I'm all Eyes- Let's see how Lens Signature affects Photographs

[fotografz]

Ahh, back from the Dentist where the root canal was more fun than the Leica Forum.

 

Agreement: yes it's the photographer most of all. Don't know if I'd quantify gear

contribution at 5% or whatever, depends on what you're trying to accomplish.

 

However, information about lens characteristics (like Doug provides on his web site) has

been invaluable to many folks when making decisions to achieve a certain look or feel.

 

Like Peter A, I favor very fast lenses, very few of which are inexpensive IF they perform

really well wide open. Nothing to do with elitism, just needed for the way I like to shoot

wedding photography ... capturing ambient backgrounds instead of a wall of black so

common with older style wedding work.

 

Now I sure the Hell am not going to go out and shoot some subject with different glass to

meet Ray's demands... or anyone else's. I have all the free work I can handle.

 

But can share a few observations based on actually shooting:

 

Canon wide angle lenses feature pronounced barrel distortion compared to Leica or

Contax lenses of the same focal length. The Canon glass presents a problem when

shooting a church interior, producing bowlegged columns. Not a problem when using a

Zeiss 25/2.8 or 28/2 Distogon on the same camera.

 

My Canon 50/1.4 had nicer Bokeh than my Zeiss/Contax 50/1.4N ... but the Zeiss was

sharper wide open. The R 35/1.4 has a more pleasant Bokeh in front & back than my

Canon 35/1.4

 

My older R80/1.4 had a pleasing sort of glow to it compared to my R90/2APO ... so each

could be used for different applications if someone owned both. Attached portrait of

Grosse Pointe matrons for a fund raiser was better suited to the pleasant characteristics of

the 80 than the flawlessly sharp 90 would be ... a creative decision involving glass used.

 

And so on and so on. There are myriad examples of different lens characteristics and

"signatures" from lenses of the same focal length that could be cited.<div></div>

[fotografz]

Here's a portrait using Zeiss glass so sharp it requires a Softar to tame it for portrait work of

anyone over 10 years old. I deliberately used it straight for this shot to convey strength and

character of this specific person.<div></div>

[fotografz]

This one is from a Zeiss 85/1.2 which exhibits crisper contrast and more vivid color

saturation that the Leica R/80/1.4 but not as crisp and vivid as the R90/2.<div></div>

[EricM]

"Canon wide angle lenses feature pronounced barrel distortion compared to Leica or Contax lenses of the same focal length."

 

Marc, you forgot Nikon, for some reason...

 

David, how big was the "Afghan Girl" print? I'd like to see that one too. And the current portrait of her as well.

[fotografz]

Lastly, here's an example of a Canon 24/1.4L demonstrating the barrel distortion I find

unacceptable for certain shots. If I know I'll be facing such shots, I bring along the tiny Zeiss

25/2.8 with a EOS adapter. At the time, this specific shot is what prompted me to get the 25

for future work.<div></div>

[doug herr]

"<I>Zeiss 350/4</I>"

<P>

Marc, is this a 645 lens?

[david k.]

Eric, 11x14 min. 16x20 max., probable close to life size.

 

Part of the Magnum Exhibition in Toronto.

[kevin m.]

BTW, the barrel distortion of the 24 f1.4L is evident even when cropped on an APS-C sensor

like the 20D. "L" lens or no, it's not equal to Leica glass even when used as a "38mm" lens.

[al_kaplan1]

Marc, it's like talking to the lamp post. These people don't see it and they never will. Why they come here to troll the Leica Forum is the big mystery. But they do, and we just have to live with it.

[kevin m.]

"Marc is a perfect example of the typical consumer."

 

...and you seem a perfect example of the typical internet troll.

 

Back under your bridge now!

[EricM]

David, I wish the village of Vancouver had decent shows...demographics too small i suppose.

[doug herr]

<I>"Vivid color saturation has more to do with film choice or photoshop these days then any lens ever will" </I><P>

 

Color saturation is much more than being vivid. It's also a matter of vivid along with gradation. It's true that high-saturation film or Photoshop controls can make dull colors bright but this will not do anything for color gradation. My experience is that when you rely on film or photoshop instead of the lens for color saturation you're not going to get smooth color gradation along with your vivid colors.

[david k.]

Eric, every year in TO, there is the Contact show that typically has over 100 different exhibits all over the city. It is for the whole month of May, and is well worth a look if your ever in town.

[doug herr]

Dave, very true. Information gets lost at each step of the process, so for the best results it's best to start with as much quality as possible. Photoshop can only interpolate image detail, and neither film nor photoshop can correctly interpolate color saturation without making the picture look fake. If your lens delivers the full range of colors to the film or sensor the steps inbetween full gray and full saturation are going to be there as well. If you rely on film or photoshop to reach full saturation you're going to get gaps in your histograms indicating poor gradation.

