven't made up my mind on the 24. I really like it, but somehow it doesn't get to go out much.

The 50/2.5 is small and a great IR performer so it is a keeper
The CV12 is in, maybe the CV15 is out, and the CV75/2.5 will probably sell since it is redundant to the 75/2APO.
So it is not that I am in a rush to sell off ALL my 35 gear, just shifting the Nikon side to FX and on the Leica side just trying to rationalize what I have got.
-bob

Well, I am trying to be a little practical in the migration to MF with my other gear.

My M8 & M7 are both staying as I really love the camera for its size, file quality, and works great for personal or event work. The M8 gets all the color work and the M7 gets fun personal stuff with Acros 100 and the new TMax 400. However, on the lens side a lot of pairing down did occur. I'm only keeping the 28 Cron ASPH, 35 Cron ASHP, 50 Lux ASPH, and 90 Elmarit. These four are the ones which got the lions share of the all the photos. The mix depended on the subject and camera (film or 1.3 crop).

The Nikon system did take a complete hit in bodies, Nikon glass, and Zeiss glass. The Nikon is what I actually brought to Puerto Rico, which should have probably been the M8 in its place (but live and learn). The Nikon was a really great system, but I needed more for product photography and Nascar event work (the race work is garage, pits, drivers, and set-up stills, not the telephoto track stuff). Based on what I really needed for a second camera system, MF just does meet my needs better. Being surprised by a a crop that gets blown up into a two page center of a magazine or a banner, just didn't work with the Nikon files. The other advantage is that MF gets me a better rate for the photos and appears that it will get me more work. (On the personal side, I just love the MFDB results from many aspects and it makes me happier when I do photography.) Isn't that a big part of why we do this.

I completely understand the original direction of this thread, and hope that I truly went in a direction that works for me without having given up something that I will want back.

My advantage in the M system has been that I have owned or been loaned every Leica or Zeiss lens that is recent and kept what I like and use. I had the same opportunity with the Nikon system and built up what was a great system for my use, until the MF bug bit me and showed me what difference in quality was really available.

My MF decision was also based on use of the Phase/Mamiya & Hassy systems (cameras/lenses) prior to purchase. Currently, I'm going to limit the MF system to a 45-55/50 depending on system, an 80 (plus small extension tube), and a 150.

Now, I'm acquiring all the little pieces such as quick release plates, cable releases, flash adaptors, etc...

I am also going to try these focus / DOF programs to see if they can meet my needs vs. going the full view camera route.

Best,

Ray