New Leica iii test shots

[keith_lubow]

Hello,

<br>

<br>

Could not wait to process and proof my film! I am already about 50 rolls behind

in my processing, so I took some of my [many] test rolls from my new IIIc to the

local CVS and got a photo CD made. Here is one shot from each roll. All just

testing to get the hang of the camera and see how accurate the shutter is.

<BR>

<BR>

<IMG SRC="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/5976596-lg.jpg">

<br>

<br>

<IMG SRC="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/5976618-lg.jpg">

<br>

<br>

Very interesting lens, this Summitar. Very subdued contrast and edge sharpness.

Pretty low resolution, especially with distant detail. Saturates certain colors

more than others...doesn't seem to capture yellow that well (makes oranges into

reds, turns yellow-greens into pure greens, skin tone seems a bit difficult to

render well). Bright highlights get very fuzzy. Out of focus areas look shaky. I

love the look of the lens! It's not for everything, but I love it nonetheless.

The worst part is the lack of close focusing ability. I can get 1.5 feet in

focus with my SLR. I plan on mounting this lens on my 4x5 as well.

<br>

<br>

I cannot put this camera down! It is so intuitive and easy to use. I love the

portability, balance, and stabiltiy. It is easy to hand hold down to '10. This

is definitely going to become my everyday camera. Very unobtrusive, easy to

handle piece.

<br>

<br>

Keith

[keith_lubow]

technical info:

 

1st picture: 5cm Summitar - Fuji Superia Reala 100 - open shade on bright hazy day - estimated exposure based on f/16 rule (prob. around f/4 or f/5.6 at '100) - processed and scanned at CVS - full frame - levels, color balance, curves, and 50/4/30 unsharp mask in Photoshop 7.0. This is literally as close as I could focus with this lens. I cranked it all the way out and moved forward and backward to focus as near as I could with the rangefinder.

 

2nd picture: Leica IIIc from 1949/1950 - 5cm Summitar - Fuji Superia Press 400 - bright hazy day - estimated exposure based on f/16 rule (prob. around f/8 or f/11 at '500) - processed and scanned at CVS - full frame - levels, color balance, curves, and 50/4/30 unsharp mask in Photoshop 7.0. I think for this one I just focused the lens right on my friend.

[charles_stobbs3]

I don't think the scans CVS does for 4 X 6 prints are very good. You would probaably get much better results elsewhere (for more money).

[jerry_kirkwood]

I bet if he'd said those were shots from an M8 there'd be plenty of ooohing and aaahing <wink>.

[jkelly04]

Very nice, thanks for sharing. I love my Summitar too. However, I doubt the lack of color fidelity is the fault of the lens. If you use a quality photo processor, I'm sure you'll notice a difference.

[elmarfudd]

Definetly two nice compositions.

 

I love the Summitar, but remember that CVS auto everything printer will hide a lot of the lenses characteristics, and the colors are most likely more representative of in printer changes than the properties of the Summitar.

[keith_lubow]

Hello,

 

Thanks.

 

Believe me; I know a good "lab" from a bad one. I usually do my own C-41, actually. However, I just wanted to get something back quickly, since these were just a test, and my friend wanted to see them as well. I usually get so behind (like I am now) that I don't even proof anything. I am 30 rolls of color behind in my processing and 20 rolls of black and white.

 

As for the color, I will eventually get around to proofing these myself on my usual RA paper at my usual filtrations for these films. I have had OK luck with CVS in the past, especially with quick prints from digital files, but there are so many more variables with film. At any rate, I have shot other rolls, so I will get around to looking at them. At one time I did a lot of shooting AYSO and other kids' sports, and I would print the photos and bring them back and sell them to the parents for five bucks each. With all the different shades of skin, grass, and uniforms, the color was never that bad. Like you all have said, however: consistency is not CVS' forte.

 

Thanks for the feedback on the lens. Take care.

 

Keith

[larry n.]

Honestly, Leica users are a special breed. If the sun rises in the morning, you attribute it to your Leica.

 

Color fidelity is affected by (1) film, (2) film processing, (3) scanning, and last and least (999) lens.

 

You have a lovely camera, but the pictures look no different from any other camera/lens.

[keith_lubow]

They look different to me.

 

I analyze the results from all of my cameras so I can decide what cameras to use to create what effects in the future. The Leica is new to me. The images are not better or worse than anything else I use; just different...Just as notably different as any camera/lens combo. I do not claim that any camera is magic or gives me any special mojo, but to deny that different cameras create different image characteristics is innatentive to detail and ignorant. No one is saying here that a camera makes the photo. But you'd notice and comment on the differences between driving a Caddy and a Lincoln, wouldn't you?

 

Keith

 

Keith