pensacolaphoto

<p>Hi Jim,<br> I need such a friend who gives me a 240. :)</p>

<p>I have several lenses from each type. Both are great lenses. The 5cm 1,5 is faster. Some claim that it is optically also better than the 5cm 2.0. Get a Jupiter 3 (clone of Zeiss) and try one out.</p>

<p>There are "too many" excellent ltm/M lenses to list here for the M3. I happen to enoy using these lenses with my M3:</p> <ol> <li>50/2 Rigid Summicron (came with my M3)</li> <li>35/2 Summicron Version 1 </li> <li>90/2 Summicron with built-in hood, Version 2.</li> <li>Elmar 50/2.8</li> <li>CV Heliar 50/3.5</li> <li>Zeiss Sonnar 5cm 1.5</li> <li>Summilux 75/1.4M</li> <li>...</li> </ol>

<p>The 500/4.5L is an awesome lens overall. It was my only long tele lens for many years. I used mainly Fujichrome 100 with it then.</p>

<p>1955 was a very good year overall.</p> <p>Rolleiflex 2.8D</p>

<p>My two favorite lenses are the FD 85/1.2L and the Zeiss 85/1.4. Each has some advantages. </p>

<p>R.I.P. Al. He was a friend to me. He even developed for me some rolls of B&W for a while. </p>

<p>Can you use non-Leica SLR lenses without Live View?</p>

<p>Thanks, Robin. I am really not set on having to use the SWC. It is a thought that came t me, and I am balancing the pros and cons. I just bought XP2 film recently, and I also was thinking of the wide latitude of this film. I do own a monopod. I am also considering making it much easier (but less challenging) and use a rangefinder camera or a M 4/3 mirrorless camera. </p>

<p>I came to PN to get from this forum useful second opinions on using a SWC for a portrait after this has been suggested to me by several highly experienced photographers at another photography website with many users of rangefinder cameras. I asked a simple question on what may appear a difficult to do portrait session with a very wide angle camera that has a slow lens. Some people took the time to provide suggestions relating to my question, while someone said " ... get on with it". <br> For example, Ethan mentioned an important fact about taking photos from close-up with a wide angle lens. I know that the Biogon is "highly corrected" and it is supposed to "have no distortion", but it could be that such praises while correct, they do not apply to close-up images. Another important fact is the shallow DOF of MF cameras. This is another stumbling block that has to be overcome. </p> <p>I am not after an easy to take portrait. I have lots of experience with 35mm rangefinder cameras, but the SWC is not a camera that I have ever used for a portrait close-up. Therefore I asked a question here. I want to try using this camera, and I wanted some useful feedback on this plan. Maybe it is not a good choice after all. This does not imply that some people get annoyed by a question.</p>

<p>Thanks for this feedback, Ethan. I have thought about the possible problems or challenges with using a wide angle lens for a portrait. The lack of DOF at close focus is a good point. I have seen portraits with the SWC where the subject was placed in the center of the image, and the results did not appear distorted.</p>

<p>What will you do with the lens, Stuart?</p>

<p>I understand, Bill. My main goal is to create an artistic image somehow. I feel that using the SWC is one of several ways that could contribute to reaching this goal. Maybe I am too optimistic with having a 4.5 max aperture, but it may work out well if I can get the person very close to the window. </p> <p>My comment to C Watson has to do with the fact that nobody should be forced to comment on any thread or postings that appear uninteresting or annoying to him. </p>

<p>Tony,<br> I could do that, but I have done this last time. I want to try out using the SWC for a special portrait.</p>

<p>C Watson,<br> Don't stay in this thread if you are annoyed or uncomfortable about it.<br> Your comment suggests lack of respect to all individuals who have commented so far here.<br> Move on?</p> <p>" Chat, study the guy and his surroundings and get on with it."</p>

