wide aperture shots outdoors

Seeing some of the Noctalux shots taken outside posted here got me interested in trying wide open aperture shots outside. I tried some with the fastest lens I own, an old Zeiss 50mm f1.5 Sonnar.<a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/380562&size=lgURL">f1.5 outside</a>

What do you think of that wild bokeh-it feels to me that the backround is actually in motion. I would probably never thought to use 1/1250 second at f1.5 outside for a portrait if not for the posting of the Noct shots here. Shows you how you can get stuck taking the same kind of pictures over and over again. Thanks to all the posters here who keep me from stagnating in my image making endeavors.

Very interesting "motion" effect. I like the colors, too. I see some

of the motion effect in some Noct photos, too. Kind of like a "swirl"

action. Weird. Lately I've been using TMX-100 instead of the 400

just so I can open up more in daylight. One of these days I'll try to

get some posted.

The background looks as if it were painted for scenery in a play. I

too have been inspired to try to replicate the shots like those with

the Noct' outdoors in good light. I have been using my Nikon and

50mm f/1.4, (fighting every impulse to buy a Noctilux). I can shoot

wide open on aperture priority and the top speed of 1/8000th of a

second lets me forget about over exposure. This project is making me

consider a Konica Hexar RF, so I can use my Leica lenses wide open at

1/4000th. The look is unique enough to make people wonder what you

did, especially people that are using those f-slow to f-slower

variable aperture zooms where everything is perpetually hyper-

focused.

<p>

Incase some of you didn't see the origonal post with the Noctilux

photos, they are at:

<p>

<a href="http://www.shinozuka-family.com/f1">noct' shots</a>

<p>

and:

<p>

<a href="http://www.shinozuka-family.com/bokars/">more noct'

shots</a>

Andrew,

What film were you using?

Using a filter to block excessive light at f/1 is a good idea. I'm

simply amazed at those shots on the Shinozuka site, particularly the

ones at the beach. Al, if that's not enough to entise you into buying

a Noctilux, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS!!!!! :-)

I used what would have been a very high speed film for that 1950's

vintage lens, "ASA" 100 speed Fuji Superia. In indirect lighting,

f1.5 and 1/1250 top speed was just about right on the exposure. I

wish they still made some 25 speed negative film.

Andrew:

<p>

I think this is what bokeh afficionados call 'bad bokeh'! :-)

"This project is making me consider a Konica Hexar RF, so I can use my

Leica lenses wide open at 1/4000th."

<p>

Good thinking. Even though I've finally sold the RF, this was

definitely one of its strong features. Fortunately, from the point of

view of using f/1 outdoors, there is also the option of 2x/4x neutral

density filters - cheaper and easier to focus 8^)

I like the shot & its bokeh, but I'm a big fan of Zeiss glass (the

f/1.5 Sonnar is a particular favorite--I have 5 examples, pre &

post-WWII) & the shallow depth of field look (particularly for

portraits & street photography).

I like the effect as well. Shows you that good and bad can be in the

eye of the beholder. The Noctalux shots wide open look very strange

as well, and I could see how someone would think it was bad bokeh.

I think that's outstanding bokeh, Andrew, Renoir smooth and creamy.

Boy do I love 1.5 sonnars! Alas my eyes can no longer handle the

squinty Contax range/viewfinder -anybody know what it would cost to

adapt one of these beauties for an M3? I know some were made in LTM

but I've never run across one for sale.......

Al, how are the experiments with the 1.4 Nikkor working out? Just

another Nikon lens would be so much easier to slide past She Who Must

Be Obeyed...........

Al,

Now you have tempted us with a Noctilux or to "break ranks" and use a

Hexar for its extra speed. Seriously, it does teach the merit of a bit

of lateral thinking. Those are wonderful shots. Thanks for posting

them.

I'm interested in the tech talk on this forum, but seeing images and

being stimulated by the technical and composition techniques of others

is particularly welcome from my point of view.

David, the E. German Carl Zeiss Jena 50/1.5 Sonnars (w/ "T

Coating") in LTM do appear on eBay now & then, I think in the

$300+ range. I've also seen a pre-WWII CZJ 50/1.5 in LTM but

can't remember what it went for. Another, more expensive but

also more versatile, alternative is to go to Japan & get a new

Contax RF-to-LTM adapter for about $800 (see Stephen Gandy's

overview of these adapters, old & new, @

www.cameraquest.com/adapter.htm)--then you can also mount

your 85/2 & 135/4 Sonnars on your M3!

