More shooting with the Rapid Rectilinear

[vilva]

Yesterday there was some sunshine, and I succeeded in doing a little bit of shooting with the RR on 5D. It was cold, and there was some wind (almost 10 m/s, 20 mph) so my shooting wasn't any too steady and I was also unable to use my self-made lens shade, which affected the results. I'll post here just one shot, first with minimal post-processing and then with local contrast enhancing sharpening.



This is quite typical behaviour. There is some lens flare, which makes even the down-sampled image quite soft. After sharpening, the image begins to look quite respectable. These photos are all at f/8, but the DOF is shallower than with my old Sony DSC-F505 at f/2.8 and the same FOV.



Of course, this isn't like a photo taken with a high quality MC lens, and it need not be. These photos retain a certain amount of a character of their own even after post-processing.

Next a post-processed photo of the same subject taken a few days earlier, in low contrast light:



Then a B & W version of the same:



The softness of the RR is perhaps best suited for taking photos of flowers etc. It isn't very sharp when used in a small format camera, and there are problems with contrast so it certainly isn't the first choice for architectural photography despite the lack of geometrical aberrations (it isn't astigmatic, but here it doesn't matter because a dSLR only uses rather a small section from the center of the image circle.) However, I think that these examples here and on my site show that it also has potential as a general photographic tool with its own signature.

There are more photos at http://galactinus.net/vilva/retro/eos5d_rr2.html . I also prepared post-processed versions of the Botanic Garden shots at http://galactinus.net/vilva/retro/eos5d_rr2bg.html in order to display the effect of the combination of increased sharpness and the RR bokeh, something not easily emulated with a modern lens.

Veijo

[Orio]

I like the examples, Veijo. They have a lot of richness in the medium tones. I find this characteristic very appropriate for architecture. I think that architecture photograph should not be very contrasted, except if one looks for a special effect, because the volumes are (or at least should) already be dictated by the real wolrd shape of the architectural objects, the lens should only capture them in a moment where the light is good, for the rest it should remain "transparent" and allow the original volumes to display their force (if they have any).
The botanical garden photos are surely "sabotated" by a bad day light, yet, they reveal an absolutely champion bokeh, as I would have anyway expected having already known what this kind of old lenses can deliver once in your hands.

-
_________________
_
ХОРИОС-61 ( ώρεος ) : Lens sana in corpore sano
www.timelessphotography.eu
www.oriofoto.net

Read list of equipment HERE

[niblue]

Definitely looks useable - the 2nd shot, with the contrast adjusted, looks like it'd convert to B&W well.
_________________
Regards
Steve

[Laurence]

You have to wonder about portraits with this lens. That glowing softness might be a fine effect for faces. The more I look, the more I like...

[vilva]

[vilva]

[vilva]

[patrickh]

I don't think even a filter could replicate that "all over" glow. That is stunning.


patrickh
_________________
DSLR: Nikon D70 Nikon D200 Canon 40D
MF Zooms: Kiron 28-85/3.5, 28-105/3.2, 75-150/3.5, Nikkor 50-135/3.5 AIS // MF Primes: Nikkor 20/4 AI, 24/2 AI, 28/2 AI, 28/2.8 AIS, 28/3.5 AI, 35/1.4 AIS, 35/2 AIS, 35/2.8 PC, 45/2.8 P, 50/1.4 AIS, 50/1.8 AIS, 50/2 AI, 55/2.8 AIS micro, 55/3.5 AI micro, 85/2 AI, 100/2,8 E, 105/1,8 AIS, 105/2,5 AIS, 135/2 AIS, 135/2.8 AIS, Nikkor 200/4 AI, 200/4 AIS micro, 3004.5 AI, 300/4.5 AI ED, Kiron 28/2 Panagor 135/2.8, Tamron 28/2.5, Tamron 90/2.5 macro, Vivitar 90/2.5 macro (Tokina) Voigtlander 90/3.5 Vivitar 105/2.5 macro (Kiron) Kaleinar 100/2.8 AI Tamron 135/2.5, Vivitar 135/2.8CF, 200/3.5, Tokina 400/5,6
M42: Vivitar 28/2.5, Flektogon 35/2.4, Takumar 35/3.5, Curtagon 35/4, Arsat 50/1.4, Volna-6 50/2.8 macro,Mamiya 50/1.4, CZJ Pancolar 50/1,8, Oreston 50/1.8, Industar 50/3.5, Sears 55/1.4, Helios 58/2, Jupiter 85/2, Helios 85/1.5, Jupiter 135/4, Jupiter 135/3.5, Takumar 135/3.5, Tair 135/2.8, Takumar 150/4, Jupiter 200/4
Exakta: Topcon 100/2.8, 35/2.8
C/Y: Yashica 28/2.8, 50/1.7, 135/2.8
P6 : Mir 38 65/3.5, Biometar 80/2.8, Kaleinar 150/2.8, Sonnar 180/2.8

[Laurence]

Wow, how beautiful!

I hadn't heard much about a meniscus lens, so I looked it up. It seems that the light passing through a meniscus lens is neither diverged or converged; in other words it simply passes straight through the planar axes with no separation or compression.

I'm certainly not sure of the physics involved, but I must assume that, since the light waves don't intersect at all, then the object that is being imaged has a sort of "even" lighting that cuts contrast.

Any way you look at it though, that glow is impressive.

And here I thought we were talking about meniscus knee surgery or something!

Thank you VERY much for the example.

[vilva]

[vilva]

[Laurence]

Thank you for the schematics Veijo. I see now that there MUST be a convergence somewhere, or there would not be a projected image at all! So, it is the differential between the degree of concavity/convexity that creates the image after all.

The effects are remarkable, certainly not good for every application, but patently useful and extremely effective in others.