<p>Thank you for the feedback, Bill. I have no option for the location of the shoot. I may use B&W film to make things easier.</p> <p>Raid</p> <p>=======================</p> <p>"Could you share your experience based advices here? Thanks!""<br> I did a fair amount of this sort of thing in my younger days. The main downside of the university/office lighting is the tendency for "racoon eyes," where the overhead light doesn't get down into the eyes. If you underexpose the situation is worse. For this reason, I would do my best to avoid underexposure. Paperwork on a desktop, or that sort of thing, can help out quite a lot by reflecting some light back up into the shadowed areas.<br> Typically, office lights don't vary that much, and I'd guess that you're going to be right on the edge of "handholdability," perhaps 1/15 or 1/30 second. So if you have a tripod, you might be able to shoot like that. But expect that a certain proportion will have some motion blur of the subject.<br> I would personally want to work with the window light if it works out ok, or perhaps bounce a low-power flash off the wall, if possible.<br> I'm presuming that you're using B&W. If color, I'd do things differently.<br> [update: a lot of new posts since I started my on/off typing. If I was only getting one shot, a snapshot at that, I'd probably use a flash on a bracket, fire it off, and be done. Whoops; another update, the SWC might be a problem for flash coverage; I wouldn't use it unless I had time to pretest.]</p> <p> </p>

<p>Thank you John. This is the main reason for using the SWC. <br> If all fails, I will have my iPhone with me then.<br> =============================</p> <p>"I found that medium format doesn't suit me for that sort of light level. With 35mm film one has obviously the choice of larger apertures and a reasonable amount of DoF.<br />Having said that, at least with a wide lens you could get away with a slower shutter speed. I know you don't know the light level, but a trial run in a somewhat similar situation is essential. Also, I think the camera has an external viewer: if so, trial is doubly important for framing close up.<br />The good thing about the Hasselblad is that it certainly doesn't look like yet another damned ordinary camera and that can alleviate sitter's reluctance to be photographed.<br /><br />I hope you can post a pic when it's done."</p>

<p>Hi Russ.<br> I would like to use film, but if my choices seem to be unreasonable, I don't mind switching to my M9 then.<br> This is not a studio setting in any way. It is most likely a 20 minute meeting, followed by 2-3 minutes of quickly taking a photo or two or three ....<br> ======================</p> <p>"Are you shooting film?<br />I would think you would have to, if its not captured on the film how will you "with the goal to adjust with PS later on?"<br /><br />I used a superwide often, a bare bulb gives a great natural light look to images.<br />You can push the film processing, but not put what is not there with PS. <br /><br />I love the superwide camera.......its amazing.<br />Bring a polaroid back with the same asa film you will be shooting. <br />And of course always use a tripod, and a really trusted light meter."</p>

<p>Hi Craig,<br> I was told by his office manager that he is not a fan of being photographed. This tells me to take quickly 1-2 photos.</p> <p>===================</p> <p>"Why would it be your only shot?"</p>

<p>Hi Arthur,<br> It is a meeting with a Professor and it is only for 20 minutes. I will get a brief chance for a snapshot or two. This is what I will be facing then. I small flash may do it, but it may trigger a negative response to it.</p> <p>Raid</p> <p>"How much background detail is important in these cases? F4 may be fine if it is not important. Shutter speed will vary a bit I guess and the need of fill flash or reflector will depend upon the lighting ratio to best characterize your subjects. Only having one shot is an impediment in regards to getting the best rendition of a subject. Perhaps you can have a tripod ready and overcome the shutter speed limitations, although here too one or two shots may restrict your time in setting up unless you can use the time to set up approximately before the subject arrives?"</p>

<p>Thank you Craig. What you have said is logical. I will have with me my hand held spotmeter then. I could ask the person to stand beside the window.</p>

Hi,<br /><br /><br />I usually set my camera to ISO 400 with the lens set to aperture 2.0 for many indoor photos over the years. Sometimes, I need ISO 800. <br />My questions is this: if I have a wide angle lens with max aperture 4.0, and I want to use this lens (because it is fixed to a camera and I cannot change lenses here) with print film, which exposure would work here and which film to pick? Basically, I want to use my SWC for a close-up portrait that will be taken inside a university office that has one window.<br /><br />I know that traveling with very sensitive film through airports may fog up (say) a film with ISO 3200. If I stick to ISO 400 film for this reason, and if I want to stay away from using a flash, would a window light shot at 4.0 and ISO 400 work out if I took it regardless of the indicated light levels, with the goal to adjust with PS later on?<br /><br />Could you share your experience based advices here? Thanks!<br /><br />I could see myself using a fill-in flash if it is absolutely needed. It would most likely be my only shot taken then. __________________<br />- Raid

<p>I am glad that you found the lever.</p>

<p>I will try to do the same, Q.G.</p>

<p>Hi Kenneth,<br> Thank you for your feedback. I like o get "better dynamic range performance". </p>