1st shot / CV 75/2.5 Heliar / R3M

Back to the post - thanks for sharing that Bill. I have no experience with the Bessa, but I like the 75/2.5 as do many others here. As sockeyed said it is a very good portrait lens but also good for general use. I pair mine with a 35mm and find that combo very useful.
 
adayoncedawned said:
Not to be a negative nancy, but I think the first reply was on to something, he simply stated it in a terrible way.
Click to expand...

Giving thoughtful comments about a photo is one thing (which is what you did, IMO) but the earlier comment wasn't thoughtful or constructive.
 
Andrew Sowerby said:
Giving thoughtful comments about a photo is one thing (which is what you did, IMO) but the earlier comment wasn't thoughtful or constructive.
Click to expand...

Admit it. You're just enamoured with his use of the phrase "negative nancy". I know I am :eek:

Why is this lens so cheap? Why does it call out and say "Buy me. You know you want to.". I don't want to!
 
I answered the siren call of the 75/2.5 very recently. I haven't developed the film yet but I will soon. I've got my fingers crossed . . .
 
I'm just about to answer its call as well. Have a wedding coming up in December and I really should get some practice in beforehand. Robert White are going to be very pleased with me; my bank manager less so :)
 
It seems to have been discovered by DSLR users as well, as a portrait lens. The discontinued version in nikon f-mount sells for ridiculous prices on ebay and FM.
 
ray_g said:
It seems to have been discovered by DSLR users as well, as a portrait lens. The discontinued version in nikon f-mount sells for ridiculous prices on ebay and FM.
Click to expand...

I actually answered the siren call of the Pentax 77/1.8. I still want that damned lens in LTM or M mount. Hurry up Pentax :p
 
sockeyed said:
Enjoy! It's an excellent lens, great for portraits and other things:

252113962_5d1e777cc5.jpg


234400550_49911fde51.jpg
Click to expand...
Thanks Sockeyed, your post prompted me to buy this lens, looks like it will work out fine for me...
 
Burkey said:
Nice candid shot. A good example of this lens and it's ability in the hands of a competent photographer.

"Pickles up my what?" So much for reading RFF at work and
keeping my professorial dignity. ;)
Click to expand...
Appreciate the kind words Burkey..
 
adayoncedawned said:
Not to be a negative nancy, but I think the first reply was on to something, he simply stated it in a terrible way.

The lighting, while probably natural, has a really artificial look to it. I think it's a combination of the angle of illumination and the fact that delta 100 is so freakin smooth and demonstrates no grain.

It may just be my display (I'm not on my normal one now) but the upper mids seem to block up in that grey and then explode into blown highlights. At first I would consider this a result of the exposure but when it comes to pleasing skin tones one must also consider the lens in question as well as the film used.

Also, what's with the crop?
Click to expand...
It is natural light a bright sunny day, I was focused on the girl not background and the detail in and around her face is fine, and there is nothing wrong with the lens or film used, there was a person to her left so I cropped them out..
 
ray_g said:
Back to the post - thanks for sharing that Bill. I have no experience with the Bessa, but I like the 75/2.5 as do many others here. As sockeyed said it is a very good portrait lens but also good for general use. I pair mine with a 35mm and find that combo very useful.
Click to expand...
Thanks Ray, I shoot mostly people so the 75 will work well for me, thanks again...
 
Andrew Sowerby said:
I answered the siren call of the 75/2.5 very recently. I haven't developed the film yet but I will soon. I've got my fingers crossed . . .
Click to expand...
The lens should perform well Andrew, waiting is the hardest part...
 
I think it's a fine shot and I fail to see what our initial critic saw. Forced smile? Eye of the beholder there. And "What's with the crop?" Is cropping a felony? We'd probably all like to subscribe to HCB's rigor (at least I heard he never cropped), but I've never seen a thing wrong with a bit of a crop now and then. I try not to, generally, but sometimes I'm looking at a contact sheet and realize I was so intent on the shot that I failed to see the telephone pole six inches to the left of her shoulder. As it's not the subject of the photograph, I'll chop it out and lose no sleep.


Ted
 
Thanks for your input Ted, you are right I try not to, but somethings are out of your control, like people walking into the scene, thanks again for your insight..
 
I agree that the tonality looks a little botched, but there are so many variables - *especially* it being a scan of a print - that it's hard to assess the lens. I like the 75, personally. It's got a character of it's own. Definitely lower contrast than my recent Leica glass, but has a classic sort of look, and also does well in harsh sunlight. This image was in glaring midday sun against full on white marble. Note - I'm currently w/o scanner, so this is a 5D picture of my test print. No dodging/burning, just 12 seconds with a 2.5 filter as seen by my Canon DSLR.

2h81mqw.jpg


the low contrast character of the lens shows here in a favorable way - it actually held the detail and didn't blow out madly.
 
You are right E_Aiken about the Calssic look to the lens..and this is a fine image here, concidering the lighting, very well done..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom