robweatherburn

Response to hoods, and which fits this or that...

 

In many cases, just keep it simple. Many of my photos are taken with the use of a decent staw hat - just hold it to shade the viewfinder image, and you should be fine. A Leica - and many other cameras following the same basic design - should fit snugly to the lines of your skull - eyebrow - nose - cheekbone - giving a good bracing surface for a one-handed shooting position; the position that Oscar Barnack made possible with his original prototype that fits a man's hand so perfectly. You just need hold the camera firmly to your face. But if you have someone along with you, they can hold your hat to shade the lens. That's all you need...

Not quite sure I got the hang of your baffle and hoods, but the resulsts are great. I have a black uncoated 90mm elmar, and it does a great job

Thanks for the responses here - photos and comments. David - I use a Leica Ia as my everyday camera, and I agree with you about the way the old Elmar 50mm - like the Summar, as Adrian points out - captures and renders what we see.

For Summar enthusiasts: This shot of the bastions of Valletta across Grand

Harbour on Malta was taken with a well-used uncoated Summar I bought a couple

of years ago, but did not get round to using it until very recently.

Surprisingly, the glass looks very good, but the body shows its had a lot of

use. Lens #4456xx. Film: Fuji 800ASA Professional Portrait. Elmar hood used

with push-on UV filter that has a slightly green tinge. Using this filter on

another Summar on my IIIb or IIIf I allowed a factor of 1. Here I used a

Bessa R, and the TTL meter confirmed that factor.<div></div>

Hi Mukul - yes - that was what I was trying to say: that the 800ASA film is too fast to use with this camera in very bright light, but that is fine for work at night. Am off to the beach to look for that friendly crab.

 

It was good to meet you - and thanks for you input

 

Rob

Hi John - I enjoy using the old camera, and posted this image to show how wonderfully it handled the artificial night light with a modern 800ASA film. With this camera, that film is too fast to use in bright summer light of the Med: - you might remember I used Jessops 200ASA film in those conditions, and I was very happy with the results.

 

Glad you like this image

 

Rob

Dan - I've never regretted buying my Ia - and I take it pretty well everywhere. It was a mess when I bought it: curtains full of holes, rust in the works - and I wondered if I'd made a mistake; but I won't forget the thrill of getting it back from a complete workover and putting the first film through it.

 

Sunny 16 usually does it for me - even though the calibration on the lens doesn't coincide exactly for that. But it's easy to adjust - and, anyway, there's a lot of guesswork for my night work.

 

Rob

 

Rob

Mukul - it's just an Elmar, and you're right - it doesn't have the contrast of later coated lenses; but this film's speed is too fast for this combo in bright light conditions.

 

I've been very pleased with the results from Jessops' 200 and 400 ASA films in night and daylight situations, but thought I'd just give this 800ASA film a whirl in dark and artificial night light situations. I'm very pleased with the results in those situations: with the contrast, saturation, and tonal quality. I am at fault using this camera and film in very bright daylight.

 

Adrian - thanks for the tip about neutral density filters.

 

Shooting anywhere towards the sun I also shade the lens with a hat.

 

Rob

Mukul - yes, the original fixed Leitz lens used, - with a hood and UV filter.

 

Rob

Thanks guys - the camera worked well here - but not so happy with very bright light off the sea and cliffs at f18 and 1/500. As expected, it over-exposes at least one stop with the 800 ASA film. Not the film to use in those conditions anyway.

 

But glad you like the image - I love the old Ia

 

Rob

I know the Leica Ia is old hat - but I think it is worth posting this image;

if only to show how well the camera compares - in these conditions - with

modern technology, and copes with modern fast film.

 

Taken with my 1929 camera, lens wide open, 1/30th second, lens hood and UV

filter, using Fujifilm NPZ800 professional.

 

Subject: The bastion steps and the entrance to the Sally Port of the old city

of Senglea, Grand Harbour, Malta. I have an exhibition here - opening

September - with all images taken with the 1929 Leica Ia.

 

Rob<div></div>

Peter - stunning!! wonderful stuff

 

Rob

Lovely print Craig - like the tones and sense of drama. Were you using a filter?

 

Rob

Hi Chris - that's an excellent description of most DSLR work.

 

Rob

Tom - would you consider a Russian - Jupiter 3 f1.5? Great lens if you find a good one, and they come cheap. Zeiss copies.

 

Rob

The coated Elmar<div></div>

Hi Tom - Each lens has its look - signature if you like - and your photos with them will be influenced by how you see an image, and how you use the particular lens.

 

I have a prewar Summar, and love the effects/results I can sometimes achieve with it. You didn't mention the great 50mm Elmar - so you are obviously looking for a faster lens. I'm posting a couple of images taken my my IIIb - both indoor shots with available light.

 

The first of them - the classical torso - was taken with the uncoated Summar wide open; and the second - the Buddhist figure - with my coated Elmar. I think, because of good overhead light in the NSW Art Gallery - I used f5.6. Both photos were handheld - don't remember the speed - and both these images are cropped down from the full sized negatives.

 

I hope they both show the much-vaunted 'Leica Look', and - that said - that they demonstrate a considerable difference in lens signature. Both photos with Neopan 400.

 

I would love to try a Xenon, but never had the chance. There is an opinion, however, that if you keep changing lenses you'll never completely get to know any of them; and that you should find one that suits you and your style of photography, and stick with it until you feel you need something different.

 

To be a better comparison I should have taken both at the same time with the same lenses. I guess all I'm saying is don't ignore the Elmar - it is still a great lens.

 

Rob<div></div>

Yes - I agree - there's too much talked about different cameras and lenses - and not enough about understanding and appreciating a situation. Apart from camera enthusiasts, most people don't give a damn what camera or lens took the image. Images that are obviously 'set up' - and most modern portrait work, in particular, smacks of that - studio or outdoor - are nothing more than obviously contrived. The camera is just the mechanical tool - the extension of the eye and the imagination of the photographer. Who the hell wants to hear 'what camera did you use?' - or 'how did you do that?'

 

A Leica - or any other good camera - has the capacity to make great quality images, but the end product is how the photographer saw it - how he understood the situation, and what he wanted - and what he made of it.

 

And even then - once one has a negative - that's only the start. Then comes the printing in the darkroom - now mostly the work on the computer - to create the final image. I've forgotten who said something like 'the negative is the manuscript - the print is the performance.'

 

The print - the performance - is the object of all the effort. If I'm painting, few people would ever ask me what make of brushes I use...

Natural light? Kids are much more comfortable away from batteries of lights.

What's left of the 'Amsterdam'?

Josiah's original question was "where does the Art of Photography Begin? and end?

 

The whole process of photography (light drawing - just a term) begins in the eye and mind of the guy with the camera - and then the action of exposing a frame of film or grabbing it digitally.

 

The process ends when that guy says it's finished - as he or she wants to see it.

 

You can take the narrow approach of not manipulating the image at all - or take a broader approach and work with the image in any way you want. Both are concepts of photography. You may seem them as Art: I may not.

 

For me, photography is just another medium of Art - or can be, in the right hands. Art is about self-expression - not about the mere copying of nature in any way.

 

What is Art for one - might be a nonsense for another. The Cambridge Dictionary defines Art as:

 

"the making of objects, images, music, etc. that are beautiful or that express feelings"

 

This discussion - as I said earlier - was at its most sensitive and expressive in the early years of the 20th century. The great movers here were - amongst others - Steiglitz, Steichen, Coburn and DeMachy.

 

Please follow this link if you are interested...and follow the internal links.

 

http://www.rleggat.com/photohistory/history/demachy.htm

Luis - thank you for replying on the photonet thread - I hope you don't mind that I have contacted you on your email address.

 

What a wonderful thing you are doing!! Have you read Axel Munthe's beautiful book - The Story of San Michele - written many years ago In it he talks about his efforts to help and protect birds on the Italian islands.

 

I am in Malta, and this week three hawks were seen shot within an hour - and reported in the local press. It seems there is no stopping either legal or illegal hunting here. The madness is endemic.

 

A few years ago - in Greece - I watched from a boat as hunters on Delos shot down one of a pair of grey kites. I dived into the sea and tried to rescue it, but it died on the cabin top. The hunters' boat came near to us, and when my friend shouted at them, they swung their guns at us.

 

That killing - on the sacred island where hunting is prohibited - was even more distressing as the kite's mate was still circling and looking for it some 5 hours later. I had no option but to put the dead bird back in the sea. I understand the Grey Kite is a protected species.

 

I took photos of the dead bird, and wrote an article about this - it appeared in the Yachting magazine - Cruising Helmsman. I doubt it did any good at all.

 

Thank you for your efforts with wild animals.

 

My very best regards and wishes for your efforts

 

Robert

Luis - It was a pleasure to see your work on your site - and to chat - in such a disjointed way - on here.

 

Thankyou for your support - and the pleasure it gave me to see your work.

 

Can you tell me? In your bio photo you are holding a bird. What is it? A hawk of some kind.

 

Please keep in touvh - and thankyou again.

 

Best regards

 

Rob

Bill, I only have a Jupiter 3 copy of the 1.5 Sonnar - and it's a good one! My Sonnar is prewar and uncoated . I love both these lenses, the Sonnar is as sharp as I ever require - and smooth and creamy with it. The Jupiter - more contrasted in B&W - and renders the colour in light more 'brightly' - perhaps with more sparkle.

 

Which to use? Depends on the mood I want to try and catch...

Rob

Josiah - it is also informative to follow the internal links in my last answer to your posting....

 

Rob