[ray .]

Kevin, think that $1600 lens you're selling is going to make a

rat's ass bit of difference from a $300 VC lens for 95% of what's

posted on this forum?

[david k.]

Ray, you've just got to get out more, there's a whole world out there that isn't limited to 511 pixels.

[akochanowski]

Great round of shots.

 

I'm staying out of this, as it's a pointless argument, but having met Marc and seen what he can do, I certainly defer to his experience with these lenses.

 

Marc, BTW, I ended up with an M7 with a 35/2 ASPH, and though it may pain Brad and my buddy Ray to hear this, it IS a fantastic lens opened or stopped down. And no, it doesn't make a hill of beans difference in my shooting, I just like it.

[terry_rory]

With a few exceptions this has been a very good discussion. I hope it continues. If Marc is a 'typical consumer' then I am the Duke of Edinburgh!

 

Ray, Marc, Eric, Brad and Douglas are some of our 'heavyweight' image makers with enough collective skill and experience across diverse subject matter (portraits, weddings, nature, wildlife, street ) to make me want to bookmark this thread. Most of these guys earn a living from photography, exhibit and publish so they are worth learning from. None of them are 'typical consumers'. (If anything I am the typical consumer in this crowd.)

[terry_rory]

I only wish PN could prevail upon some of these guys to publish some PN 'masterclasses' for us all. If their 'differences' could be dropped for long enough to co-operate on such a project. (And I don't mean for the Leica forum, I mean for everyone.)

[kevin m.]

All hostility aside for a moment Ray, no, it wouldn't. That's why I'm selling it, BTW. Since I'm

using that focal length primarily as a "snapshot" lens, it's freedom from distortion, absence of

chromatic abberation and nearly perfect resistance to flare don't mean that much to me. So

it's not worth the extra money over and above a VC lens. I'm perfectly willing to admit,

however, that those traits might be JUST what another photographer needs if he or she has

the skills to match.

[vivek iyer]

It does not matter if someone is the Queen of England or whatever, if he/she is not capable of expressing her/his thoughts clearly and in a civilised manner they become featherweights and out they go in to the trash bin.

 

On topic:

 

Is the overwhelming majority here (heavy weight or otherwise) claiming that all the high priced Leica gear is just crap and VC or Pentax or Sigma gear is better suited for the majority of the folks here? And should we do away with films also?

[fotografz]

Doug, yes that was with the 350/4 for the 645. I've pared down a lot of gear and

unfortunately, that lens went with the entire Contax 645 kit and Kodak digital back. Like

Peter A., I'm zeroing in on having less stuff and going for a 22 meg digital back on a

Hasselblad. Purely a business decision.

 

I also agree with you about the color gradations. Good observation and way of describing

it. Gets more evident when you take a shot up bigger or severely crop. Color fringing on

less corrected lenses really starts becoming apparent then also.

 

Don't worry Al. If the only outlet some folks have is the web and tiny compressed jpegs,

and they use that to evaluate image quality, then it's like discussing radio waves with an

isolated Bushman. Last year I sold over 1500 8"X10" prints, and about 150 11"X14"s. I

sold zero 500 pixel web images. None. You do the math.

[steve_swinehart]

Nice portrait Marc. I know what you mean about the Zeiss glass for portraits. I solved the problem by getting a 120mm Imagon. Now, there's a piece of glass that can make difference that can be easily seen when compared to a 120mm Makro Planar...

[Brad_]

<I>I ended up with an M7 with a 35/2 ASPH, and though it may pain Brad and my buddy

Ray to hear this, it IS a fantastic lens opened or stopped down. And no, it doesn't make a

hill of beans difference in my shooting,</I><P>

 

Hey Andy, doesn't pain me at all. The point Ray is trying to make, and which I and a few

others agree, is that small nuances in lens rendition don't drive the strength of a photo for

the average shooter here. BTW, your stuff is super - you're far from the average shooter,

so if it makes no difference to you... And it makes no difference to me. Dave Mirra nailed

it - quality of light and other factors drive the end end result more than anything

else.<BR><P>

 

What I don't understand, is why people post pics online to make or prove a point about a

lens or camera, and then in the same breath say, "Well, it's just a web pic, you need to see

a real print to see the difference." Um, why post it then???

[kevin m.]

...Tell you what, Ray, why don't YOU buy my lens, try shooting with it for a couple of weeks,

and if you can't see any difference between it and a VC 25, then I'll refund all your money

including shipping costs....