75/2.5 Color Heliar, Opinions Please

N

Nearsighted

RFF-aholic
Local time
1:41 AM
Joined
Nov 15, 2005
Messages
106
I just received this lens and I'm wondering if anyone else is using it. My main question is how slow of shutter speed can I use and still expect good results. I'm also curios about bokeh and sharpness. Any input is welcomed. Thanks, Jim
 
I do not have this lens so can't give you any info on bokeh or sharpness first hand except to say that I have heard that it is sharp. The old rule of thumb was that the slowest shutter speed to use was 1/the focal length in use. It worked well with the SLRs I use but I find that I can hold a stop or two slower with a RF. It is something that you have to experiment with to find your personal limits for an acceptably sharp (to you) result. I am sure you will enjoy the new lens.

Bob
 
Rich, I had a look at you gallery. That shot "Ben in the Park" is what I was looking for. Nice picture. Do you remember if that was taken wide open? Thanks again.
 
picture of my cousin taken with cv 75/2.5 wide open on neopan 1600. shutter speed around 1/30sec, if memory serves right.
 
Last edited:
HERE are a few of my shots taken with the 75/2.5. It's a great lens and very flattering for portraits (I think that it's intentionally not over-sharp). Bokeh is quite lovely, too, and build quality is good.
 
I see only one problem with this lens ... It's too close to 50mm ... I wish VC could come up with a fast 90mm or 100mm ...

Fred
 
fredus said:
I see only one problem with this lens ... It's too close to 50mm ... I wish VC could come up with a fast 90mm or 100mm ...

Fred
Click to expand...

Fred, now that they have the improved focus capability of the R3A, it would seem like a natural for them to upgrade their 90 to f/2.8 & the 75 to f/2. The question is whether they're interested in the telephoto end of the spectrum. It's not where they've directed their energies in the past. The other question is whether the cost to produce such a lens would take them out of their niche, i.e. would they consider it feasible to do within their price structure?

Huck
 
Last edited:
Huck Finn said:
It's not where they've directed their energies in the past. The other question is whether the cost to produce such a lens would take them out of their niche, i.e. would they consider it feasible to do within their price structure?

Huck
Click to expand...

Excatly and this is exactly why I think they will go in that direction. They have fast lens in 28, 35, 40 and 50mm. I believe next is 90mm and 75mm. I'm sure they can pull a 90mm f/2 for < $500 or so ...

Fred
 
But I'll bet Cosina continues previous practice in not offering the same apertures for the same focal lengths as Leica; they'll be either a bit faster or a bit slower than Leica's lenses. So, a 75mm f/1.8 maybe, and a 90mm f/2.2...?

I do have a 75mm Heliar but have not used it very much. What I have seen of it though is pleasant.
 
My two lens combo for my R is the 2.5/35 C and the 2.5/75. I thought the two lenses would be far enough apart in focal length to be effective. Both lenses sharing the same speed (or lack of) so I would get better at guestimating exposure. Thanks you guys for all the sample photos. I'll post a few shots when I get some back. Just one more question. I notice the lens is in the big picture throught the finder on my R. Do you guys (who shoot with the R)use the external finder with this lens or are the frame lines in the R's built in finder good enough?
 
Jim, I cannot remember if it was wide open or not, maybe f/4. The bokeh on this lens is very nice if that's your concern. Erwin Puts says that its wide open performance is a weak point but mostly on the edges. I think that only really matters mostly in terms of shooting a resolution chart and in the real world it's no big deal.

Here's another 75VC shot, it's really a great lens:

http://static.flickr.com/24/52581200_5411d9f618_o.jpg

Email if you want me to show you a few others shot with the 75VC that I have on my hard rive at home....
 
Here are a couple of shots with my 75 Heliar where I was trying to see what the bokeh looked like, and looking for flare as well... These both were about f/2.8 I believe, for the first one I was focused at the minimum focusing distance...
 
fredus said:
Excatly and this is exactly why I think they will go in that direction. They have fast lens in 28, 35, 40 and 50mm. I believe next is 90mm and 75mm. I'm sure they can pull a 90mm f/2 for < $500 or so ...

Fred
Click to expand...

Fred, Stephen Gandy reports on his CameraQuest website a conversation he had with Mr. Kobayashi some years ago in which Mr. K said that he saw the strengths of RF cameras as being their wide angle lenses because these lenses can be built without retrofocus designs to avoid the SLR mirror. Originally he had planned the 75/2.5 lens as the longest in his system. For some reason, he conceded to the market & offered the 90/3.5. but I don't think that these lenses are his real interest & I don't think that RF lens design offeres anything that can't be accomplished equally well on an SLR due to the lack of mirror constraints at these longer focal lengths.

Can they make a 90/2 for less than $500? I don't know, but I do know that they don't have a camera in the CV system that can focus such a lens at its maximum aperture. They have in the past built lenses that will work on their own cameras. Incidental to this is the fact that they can also work on other cameras, but they have not set themselves up to be an OEM for after market lenses for other cameras. Rather, they have developed their own system.

By the way, that 90/2 for <$500? Consider that with adapter, the 90/3.5 cost $370. To get to f/2, they would have to add more than a stop and a half. I think that would be asking a lot for $130 for a lens for a small niche market. It would in all likelihood be at least double the cost.

Huck
 
Doug said:
But I'll bet Cosina continues previous practice in not offering the same apertures for the same focal lengths as Leica. QUOTE]

Hmm . . .

At least that's what they say, Doug. May be a little marketing magic at work here. I've read 9 test reports of CV lenses in Popular Photography, which included measurements of both focal length & maximum aperture. Only 2 of the 9 lenses measured within +/- 1.0 of their actual maximum aperture. Is this really a big deal? Plenty of lenses vary from their stated specs. Well, to me it's a big deal because by listing non-standard maximum apertures, they give the impression of being more precise than normal. Why else would you list a maximum aperture of f/2.5 unless it really is f/2.5? The 75/2.5 is a perfect example of this. It's maximum aperture was measured a f/2.7 by Pop Photo. So, why not call it f/2.8?

This practice reduces their credibility in my eyes because they have used such non-standard specs to hype their products. For example, they call the 28/1.9 the fastest 28 ever. Is it? I don't know because Pop Photo hasn't reviewed this lens. But why not just call it 28/2 & dispense with the hype? Anyone else would. I don't mind the fact that the focal lengths are off because everyone else's are too - & CV lists standard focal lengths. But when they call a lens 35/2.5 instead of 35/2.8, they lead you to believe that you're getting a little more for your money. Would you feel the same way if they called it 35/2.7, which is what it really is?

So, yes, you're right that any such new lens will probably be listed at a non-standard spec, but equally lkiely is that it will not actually be as spec'd.

Huck
Click to expand...
 
Nearsighted said:
I just received this lens and I'm wondering if anyone else is using it. My main question is how slow of shutter speed can I use and still expect good results. I'm also curios about bokeh and sharpness. Any input is welcomed. Thanks, Jim
Click to expand...

Hello:

I find that I can handhold a 75mm on a M at 1/60 and am surprised by this. A minimal acceptable shutter speed for handheld shots, in my hands, is 1/(twice the focal length) in general. I think the extra heft is responsible.

Others have shown acceptable results at lower speeds- presumibly younger and uncaffinated.

yours
Frank
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom