Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Schneider Kreuznach Tele Xenar 135 and CZJ Biotar 58/2
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:08 am    Post subject: Schneider Kreuznach Tele Xenar 135 and CZJ Biotar 58/2 Reply with quote
I was impressed by Orio's shot of geranium with his CZ Sonnar 85 and indeed reds are a hell to render with some lens (especially, what a coincidence, the newest ones!).

Here a diptych I made for a food contest showing the Tele Xenar at left and the Biotar at right. I love german lenses!



PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
No doubt LENS is German Wink


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 9:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
yes, Schneider and Zeiss, can you really get better than that? Smile

Alessandro (Ale? Alex?), is it possible to look at the full size of the Xenar photo?


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
yes, Schneider and Zeiss, can you really get better than that? Smile

Alessandro (Ale? Alex?), is it possible to look at the full size of the Xenar photo?


Yes, I have the full size TIFF. I'll upload it here when back at home.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
A G Photography wrote:
Orio wrote:
yes, Schneider and Zeiss, can you really get better than that? Smile

Alessandro (Ale? Alex?), is it possible to look at the full size of the Xenar photo?


Yes, I have the full size TIFF. I'll upload it here when back at home.


Is that the m42 Schneider-Kreuznach Edixa-Tele-Xenar 135mm 1:3,5f?

This is what red looks like with mine


Full size: http://flickr.com/photos/zewrak/2527219521/sizes/o/in/set-72157605284137263/


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
zewrak wrote:

Is that the m42 Schneider-Kreuznach Edixa-Tele-Xenar 135mm 1:3,5f?



Yep

Your shot, apart from different exposition and contrast, has a very similar color output.

Btw, if some people thinks colors can be modified at will in post production I can say that if you have a good color balance from start, you will get good results, if you have bad colors you can tinker for hours with levels, curves, etc, but something will always show up definitively wrong, especially with greens and reds.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
A G Photography wrote:

Btw, if some people thinks colors can be modified at will in post production I can say that if you have a good color balance from start, you will get good results, if you have bad colors you can tinker for hours with levels, curves, etc, but something will always show up definitively wrong, especially with greens and reds.


And thats why we do it in black and white. Wink


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
That Schneider-Kreuznach is very impressive!


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
[quote="zewrak"][quote="A G Photography"]
Btw, if some people thinks colors can be modified at will in post production I can say that if you have a good color balance from start, you will get good results, if you have bad colors you can tinker for hours with levels, curves, etc, but something will always show up definitively wrong, especially with greens and reds.[/quote]

And thats why we do it in black and white. Wink[/quote]

Haw do you do it - in B&W-? Film-which- with scaner?


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Zewrak, what camera? Pentax?


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
Zewrak, what camera? Pentax?


Pentax K10D.

Estudleon, photoshop. Wink Soon enough Spotmatic, I hope.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
zewrak wrote:
Orio wrote:
Zewrak, what camera? Pentax?


Pentax K10D..


I knew it must have been the K10D.
For whatever the technical reason, that I ignore, it's the camera that renders the best reds, that I have seen.
I really would like to buy one K10 for red subjects only. Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Original 100% shot:



PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Strange ... My Tele-Xenar gave me reds which are very close to these , and the Xenon 1,9/50 is able to "render" the same color ! Hmmm , Schneider used optical glasses (Schott ? Steinheil ? Or Schneider ....! ) of a "red colour" afficionado ....

"Red" tele-Xenar .... October , no light , full aperture , Agfa Xrg , Minolta Xe-5 (A pure marvel...)







PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Damn, I'm really searching a Xenon 50/1.9 in m42 mount. Crying or Very sad


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
All very nice!

Ale the full size shows great contrast for such an old lens. Another lens that ends in my wishlist...


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
All very nice!

Ale the full size shows great contrast for such an old lens. Another lens that ends in my wishlist...