David,

<p>

Regarding the Nikon with 50mm, the results are mixed. I went to Salt

Lake City, where I use to live and took advantage of some life sized

statuary near Temple Square. There are many life sized statues of

couples, children playing with their mother in a circle, and very

diverse backgrounds of varying distances. These allowed me to really

play around with no fear of boring anyone standing there posing. The

statues are very accurate, so I had to work to avoid the normal

things like eye socket shadows. The light was pure sunny-16, with

that great contrast of a high altitude setting. The results...

<p>

Yes, I can get that great selective focus with the normal

perspective. Yes, the images are very sharp right on the focus

plane. But... as much as I hate to talk of things that can't be

quantified, the background just is not as good as those with the

Noctilux. It is very harsh. Specular highlights in the background

draw the eye, as apposed to the smooth look with the Leica lens. I

would use this set up, but I would always know that I am not getting

the best results possible, although if I factor in the money, (I paid

150 Dollars for this manual focus AI Nikon f/1.4), I can't really

complain. Anyone that shoots at f/8 all of the time should just try

this experiment for a mental shift. You really have to plan the

shot, since so little of it is sharp, you must know what is important.

<p>

My next thought is to get the f/1.2 Nikkor, and or the Konica and use

my Summicron at f/2.0. I really am adverse to ND filters, (justified

or not, but I don't even use UV filters on any of my lenses), so I'd

rather use the faster shutterspeed to allow the use of the wide

aperture. My biggest fear is that I'll spend more than the price of

the Noctilux, trying to determine if I can live without it, and then

end up buying it later anyway.

<p>

David, I don't have a scanner or website, but if you are interested,

I would be glad to send you a few slides in the mail if you would

want to look at them to see the potential of the f/1.4. Just e-mail

me if you would like to see them.

Well, Andrew, I feel a bit of a heretic, but I am not sure I really

like the bokeh of the Sonnar - certainly it does not seem to compare

with the Noctilux, or a good current 'cron or 'lux. It is difficult to

compare directly with the Noct. images that Al has referred us to, as

they are black and white, but they, to my eyes, do have beautiful

bokeh, whereas the Sonnar is not particularly pleasing to me. It has a

"look" alright: but I am not sure I like it.

These wide open shots are really great. Something zooms are not

capable of - another reason to stay in the zoom-free rangefinder

world ;-).

To those who like to 'try' the zeiss sonnars: Look out for those

Jupiter-3 LTM - lenses, especially from the 50s and early 60s. These

are an exact copy made on the same machines (the very first even out

of the original parts) as the Sonnar 1.5/50. These usually are quite

cheaper, somewhere around the US$ 70 range, the sonnar 2/50 copies

(Jupiter-8) are even cheaper. And wide open both are really nice ...

<p>

Kai

I got from my experiments that all of normal lenses having the

triplet design (whether simple or complex one) produce almost a

similar bokeh, which differs from a bokeh producing with a normal

lens of Hauss-type design. For example, an Elmar, Tessar, Triotar,

Meyer-Primarplan, Sonnar f2.0&f1.5 make double-image and uneven

(harsh or �in rags�) bokeh, while a bokeh of Summar, Summitar,

Summarit, Leitz-Xenon (all are low-contrast wide open), and CZ

Biotar, SK Xenon, pre-asph Summicron/�lux is more pleasant, so as a

background images are looking more even washed out in both

directions: vertically and horizontally and no double images. A bokeh

depends on a speed of a lens too of course, but a lens design is more

important for an �bokeh� image�. It�s my subjective conclusion, of

course. However BTW, the triplet design lens has a strong difference

between sagittal and tangential values of frequency-contrast

characteristics, but these ones of the Hauss-type design lens are

almost equal. That�s why a Planar 3.5/75 is better than a Tessar

3.5/75 in all respects. But sorry, it�s for other forum.

Andrew, and all;

<p>

Yesterday I went to the movies, the film: "Luzhin strategy", I

actualy don´t know the title in english, but is the closest

traslation to what it is in spanish; well it is a great film, and if

you can see it, there is a scene when she goes into a lake on a boat,

and in a couple of times she is photographed with a small tele and

the ligthing of the hotel at nigth to her back, and this lens is for

certain wide open; beautiful couple of seconds, and you can see it

twice.