Best normal lens for Barnack?

[arbib]

Here is another IIIf snap but taken with a coated FED 50mm f3.5 I got from Fedka. We were illustrating an antique dress that was for sale and trying to give the pic a period look. The lighting was controlled. Main light overhead to the right with a fill light next to the camera. The IIIf was on a tripod and from what I remember the exposure was 1 sec.+ @ f8. Don't quote me on this, I'm guessing here. Tri-X film developed in HC-110 1:50 for 11 minutes with 1 min agitation. The neg is snappy from being overexposed but the grain is fine. A simple flatbed screen scan. I know some of you get off on this tech stuff so I'm mentioning it. The FED did a good job and without a hood. This was taken shortly before I got my Elmar off eBay... such a deal. Two things I regret about this session are not putting a low wattage lamp behind the posing chair to separate the background drape from her hair and not noticing the posing chair's metal rod. Oh well, live and learn. Anyway, having shot with the FED and then the Elmar it's really hard to tell them apart visually. However, the Elmar has a tad smoother feel with less drag while focusing. So, that's that on that.

I hope some of you contribute to this thread and with an example.

Best,
George

BTW: Who the heck is Bellocq ?

Beautiful 🙂


I have been reading this thread, and I enjoy the conversation with great examples too. Now to my contribution:

I too think a 50/3.5 makes a nice normal lens on a Leica II/III. I just a got a beautiful Zorki 1e from Justin Low. I have a J8 on it now. BUT !! The camera is so small and compact, I am voting for the 50/3.5 collapsible. I use my RF's with 200 film and outside 95% of the time. So F/3.5 is not an issue with me. Plus F/3.5 has nice DOF for a head shoot to keep most of the face in focus.

No samples yet.... Don't have the I-50 yet, But I use F/4 on my J8,..gets the same results...If I could afford a Elmar 50/3.5, I'd get it., But at F/5.6-16 (were I normally shoot) I don't know if I could tell the difference after scanning the negs to 2400x3600 at 600dpi.

to George Bonanno
You can easily clown the background over that chair rail. Sometimes we are so pleased with a pose, a small detail gets missed...no biggie. I beleive in using period camera's too, to duplacate the period look. That is one reason why I have gotten back into RF photography

 

[Krosya]

J-3 on IIIf

J-3 on IIIf

Here is my little addition to this thread - this photo was taken with Leica IIIF and J-3 lens wide open on a Fuji print film. I think it shows off 2 things - how sharp this lens is and it's bokeh. What do you think? I'll post more as I find them.

 

[easyrider]

Here is another IIIf snap but taken with a coated FED 50mm f3.5 I got from Fedka. We were illustrating an antique dress that was for sale and trying to give the pic a period look. The lighting was controlled. Main light overhead to the right with a fill light next to the camera. The IIIf was on a tripod and from what I remember the exposure was 1 sec.+ @ f8. Don't quote me on this, I'm guessing here. Tri-X film developed in HC-110 1:50 for 11 minutes with 1 min agitation. The neg is snappy from being overexposed but the grain is fine. A simple flatbed screen scan. I know some of you get off on this tech stuff so I'm mentioning it. The FED did a good job and without a hood. This was taken shortly before I got my Elmar off eBay... such a deal. Two things I regret about this session are not putting a low wattage lamp behind the posing chair to separate the background drape from her hair and not noticing the posing chair's metal rod. Oh well, live and learn. Anyway, having shot with the FED and then the Elmar it's really hard to tell them apart visually. However, the Elmar has a tad smoother feel with less drag while focusing. So, that's that on that.

I hope some of you contribute to this thread and with an example.

Best,
George

BTW: Who the heck is Bellocq ?

Bellocq photographed the ladies of Storyville in New Orleans early in the 20th Century.


Here is a link:


http://www.masters-of-photography.com/B/bellocq/bellocq.html

 

[Krosya]

more photos

more photos

Here are a few more photos. All done with J3 on Bessa R and on 400 ISO Print Fuji Film Handheld. Wide open or pretty close to it.

 

[Krosya]

Same setup as above

 

[George Bonanno]

Bellocq...

Bellocq...

Bellocq photographed the ladies of Storyville in New Orleans early in the 20th Century.


Here is a link:


http://www.masters-of-photography.com/B/bellocq/bellocq.html

Easyrider...

Thanks for the link. Wow, that Bellocq was quite a guy. Great snaps especially since he used an 8x10. My favorite from that site is the lady with the dog. I did a search on him and came up with another site of interest that has somewhat detailed info on him.

http://www.corpse.org/issue_10/gallery/bellocq/

"Visiting a fallen comrade in the isolation hospital" is truly an outstanding snap in my opinion.

Thanks again for bringing this photographer to my attention.

Best,
George

 

[wlewisiii]

This is an interesting little thread. My own favorite/best normal lens for LTM has to be the Canon 50/1.8. It's a marvellous example of the classic planar type lens that dominates the field these days. And, best of all, even though the prices have been slowing going up, it's still massivly undervalued in the market.

Other really great lenses I've used are the I-50 collapsible & the I-61L/D. Both are stupid cheap & both are excellent examples of the basic Tessar design.

Going up to the Summicron is a very real option as Brian points out. But I will simply note that, in the end, I chose to sell my collapsible 'cron & keep my Canon lens because I felt the latter gave me better images. YMWV. 😉

William

 

[George Bonanno]

Krosya...

The J-3 pics look very good. I'm not familiar with that lens but I assume it's faster than f3.5 since the DOF is shallow wide open. It is sharp though from the looks of the first pic. Color saturation also seems more true to life than the mellower (less saturated) look of my FED and Elmar using color film. I like the altar pic best... good one. I think you might have a few Japanese normal lenses that fit Leica. If so maybe you could post a snap or two from those too. I'm trying to get an older Japanese 45mm lens for my Leica as I like that FL best but the prices are out of sight. Since I use an Imarect finder I would just tape it for a 45mm FOV... if I were so lucky to get one.

Hopefully others interested in this thread will post pics too.

Best,
George



William... can you post a pic or two ? I'd like to see an image from that Canon.

TIA,
George



PS: Ya know, something I just don't get. Why is it that some people post a pic within the thread like I do and some post a link ? The links are a drag as they require more clicks and more waiting time for them to load. Furthermore, lurkers can't see them. What's the point ? It just does not make sense to me. On occasion I am not on my personal computer and I have no intention of logging in just to see a posted picture link. Personally I think it's a selfish restricting maneuver and "you never know" who of importance is reading - looking.

OK... rant over,
George

 

[wlewisiii]

Only have links to my gallery available at the moment, but:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=56927
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=54358&ppuser=511

are a couple of places to start. Hope they're of some help.

William

 

[Krosya]

Krosya...

The J-3 pics look very good. I'm not familiar with that lens but I assume it's faster than f3.5 since the DOF is shallow wide open. It is sharp though from the looks of the first pic. Color saturation also seems more true to life than the mellower (less saturated) look of my FED and Elmar using color film. I like the altar pic best... good one. I think you might have a few Japanese normal lenses that fit Leica. If so maybe you could post a snap or two from those too. I'm trying to get an older Japanese 45mm lens for my Leica as I like that FL best but the prices are out of sight. Since I use an Imarect finder I would just tape it for a 45mm FOV... if I were so lucky to get one.

Hopefully others interested in this thread will post pics too.

Best,
George


J-3 lens is a russian Jupiter - 3 50mm /1.5 . Its a Sonnar design and if you find a good one - its very good.
I Do not have any Japanese normal FL lenses. Only Telephoto - Nikon 85/2. Used to have a Canon 85mm as well, but sold it. But I do have a few russian ones - Very rare ZK (Zonnar Krasnogorsk) 50/2 from 1948 (its a Zorki lens that could possibly be made with real Zeiss glass and by Zeiss workers). I also have russian 50/2.8, 50/3.5 coll Industar. So I'll post some from them when I get those pics scanned.
I also have a Summitar Leica lens 50/2 coll. which I like a lot as well. Just need time to do all that.

 

[harmsr]

Hi Krosya,

Sorry for the delay in answering.

The new re-issue summicron is a great lens, which is basically identical to the current M mount summicron except for close focus minimum of 1 meter.

If you like the rendering of the modern summicron (which I do) it is a great lens. It is also more flare resistant than the older vintage lenses.

The main reason that I prefer the old Summicron vs. the new one is just the size on the iiif. The new Summicron matches an "M" camera very well from balance and feel, but seems a little large on the iiif. On the other hand, it does seem much more at home on a iiig.

If you are looking for "probably" the "best" 50 mm LTM available in f 2.0, that is the re-issue summicron.

My iiif is for enjoyment, to remind my "eye" on judging light without a meter, and just the nostalgic experience of using an old Leica like the iiif. Probably for that reason, I prefer the vintage lenses even though I am a big fan of the more modern Leica lenses.

Best,

Ray

 

[350D_user]

I'm more than happy with the Industar-22 lens I have on my Standard. It's *very* sharp.

 

[raid]

Any of the vintage 50mm should do fine. I have used a Zeiss Jena 5cm/2in LTM on a Leica IIIc, and it looks very cool and gave me great looking slides with Fujichrome Velvia. I also like the paster colors I get with the old 5cm/3.5 Elmar that I often use on a Standard Leica. The Canon 50mm/1.8 is a great lens for photography and it looks great on vntage cameras. My Canon is the Serenar in chrome finish. Another great lens is the J-3. It gives you a 50/1.5 at a reasonable cost. When I compared twenty 50mm for Leica cameras, many chose the photos taken with the J-3 as "best". Of course, I still like my Summicron rigid (first version) in satin finish. It is a classic.

I want to add that using a new lens defies the whole idea of using a Barnack. Vintage is not an option; it is mandatory!

Raid

 

[easyrider]

Easyrider...

Thanks for the link. Wow, that Bellocq was quite a guy. Great snaps especially since he used an 8x10. My favorite from that site is the lady with the dog. I did a search on him and came up with another site of interest that has somewhat detailed info on him.

http://www.corpse.org/issue_10/gallery/bellocq/

"Visiting a fallen comrade in the isolation hospital" is truly an outstanding snap in my opinion.

Thanks again for bringing this photographer to my attention.

Best,
George

You are welcome Eddie -- eh, I mean George. That Bellocq page is a good find. Ladies in that profession are all over the Internet and i wonder whether a modern-day Bellocq will emrge some day.


Inspired by this thread (and RFF), I took out my long-neglected IIIf with a 5cm Summitar and shot at a Saturday afternoon jazz session at a local club -- the Pilot Tavern in mid-town Toronto. There was almost no light. My Minolta meter indicated speeds between 1/10th adn 1/30th with the Summitar wide open. I loaded a roll of Fuji 800. I posted some in another thread. "Bought a Summitar." here is my fav.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=43977&d=1176766049

The group is the is Pat Labarbera quartet.

This is a scan from a 4x6 print. I have not had much luck with scanning film on my Epson 3170.

 

[George Bonanno]

Easyrider,

That's a wonderful thing that you're shooting with a IIIf and a 50mm lens. It just doesn't get any better than that. Well, sometimes, anyway. The 4x6 scan looks great... hopefully the music was as good and the crowd was gettin' down on the good foot. I find when shooting stage stuff that 1/30th. sec. wide open with any lens - film combo is right on target. I seldom if ever use a light meter anymore under those conditions. 1/30 sec. wide open 90% of the time is fine whether it's Broadway or a small playhouse.

As far as scanning film the 3170 should do the job. I use an old 1240U Photo for 35mm scans and it works very well. However I scan them one at a time. The 3170 is a much better scanner. Anyway, here's a decent review on your scanner. Hopefully it'll be helpful.

http://personal.inet.fi/private/luukkanen/3170_review.html

OK, I'll look at that other thread now.

Best,
George

BTW: Its Lemmy... Lemmy Caution.

 

[Krosya]

More screwmounts examples

More screwmounts examples

Well, this thread slowed down a bit, so since I got some time here to look through my old photos, I picked a few more to display here.
First Russian Industar I-22 coll. A copy of Elmar I suppose. I used to have Elmar and never got results as good as I get with the I-22. I-22 RULES!!!!!!!!!
It's a 50mm 3.5 lens. These photos were shot on Bessa R - the only Rf camera I had at that time. All photos are scans from photos on a flatbed - quick and dirty way, but still gives you some idea.
Comments are always welcome.

 

[Krosya]

Summitar

Summitar

These are examples of Summitar. I really like this lens. It has that vitage quality to it and the photos that made using it. It's sharp , even wide open. Maybe I got a good one, but I have no problem using it wide open. These photos are wide open or very close to it. On Bessa R.
Well, here we are:

 

[Krosya]

More Summitar

More Summitar

Here are more - these are wide open, handheld at about 1/8sec. on 400ISO film.

 

[Krosya]

And yet more of Summitar - can you tell - I like this lens. 😉 There was a light show there .

 

[paragon]

It really deapends on what are you trying to achieve?

Presumably this is not your ONLY, or every day camera.

To me it is a strange question as the whole point of using a "vintage" camera is to use it with a lens from that period.
The only thing that you cannot really replicate is (probably), film from that period, but everythingelse should be as near to the original as possible

A 3.5 cm or 5cm lens, (Elmar) from that period is what I would use