Lens to sharp

I purchased an M6 and 50m Summicron 6 months ago.

 

In many respects I'm delighted with the results, but to be honest,

the pictures are just too sharp and I don't like them. I shoot only

black and white, and the impressionistic quality of the b&w medium

seems destroyed by the hyper-real clarity of this lens.

 

What should I do?

 

Would a different, older lens, make a difference?

 

Many thanks

You can of course put oil on the lens surface or something else, but moneywise an old (unclean) Summar with adaptor might be the better choice if you prefer an old, dreamy, fuzzy and flairy look. You may also look out for one of the cheap russian lenses like the industar 61 or the Jupiter-8 (though this might be a good one) and try the oil trick. Or try and focus on something else the the thing you want to have sharp ;-)

James,

 

Its true (at least for me) that a lens' technical performance is not the only thing to look for in deciding if its for you. I've ALWAYS bought used and have given the lens a try before purchasing. The only way to know is to give a lens a reasonable try with subject matter that you regularly work with or at least close to what you work with. I know this can be a touchy scenario for many shops, but if you have a good relationship with a shop and something to put down as security, often times they wont deny you this opportuntiy...thats the way it has worked for me. I love the characteristics of my older generation M lenses, others might not...I also love my new 24mm (again bought used and given a test run). I understand what you are saying as a couple years back I had a chance to compare results between my 1961 Rollei-wide TLR (55mm Zeiss Distagon) and my friend's newest version of the Zeiss 50mm Distagon...It was an amazing lens,incredibly sharp, but it just wasnt for me. I liked the characteristics of my older lens better for what I do with it. I have to say though that my 1970's 50mm Summicron is pretty damn sharp and cant imagine needing anything more, except maybe an extra stop now and then, but this is very much the exception for me, and hasnt been an issue enough to unload it. I'm sure you might get some heat on this item as some flks might think this heresy...I do get what your saying though.

 

Larry.

For those occassional portraits, just swipe a pair of old pany hose from

(?)...and cut a piece to stretch over the lens using a rubber band to hold it.

If that is to much softness, look into a Zeiss Softar 1 filter. Both are a lot

less expensive than buying another lens.

Marc's idea is a good one. It will work for B & W but,if color is needed, try using a thin layer of Vasoline in a UV filter. DON'T, as suggested above, put oil, or anything else, directly on the lens surface.

Get an old Summar or Summitar (both cheap). I have both and for some situations they deliver more pleasing results than the modern 'cron. The older lens are softer with less severe contrast. I don't think you can reproduce the look of the older lens with a filter and vaseline.

Do you process your own film and prints? Have you tried XP-2?

Years ago, I shot at slower shutter speeds (handheld of course) to achieve a bit of the "look" that you seem to be striving for. It worked beautifully with color slides, so I would imagine you could achieve similar results with B&W.

 

You might also try a film with a very broad range of tonality, like Agfapan. I'd definitely stay away from ultrasharp films like TMax and Ilford Delta.

Troll!

I second Marc's recommendation of the nylon trick. It gives a more 'organic' look to my eyes than the clinically smooth diffusion you get with the softar and its clones. For a more pronounced effect, you can borrow a cinema trick and put the nylons over the rear element. The coarser the weave, the greater the effect. Very handy when shooting Robert Redford and a ProMist 10 isn't in your bag!

Or maybe try a Noctilux.

Perhaps something as simple as shooting with a wider aperture and reducing your DOF will help. It will certainly soften your backgrounds or foregrounds, as the case may be.

A Summar will cost about $50 (you'll obviously need an LTM to M adapter). A clean one can be fearsomely sharp (don't worry, they still flare like hell), but most aren't very clean at all.<p>To reduce the flare problem, try and track down a SOOMP hood, but this will probably cost as much as the lens - they're not all that common.

Nylons work GREAT over the lens. So does a piece of fabric called Tule (sp?). It's the stuff that bridal veils are made of and can had for virtually nothing at a fabric store.

