Post Your Film Images Here

Cabbage Tree Bay, Sydney, February 2020. #216
IIIc CV 21mm f/4 LTM HP5+ in ID11

U27021.1748516002.4.jpg
 
Slumgullion said:
Fair enough. I'm certain of which lens I used (because I only had one lens with me). So, I guess it's cool that a 35 could give the impression of a different lens.
Click to expand...
They are lovely. The 35 Summilux ASPH is great, and, yes, you can get very narrow depth of field with it. It was the first of the modern asphericals (the 50/1.2 Noctilux was obviously Leica's first camera lens with aspherical elements) but it was also the first of their lenses to be designed with very rapid focus fall off.

The "more is better" philosophy, as you point out elsewhere on this forum, has made lenses produced in the last 30+ years a lot more contrasty and focus falloff occurs even faster, but the 35 ASPH is pretty much where modern lens fashions were set.
 
Last edited:
Freakscene: "I was the first of the modern asphericals (the 50/1.2 Noctilux was obviously Leica's first camera lens with aspherical elements) but it was also the first of their lenses to be designed with very rapid focus fall off."

I did not know that you are a modern aspherical!

I've never heard of lenses "designed with very rapid focus fall off", but I can understand that lenses with a high contrast have less dept of field than lenses with a low contrast. Is that what you mean?

Aspherical lenses usually have more contrast than normal ones.
 
Erik van Straten said:
I've never heard of lenses "designed with very rapid focus fall off", but I can understand that lenses with a high contrast have less dept of field than lenses with a low contrast. Is that what you mean?
Click to expand...
Hi Erik,

I remember reading an article about the first version of the 50f/1.4 takumar saying that the way they used a cemented concave element in the design, assured a faster drop of focus as you move out of focus. I remember arguing that this comes at a price of losing sharpness when focusing at infinity. I think Freakscene is up to something when he says that.

I've spend some time looking at the negatives taken with the Pancolar and the Takumar. I think that there is something odd about how the pancolar renders out of focus areas when compared to the plain 55f/2 takumar and I suspect it has to do with image becoming blurry soon after the point of focus.
 
p.giannakis said:
Hi Erik,

I remember reading an article about the first version of the 50f/1.4 takumar saying that the way they used a cemented concave element in the design, assured a faster drop of focus as you move out of focus. I remember arguing that this comes at a price of losing sharpness when focusing at infinity. I think Freakscene is up to something when he says that.

I've spend some time looking at the negatives taken with the Pancolar and the Takumar. I think that there is something odd about how the pancolar renders out of focus areas when compared to the plain 55f/2 takumar and I suspect it has to do with image becoming blurry soon after the point of focus.
Click to expand...
Thank you, Pan, we'll wait what Freakscene will say. Interesting subject!
 
Having lower SA and higher contrast/resolving power creates the impression of faster focus fall off. There is a plane of clear focus and then things drop off quickly. I would argue that Leica (and all other lens manufacturers) had become more aware of out-of-focus rendering as a concept to 'focus' on (pardon the pun) when they introduced new lenses. When the 11874 came out in 1994 it miles apart from pre-aspherical 35 Lux. Hence, why so many of the newest/latest/greatest lenses are probably too smooth in their fall-off and too sharp at the point of focus.

At any rate, the two hardest to focus lenses I have are the 35 Lux 11874 and the Voigtlander 50mm APO-Lanthar. Which makes sense. Both are sharp. Both are contrasty (though the APO-Lanthar highlights the technological growth made in the intervening 20 years). Here are two whatever, utterly unscientific images that might/might not show the similarities and differences in their rendering (both shot wide-open):

Jenny by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Zeiss Ikon ZM, Voigtlander 50mm f/2 APO-Lanthar VM, Ilford HP5+, Xtol 1:1.

Fischer, on Flickr
Jenny by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Leica M7, Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-ASPH 11874, Flic Film Aurora 400.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom