Which lens has been used for this picture?

[Marc-A.]

Hello,
All is in the title: which lens has been used for this picture? (Of course it's a RF lens).
Any idea?

 

[Peter_Jones]

Jupiter 8 ?

 

[Marc-A.]

Jupiter 8 ?

No, sorry, it's not the J8, Peter. But why would say it's the J8?
I'm interesting in the reasons of your guess.

 

[rover]

Summitar that you mentioned the other day

 

[varjag]

It can be a few: hard to guess specifics without significant out of focus areas. I'd say it's one of the Leitz postwar 50s predating cron rigid.

 

[thirteen]

Helios 103

 

[nico]

Ciao Marc!
what was the aperture, please?
N.

 

[Marc-A.]

Nico, it was f4.

 

[Peter_Jones]

No, sorry, it's not the J8, Peter. But why would say it's the J8?
I'm interesting in the reasons of your guess.

Probably looking at this on the wrong monitor , but ... to me the contrast and tonality look like J8 shots.

Too many variables I guess - film/dev/scanning/monitor.




Rover has already mentioned Summitar , is he right ?

 

[Marc-A.]

Just a few more suggestions and I give the answer.
Btw, it's not the Summitar.

 

[burninfilm]

It can be a few: hard to guess specifics without significant out of focus areas. I'd say it's one of the Leitz postwar 50s predating cron rigid.

So basically, what you're saying is that lens type makes no difference without out of focus areas in a photograph? Everything from the Jupiter 8 to the collapsible Summicron have been mentioned, and we're only a few posts into the discussion! Could it be, that despite many tests and discussions here about lens "signature" here at RFF, that it is difficult to tell what lens made what photograph? Furthermore, does this show that these determinations of lens signature can be opinionated? There's nothing wrong with opinions, of course, until they start being passed around as photographic fact. What we need is a list of several pictures, along with a corresponding list of lenses utilized to render the images. This would provide an interesting chance to see if lens signatures can actually be identified. I bet that even with this information, 100% of the people questioned would not answer every choice correctly. Hmm... this gives me an idea for a future thread!

I will say that your photograph has similar qualities to portraits I made with a Summitar I used to have. However, differences in processing, scanning, editing, and even viewing probably have a more dramatic impact upon the final look than the lens itself.

EDIT: Sorry Peter Jones, I see that we have mentioned the same variables. Not the Summitar, huh? Like I said, very difficult for anyone to guess what lens rendered an image based on the image itself.

 

[nico]

I asked you about the aperture because once you told you've had a Nokton 50 and that lens .. in my confused experience ... at wider aperture may give results that look like taken with an older lens ...
So I bet on the Nokton 🙂 ...
Ciao
Nico

 

[rover]

Nico has his thinking cap on this morning (my morning).

So basically, what you're saying is that lens type makes no difference without out of focus areas in a photograph?

I don't think this is what he is saying. The background in this photo is pretty simple and would not offer a clue to the lens signature. All lenses should perform pretty uniformly with a smoothish uniformish background.

If the background was more dynamic though, I think that would give more clues.

 

[Marc-A.]

Could it be, that despite many tests and discussions here about lens "signature" here at RFF, that it is difficult to tell what lens made what photograph? Furthermore, does this show that these determinations of lens signature can be opinionated? There's nothing wrong with opinions, of course, until they start being passed around as photographic fact. What we need is a list of several pictures, along with a corresponding list of lenses utilized to render the images. This would provide an interesting chance to see if lens signatures can actually be identified.

That's exactly the idea!

 

[Marc-A.]

Nico, it's not the Nokton, but honestly it could be the Nokton; this picture looks very alike other pictures taken with the Nokton.

 

[nico]

Nico has his thinking cap on this morning .

😀 😀 😀 ...

... I can't do better...

🙂 ciao

 

[Meleica]

Hi

Doesnt appear to be that sharp....mostly in focus for F4.... It must be either 35 or 50mm - but its a pretty tight shot for a RF camera.... 50mm elmar ?

 

[burninfilm]

Nico has his thinking cap on this morning (my morning).



I don't think this is what he is saying. The background in this photo is pretty simple and would not offer a clue to the lens signature. All lenses should perform pretty uniformly with a smoothish uniformish background.

If the background was more dynamic though, I think that would give more clues.

Okay, let me rephrase what I stated: If the background is uniform and simple, then an observer of the resulting photograph is basically uncapable of concluding the lens used to make it?

Man, that makes me want to post some pics with more "dynamic" backgrounds and see if anyone can determine what I used for those. Who knows, I might just do that. I'm extremely curious to see if that would actually help.

 

[rover]

That's exactly the idea!

We shall see. Most have mentioned more classic lenses, not the critically sharp current Asph crop, so perhaps a general signature has been identified.

 

[Peter_Jones]

Industar 61 (I still think it's FSU, maybe it's this monitor that causes me to think this) ?