Keep in count that I post produced it with a mild high pass sharpening, a velvia100-like curve adjustment (using the marvelous Alien Skin plugin, a must have) and a final level adjustment. But I started from RAW and I'm pretty sure that if you use Velvia 100 film directly the results shouldn't be very far.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I feel owning Schneider lenses is like possessing a real treasure . I have 2 copies of The Xenon 50mm , the f/2 and the 1,9 . I can say they are not my bests 50mm , but are easily in the top ten ... I own also the Xenar 2,8/50 which gives a less "harder" rendition than the well - known Tessar . Close to the Industar-50-2, in fact, or Elmar ...
And furthermore, a couple af other Schneider lenses ...(TV, Enlarger, repro, etc ...)


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
A G Photography wrote:
Orio wrote:
All very nice!

Ale the full size shows great contrast for such an old lens. Another lens that ends in my wishlist...


Keep in count that I post produced it with a mild high pass sharpening, a velvia100-like curve adjustment (using the marvelous Alien Skin plugin, a must have) and a final level adjustment.


Well, in that case I have to take my words back until I see the original output from the lens.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
A G Photography wrote:
Orio wrote:
All very nice!

Ale the full size shows great contrast for such an old lens. Another lens that ends in my wishlist...


Keep in count that I post produced it with a mild high pass sharpening, a velvia100-like curve adjustment (using the marvelous Alien Skin plugin, a must have) and a final level adjustment.


Well, in that case I have to take my words back until I see the original output from the lens.


Orio posting a Raw would be exactly if I posted a film negative, completely pointless.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I enjoy reading about manual lenses etc. I realise that lenses contribute a fair amount to the final picture outcome, but there is much more to it.

I'd say a bigger portion of the final picture comes from either the film used or post processing used. Lighting, composition etc.

I would say it is pointless looking at a raw file. A raw file as it is, is going to be nowhere near the images peak output.

Sure each individual lens will produce different contrast, colour, bokeh and sharpness. Though a straight RAW file is going to be pretty drab and lifeless. If you shoot film, you are not ever going to see a "RAW" image. Each film has it's own predefined curves and characteristics, so once it is shot it is not nowhere near as RAW as a digital RAW file. Smile

Different lenses are fun though.

I think a lenses sharpness and bokeh are more important factors than colour and contrast. The latter two can to a certain extent be totally changed upon adjusting the raw. Sharpness and bokeh can not, really, be changed.

Or am I way off... Smile

I just want a lens that gives me mental out of focus highlight bokeh at 50mm... Smile


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
A G Photography wrote:

Orio posting a Raw would be exactly if I posted a film negative, completely pointless.


Not a raw, a development made using standard values.
It is the only way we have to evaluate lenses: to judge on standard values. Maybe not perfect, because every camera maker has its own standard, but a necessary compromise, because if we start to apply median filters, every lens evaluation becomes pointless. Even the same search for special manual focus lenses, etc. becomes pointless, because after a median filter, all lenses would look the same, from the expensive Leica to the cheap Canon kit lens.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Surely, even after post processing, no two lens would look the same?!

I know it is not true....

If so, could someone give me the specific curves to make a canon 50mm 1.8 look like a leica...

But I can understand your point, about comparing like for like, raw for raw.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ffureel wrote:
Surely, even after post processing, no two lens would look the same?!
I know it is not true....
If so, could someone give me the specific curves to make a canon 50mm 1.8 look like a leica...
But I can understand your point, about comparing like for like, raw for raw.


What I mean is that applying high pass filters and curve adjustments to an image makes any lens evaluation pointless.
There are tools that are perfectly legitimate to use, but since we're writing on the "manual lenses" forum, it is necessary to evaluate lenses before any invasive editing such as filtering or curve adjustments.

As for the differences amongst lenses, they are much smaller than many people think. Often, they are quite subtle. Lens amateurs, such as I think I am, want to "taste" lenses before any post work, just like wine sommeliers want to taste wine in a way that no other taste can get in the way. It's the only way we can appreciate the subtle differences.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
You are right, good point.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2