View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 5:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
The Componars are simple triplets, the cheapest of Schneider's enlarger lenses. They are decent lenses but not comparable to the Componons, Rodagons, Focotars and other modern plasmat types. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
16:9
Joined: 04 Apr 2014 Posts: 302 Location: UK
|
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
16:9 wrote:
The point is fairly made back on page 3 that all these lenses are pretty damn good.
However, comparison of them as enlarger lenses tends to be a bit anecdotal . . . even Ctein's comments are somewhat gnomic: a top five marked out of ten, no mention of which lenses were actually tested - therefore does non-inclusion in the top five indicate sub-standard performance, or simply being unavailable? - and no pictures.
Sometimes on these forums, folks are asking what is 'best' or 'better' from different perspectives, too: 'better' as an enlarger? Macro lens? At 5:1, 1:1 or 1:2?
I'm really curious to see how rigorously 'scientifically' (AKA ivory tower) we need to examine these critturs as taking lenses to tell them apart - now we have jolly discriminating DSLRs.
I'm betting that you can tell more about the difference between a Focotar II, APO EL Nikkor and an Orthoplanar 105 by strapping them all to an A7R for half an hour than all the bearded sages have gleaned in two decades.
All I need now is someone to lend me the Zeiss and Nikon . . . |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ray Parkhurst
Joined: 04 Jul 2011 Posts: 497 Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
One thing I expect you'll find in your tests is that the best-corrected lenses, such as the 105PN and other APO lenses on your list, end up looking "sterile". They are designed specifically to not impart any character to the image that isn't already there. In general this should be the quality of any enlarging/duplicating/repro lens, ie they should simply enlarge/duplicate/reproduce, perfectly and without bias or modification. The place for art and creativity is in the taking. For enlarging lenses, I would personally define "best" as "adds the least to the process". Any aberration "adds". |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kds315*
Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 16497 Location: Weinheim, Germany
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
kds315* wrote:
So how is that one then?
_________________ Klaus - Admin
"S'il vient a point, me souviendra" [Thomas Bohier (1460-1523)]
http://www.macrolenses.de for macro and special lens info
http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos for UV Images and lens/filter info
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/albums my albums using various lenses
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/ my UV BLOG
http://www.travelmeetsfood.com/blog Food + Travel BLOG
https://galeriafotografia.com Architecture + Drone photography
Currently most FAV lens(es):
X80QF f3.2/80mm
Hypergon f11/26mm
ELCAN UV f5.6/52mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f4/60mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f2/62mm
Lomo Уфар-12 f2.5/41mm
Lomo Зуфар-2 f4.0/350mm
Lomo ZIKAR-1A f1.2/100mm
Nikon UV Nikkor f4.5/105mm
Zeiss UV-Sonnar f4.3/105mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f1.8/45mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f4.1/94mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f2.8/100mm
Steinheil Quarzobjektiv f1.8/50mm
Pentax Quartz Takumar f3.5/85mm
Carl Zeiss Jena UV-Objektiv f4/60mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha II f1.1/90mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha I f2.8/200mm
COASTAL OPTICS f4/60mm UV-VIS-IR Apo
COASTAL OPTICS f4.5/105mm UV-Micro-Apo
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f4.5/85mm
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f5.6/300mm
Rodenstock UV-Rodagon f5.6/60mm + 105mm + 150mm
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
16:9
Joined: 04 Apr 2014 Posts: 302 Location: UK
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 9:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
16:9 wrote:
Ray Parkhurst wrote: |
One thing I expect you'll find in your tests is that the best-corrected lenses, such as the 105PN and other APO lenses on your list, end up looking "sterile". They are designed specifically to not impart any character to the image that isn't already there. In general this should be the quality of any enlarging/duplicating/repro lens, ie they should simply enlarge/duplicate/reproduce, perfectly and without bias or modification. The place for art and creativity is in the taking. For enlarging lenses, I would personally define "best" as "adds the least to the process". Any aberration "adds". |
For sure. An aberration-free lens better represents reality - allowing the photographer (not the lens) to be the stylist. Personally, I wouldn't use the word 'sterile' in place of 'truthful'. A good lens is simply a good lens; its technical prowess allows greater latitude for expression - especially now post-production is such a major part of the creative process. You could even argue that a lens' job is to efface itself and report maximum information about a frame's-worth of reality to Photoshop.
Having said that, sometimes we want to exploit subtle differences in drawing styles, and might reach for a lens with a 'tone of voice' to create something not quite achievable in post: pastelly, low-contrast tones, a specific type of defocus effect or light star. There's even a slot in the toolbox for 'bad' lenses that 'glow' or have funky flare: aberrations can be fun! Just not in every picture: that's pretty limiting, creatively - sterile, maybe? _________________ If it ain't broke, break it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Abbazz
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 Posts: 1098 Location: Jakarta
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Abbazz wrote:
FluffPuppy wrote: |
I had owned an EL-Nikkor 50mm f/2.8 up to that time. It was a very good lens, no doubt, but the Focotar-2 clearly is a better lens. I sincerely doubt it has been equaled. Really, not many of these lenses were made. By 'better' I mean sharper, especially in the corners |
FluffPuppy wrote: |
I saw things in the prints that I had never seen in the prints made with the EL-Nikkor. In particular, I saw separation of tones in shadow areas that I had never seen before. Sharpness in the center was not all that much different, but the corners were better. |
I just read the above comments posted here in 2012. It's quite funny, because in my lab days, the 50mm Focotar-2 was considered to be a good lens, but Focotars were not reputed to have sharp corners, due to a rather curved field:
tobey bilek wrote: |
The I version was optimized for 5x7 and 8x10 is a stretch for it.
The Schneider is easily recognized by the large front element and makes 16z20 with ease from a good negative in a glass top or full glass carrier. Works from 5.6 to 11 or 16
The Focotar 2 has a little more contrast, local contrast and pop, but gives up the nice flat field of Schneider to get it. You need to stop to 8 to negate the out of focus corners due to lack of a flat field.
Version 1 has nowhere near a flat field, but printed curved field mounted slides quite nicely. This thing was an embarrassment to Leica when larger prints were being made, so they worked with Schneider to get something decent.
Quote from tobey bilek on L.Camera Forum |
Cheers!
Abbazz _________________ Il n'y a rien dans le monde qui n'ait son moment decisif, et le chef-d'oeuvre de la bonne conduite est de connaitre et de prendre ce moment. - Cardinal de Retz
The 6x9 Photography Online Resource:
http://artbig.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Abbazz
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 Posts: 1098 Location: Jakarta
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Abbazz wrote:
kds315* wrote: |
So how is that one then?
|
Outstanding. What lens?
Cheers!
Abbazz _________________ Il n'y a rien dans le monde qui n'ait son moment decisif, et le chef-d'oeuvre de la bonne conduite est de connaitre et de prendre ce moment. - Cardinal de Retz
The 6x9 Photography Online Resource:
http://artbig.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mir
Joined: 07 Feb 2011 Posts: 973 Location: Montreal, Canada
Expire: 2017-09-30
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mir wrote:
Abbazz !
Welcome back ! _________________ "Obsta principiis, finem respice"
"There is a fine line between hobby and mental illness"
MISC: Tamron SP 35-80 (01A), Auto Chinon Tomioka 1.4/55, Tokina AT-X 2.5/90, Tamron SP 5,6/300 (54B)
ZEISS: WG Distagon 2.8/25, WG Distagon 2.8/35 HFT, WG Planar HFT 1.4/50, Ultron 1.8/50, WG Sonnar 2.8/85, WG Sonnar HFT 2.8/135
VOIGTLÄNDER : Ultron Aspherical 1.8/21, Ultron 2/28, Nokton Aspherical 1.2/35, Nokton Classic 1.4/40, Nokton Aspherical 1.5/50, Color-Heliar 2.5/75
MINOLTA: MD 3.5/35-70 Macro, MD 1.2/50, MC Rokkor-X 1.2/58, MD Macro 3.5/50
LEITZ: SUMMICRON-R 2/35 (II), SUMMICRON-R 2/50 (II), TELE ELMARIT-M 2,8/90 (Thin)
CANON RF: 2.8/28, 2/35, 1.2/50, 1.4/50, Serenar 1.8/50, 2/85, 2/100, 3.5/100
LTM : KMZ Jupiter-8 2/5cm, TOKYO KOGAKU Topcor-S 2/5cm, CHIYOKO SUPER ROKKOR C 2/5cm, Nippon Kogaku NIKKOR-H.C 2/5cm, FUJI FILM CO. FUJINON L 2/5cm
And a small Minolta AF set: 2.8/20, 1.4/35, 1.4/50, 2/100, 4.5/100-200
@we3fotography
@7plus_pictures
@_whats.that.car_ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ray Parkhurst
Joined: 04 Jul 2011 Posts: 497 Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 1:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
kds315* wrote: |
So how is that one then? |
Beautiful image. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ray Parkhurst
Joined: 04 Jul 2011 Posts: 497 Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
16:9 wrote: |
...Having said that, sometimes we want to exploit subtle differences in drawing styles, and might reach for a lens with a 'tone of voice' to create something not quite achievable in post: pastelly, low-contrast tones, a specific type of defocus effect or light star. There's even a slot in the toolbox for 'bad' lenses that 'glow' or have funky flare: aberrations can be fun! Just not in every picture: that's pretty limiting, creatively - sterile, maybe? |
Yes, if you are looking for a different expression those imperfect lenses can "add" qualities you can't easily achieve other ways. However, while that may affect the method or outcome of testing described in the other thread, I don't think this changes the outcome of this thread. I still believe the "best" enlarging lens is the one that "adds" least. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Abbazz
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 Posts: 1098 Location: Jakarta
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Abbazz wrote:
Mir wrote: |
Abbazz !
Welcome back ! |
Thanks Mir! Feels good to be here...
Cheers!
Abbazz _________________ Il n'y a rien dans le monde qui n'ait son moment decisif, et le chef-d'oeuvre de la bonne conduite est de connaitre et de prendre ce moment. - Cardinal de Retz
The 6x9 Photography Online Resource:
http://artbig.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57839 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2021-11-18
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Nice to see you back Abbazz!!!
Best enlarger lens what I have, what I don't have that is less good _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Abbazz
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 Posts: 1098 Location: Jakarta
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Abbazz wrote:
Attila wrote: |
Nice to see you back Abbazz!!! |
Thanks, Attila!
Cheers!
Abbazz _________________ Il n'y a rien dans le monde qui n'ait son moment decisif, et le chef-d'oeuvre de la bonne conduite est de connaitre et de prendre ce moment. - Cardinal de Retz
The 6x9 Photography Online Resource:
http://artbig.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|