Now the lens.....

<p>Some of you would like to know the continuing saga of my "new

image" hunt.

<P>For those who missed my previous post, let's say I am fascinated

by the old black and white fuzzy '30 -'40 style of image. I think

they have a charm of their own, unlike what sharp lenses we have

today and digital manipulation for the ultimate oversharpening ! So

I am turing to the older style of picture taking and see if I can

recreat images made during that era.

<P>I have bought a Bessa R through a forum member for $200. That's

the easy part, especially with your guys hundred of opinions. So

here comes the hard part : What lens(es)? A few hundred dollars is

what I want to spend. Old lens(es) are fine if they are not damaged.

If you try to persuade me to go with a particular one, uploading an

image (don't cheat!) would be most convicing.

<P>There are just too many to choose from, much more than bodies

(Whos? :-)) So let's get started, will you/us?

Not 30's or 40's, but 50's. My favorite period ...<div></div>

Early Sixties Softness ...<div></div>

Woops ... sorry, you said black and white, didn't you? Converted, those ones above would glow. Here's an early sixties black and white from a lens famed for softness ...<div></div>

<i>Frederick Muller , mar 30, 2006; 07:27 p.m.</i>

<p>Frederick,

<P>Now that's a beaut...

I was looking to go in a similar direction, and I decided on a 1957 Summarit, scratched and

pock-marked. Wide open at f/1.5 <P><img src="http://

www.stuartrichardson.com/summarit-bokeh.jpg"><P>A slight crop at around f/5.6 or

so<P><img src="http://www.stuartrichardson.com/the-stroll.jpg">

If I am not mistaken, the lady is of a much earlier vintage, but exhibits similar wear.

I've never owned a Summarit, but I have seen many pictures taken with that lens, and frankly, I haven't seen one yet I didn't like. It seems to be more than sharp enough when it counts, yet has a nice glow about it too.

 

Actually, It may be that apart from the period of the lens, it may be the lens type as well. It seems that prior to the late sixties, Sonnar designs were more popular. Without doing a major comparative study, I wouldn't be surprised if it was the Sonnar designs, or perhaps non-Planar designs that are more likely to produce those early lens qualities we like ...

The photograph of the loom above was done with a Canon Model 7 and a Canon 50mm f0.95, shot at about f4 or f5.6.

I've only used 2 of the older lenses, the 35mm 2.8 Summaron and the Summitar. I like the

Summitar a lot, for its beautiful midtones.

 

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4236405-lg.jpg"></center>

<center>Repost of Summitar image</center>

Mid-1930s<div></div>

Not sure if this may be the type of thing. Taken on a Summar lens that looks as though it

may have got water on the inside elements and been cleaned with wire wool. Decided to try it

out last week and quite like the effect. May try again if the right subject turns up. Have had it

for years but wrote it off as useless!<div></div>

Sandy

 

Why not just pick up an old Voigtander Bessa (a real one) with a colour scopar, or a prominent TLR.

 

I've worked with a few small format negs from the 1930s and 40s period (mainly Kodak XX pan) and I think a lot of the aesthetic which you describe comes from the grotty think elusions of the older films.

 

C.

<P>Craig,

I am quite sure what you said is true, but Bill C who posted above you is able to demonstrate that we can emulate the effect, not to a 100%, but somewhat close, something easy for the eye, don't you think? I think most photographies today are too tense or too dense.<p>Bill, Don't throw away that lens. If you do, I will buy it from you, how's that?

stuart.

 

that is a masterpiece of bokeh. wow!

I think that I'm going to start shooting with my Voigtlander Vito CL, a 1960 vintage camera with a 50/2.8 Color-Skopar. The lens is clean, all the shutter speeds and self-timer work, and even the coupled selenium meter functions correctly.

sandy, if you decide on a summarit i have a nice one i am planning on selling. contact me if interested.

<p><em>The photograph of the loom above was done with a Canon Model 7 and a Canon 50mm f0.95, shot at about f4 or f5.6.</em></p><p>That may be an excellent lens, but it won't fit on a Bessa R.</p>

Wanna bet? Just wait till I put the mounting flange of a Model 7 on my Bessa R. It'll take all the Leica threads AND the special bayonet too.

<p>Hey, silly me, I just found out I have a Summarit 50 f/1.5 B-mount. What do you think of the lens? I don't have a lens hood for that. I think it is hard to find.

You lucky duck ... I think the Summarit is a GREAT lens.

You're got it all wrong.

Get a Hassy SWC and let it wear some heavy nylon stockings on its Biogon.

Yaron, the thought of a muscular Hassy in drag is just too much.

 

Sandy, if you are going to play, do it with a curvy screw mount and the Summarit. :-)

For years I shot with a 50mm collapsible Elmar. I wish I had a scanner to digitize those old negs. My dream lens was a Summicron and I couldn't afford it. Now I've got my Summicrons, but when I look back at the old shots, they were great. Makes you think twice about how far lens technology has or hasn't come!

But Fred, tack sharp pictures everybody can have. Even with a lousy camera, one can always sharpen it/them with some software until it turns ugly. But naturally dreamy pictures, they are ours, they are in our mind, in our heads - thus dreamy is more appealing. Bad analogy but what the hack - It's your first date turn girlfriend, she's better than any one else. Of course I am referring to those innocent days when we don't have to worry about making a living or fighting with the neighbor's dog. We just want to fall in love and the whole world is beautiful, like a dream....

 

I never envy about what other people have or what I don't have (I lied) but what I really do admire is other people's talent, and I am not born with any, and can't be learned, so there my friend.