 

Whatever you decide, try to get the item in black as the lighter colored fabric will sometimes give you weird "flarey" relics on your negs and is less noticable on a black lens.

 

I use the tule to shoot portraits as I find that often you will make enemies of your models if your lenses render them too sharp. People get SO touchy about a couple of wrinkles!

Scan your images and print them without Unsharp Mask ;>)

Try a Summicron 90mm f2 old version.

By Joe

James. This is probably a job for filters, which allow you to control the type and quantity of effect without having to buy an older lens. There are a number of different types of softening filters, each made in different strengths for differing degrees of softness. I forget exactly what the differences between these filters are, but there are fog filters, diffusion filters, soft effect filters for portraits, and probably other types.

 

Or you can use the nylon trick mentioned about or spread vaseline on the central portion of a UV filter. By using a large aperture and blocking the central rays (which yield the sharpest image), you increase the relative contribution of the peripheral rays and produce softness due to residual spherical aberration (though more so in a less well corrected lens).

James, I forgot to ask if you do your own darkroom work. If you do,

just shoot away normally and use any soft filter under the lens of your

enlarger. I use Cokin 4" plastic filters which I pick up at photoshows for

a song. Or you can smear vaseline on a clear one for neat effects. That

way you have a clean neg to do any number of different effects. I use to

do this with portraits shot with a brutially sharp Hasselblad 180/4 CFi.

I have a wonerfully soft Jupiter 8 f2.0 that I would be willing to trade.

How about a 50mm Summarit? The price is right.

 

Black nylon stocking material: softer image, same contrast.

 

White nylon stocking material: softer image, lower contrast.

 

But why do this to a late-model Summicron if you're never going to want sharp pictures? Better to use an older lens, like the Summarit, and apply the cost difference to a second lens that also has the softness you want. The 90mm Thambar would be a thought (it's designed as a soft-focus lens), but the price has been driven up by collectors--around US $2500. So maybe the older 90mm Summicron, as Joe said.

James,

 

if you want the 'classic' look of B&W pictures like they were produced in the 50s I can recommend the 50 Summicron collapsible (I use one myself for this kind of 'special effect'). Less contrasty and overall a more pleasing rendition than the current 50 Summicron (which I use for color).

 

Carsten

 

http://www.cabophoto.com/

james,

 

i shoot with a '46 nikkor 35 f3.5 ltm. the results are a bit less

contrasty and sharp than the newer glass i use also. i like the

look of this lens for a "snapshot" project i have been doing

modelled on photo albums of the 30's, 40's and 50's. the older

lens gives a nice "feel" to the images. (easy, easy, i didn't say

glow.)

 

i'll try to post an example when my scanner comes next week.

someone remind me.

 

as for putting a piece of material in front of your lens, like a

stocking, you might want to look for a material with some texture

to it. i used this blue mesh like material for a portrait shoot a

while back which gave interesting effects to the background: it

textured the background rather than just diffused it. the main

subject was softend only a touch (mid sized aperture). since the

fabric was blue, it also tainted the colors, especially the blues

and reds, a touch. i wouldn't use a softener on images other

than portraits though, i don't really like how they affect the image.

for a softer feel toa photograph, i would suggest an older lens

and not diffusion.

 

also, check out www.marktucker.com for a photographer using

a, uh, softer lens. (plungercam images) i tried something similar

a while back but it never worked for me like it did for mr. tucker.

his imges are great.

 

-m

I agree that the collapsible Summicron 50mm gives a creamy, off-sharp image in black and white. Just shoot with it wide open, and you'll get the Leica look complete with good bokeh and three-dimensionality. You can stop down if you decide to sharpen up a bit, but you will never get to that almost etched quality that the latest Summicron has.

Hi everyone.

 

Many thanks to everyone who took the time to pass on advice here, which has been excellent, advice that is practical and that I can implement.

 

I would though be interested to see any direct comparisions between, for example, a collapsible summicron and a new one.

 

Again, many thanks for all your assistance!

 

james