Can you identify a "Sonnar Look"?

raid

raid

Dad Photographer
Local time
4:52 PM
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
36,567
I was so absorbed with the 35mm-40mm lens testing that I ignored my own rolls of film of my family. Eventually, I picked up four rolls of film. One roll did not have any information marked on it about lens or camera used.

I suspect a Sonnar lens.

Can you help me figure out if these photos have the Sonnar look or not?


Raid


Dana and Lina watching a video:


Sonnar6.jpg



Sonnar8.jpg


sonnar16.jpg



Sonnar1.jpg


sonnar13.jpg


Sonnar5.jpg
 
it does appear to have the Sonnar look in my eyes.. not tack-sharp but quite adequate focus.. and with the 'sonnar signature' (in my experience) having a very smooth roll-off into the OOF areas, with a creamy background

another way to tell is if you have any definite bokeh light circles, you can sometimes count the aperture blades, such as here (look at the car's license plate)

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/78/200712612_db223a8a5c_o.jpg
 
JoeFriday said:
it does appear to have the Sonnar look in my eyes.. not tack-sharp but quite adequate focus.. and with the 'sonnar signature' (in my experience) having a very smooth roll-off into the OOF areas, with a creamy background

another way to tell is if you have any definite bokeh light circles, you can sometimes count the aperture blades, such as here (look at the car's license plate)

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/78/200712612_db223a8a5c_o.jpg
Click to expand...

Brett: I am 75% sure that it was a Sonnar but there is a 25% chance that it is another vintage lens. I will post other photos from that roll that look different from the ones posted above.

Raid

575495-R1-01-1.jpg




575495-R1-00-0.jpg
 
Last edited:
Well, Raid, without insulting you, those images could have been made with a nikkor 18-55mm f5.6 and nobody would know.
They also could come out of a Sonnar or even a summilux and nobody could guess.

You now have a huge collection of pictures taken with many different lenses. It would be interesing if you could make a blind test including 10 lenses. I bet what you want that there wouldn't be a clear consensus on which is which. And most funny, there would be no consensus as to which looks better. That's just the reality, IMO.
 
It's like that "leica look" or even "vintage look".
Tell me honestly, does this image have a vintage look? And if so, is it a Leica vintage or a Nikon vintage? Or is it a new AF lens?
And no, you won't insult me if you think it's a 18-200mm consumer zoom ;-)

Web-2007-05-18-2.jpg
 
Last edited:
A specific signature of any lens would not necessarily show distinctably in every photo. Especially wide open specific signatures usually will show. At small apertures a lot of specifics get lost. So the last photo could have been made with lots of different lenses.
As for Raids photos of the two girls, they could very well be a Sonnar, but hard to tell. OOF is smooth enough to be a Sonnar, but the background is even enough to make it hard to tell. Do you have a crop of the highlights between the blinds? I guess there could be distinguishable circles or ovals.
 
@ NB23...pffft ..that´s easy, clearly shot with a Lux 35 pre Asph serial no. 38524111...everyone can see that!


hahahahahahahaha....sorry, i just had to be a smarta$$ :rolleyes:
I often can´t even make out if I shot with the 28 or 40 :-D


@ Raid, didn´t the myriards of lens test´s show that character and quality can only be discerned if compared directly against each other? I mean, the 40ies were sooo close toghether I´ll bet my legs and arms that if you see only one shot in front of you it´s completely guess work what lens it was shot with. So, just do as I do and Tag the shot´s with the lens you like the pictures to be made :-D ... can´t be of any more help here..sorry

oh...and everybody go check NB23´s Work out!!! totaly wicked awesome street style mate!! love it
 
Guys: I just wanted some assistance, if such an assistance is possible. I am not insulted or upset or even disappointed when it is impossible to tell from posted images which type of lens design it is. I was more leaning towards a Sonnar design from the smooth OOF look, but I am maybe wrong.

As for doing the lens testing, I assure you that my eyes got trained after a while to tell apart many of the lenses. I had to match each image with the a lens for each roll of film, and there were no labels placed in any image.
Would I make errors? Of course.

Raid
 
Hi Raid, first off I have to admit I’m useless with the fingerprint thing but those photos have that “sonnar” look to my eye; sharp but smooth in focus with a gradual transition to the oof areas depending on the distance; Is that what you see?
 
Sparrow said:
Hi Raid, first off I have to admit I’m useless with the fingerprint thing but those photos have that “sonnar” look to my eye; sharp but smooth in focus with a gradual transition to the oof areas depending on the distance; Is that what you see?
Click to expand...

Steve,

Yes; this is what I also see in the photos.

I took the photos at 1/15 of a second, so sharpness may be an issue in some photos, but overall, I see something that is similar to what I have seen in similarly taken photos of my children and when I used a Sonnar lens. I may have taken thousands of photos of my children so far, and I get after a while a feeling for the look obtained with certain lenses used.

My suspicion is that it could have been the J-3, or another the Sonnar lens.

Cheers,

Raid
 
laptoprob said:
A specific signature of any lens would not necessarily show distinctably in every photo. Especially wide open specific signatures usually will show. At small apertures a lot of specifics get lost. So the last photo could have been made with lots of different lenses.
As for Raids photos of the two girls, they could very well be a Sonnar, but hard to tell. OOF is smooth enough to be a Sonnar, but the background is even enough to make it hard to tell. Do you have a crop of the highlights between the blinds? I guess there could be distinguishable circles or ovals.
Click to expand...


Thanks, Rob. I will have to look again at the images. It is not a top important issue to me, but I wondered if others could tell what was not clear to me.

Raid
 
I don't think so, Raid. I would guess the children were taken at f2 or f2.8 or so.
If you check the second picture it has too much corner sharpness
for a Sonnar. Also, bokeh (light through the window shades) is not
typical. There is some strong coma.

I cann't say anything about the airplane pics, they are too far stopped down.

You know you should start writing notes when you shoot :)

Roland.

PS: attached is what I mean.
 
Last edited:
NB23 said:
Well, Raid, without insulting you, those images could have been made with a nikkor 18-55mm f5.6 and nobody would know.
They also could come out of a Sonnar or even a summilux and nobody could guess.

You now have a huge collection of pictures taken with many different lenses. It would be interesing if you could make a blind test including 10 lenses. I bet what you want that there wouldn't be a clear consensus on which is which. And most funny, there would be no consensus as to which looks better. That's just the reality, IMO.
Click to expand...

NB23: I have held blind tests here on RFF in the past, and only a few people have been able to correctly match photos with names of lenses. Still, some people did very well in such blind tests. This showed me that some RFF members have the eyes/experience to distinguish certain looks by lenses.

Raid
 
I have only used one Tessar, Stewart, on a Rollei 35. It was sharp corner
to corner but limited in speed (f3.5). So I'm not sure.

Roland.
 
ferider said:
I don't think so, Raid. I would guess the children were taken at f2 or f2.8 or so.
If you check the second picture it has too much corner sharpness
for a Sonnar. Also, bokeh (light through the window shades) is not
typical. There is some strong coma.

I cann't say anything about the airplane pics, they are too far stopped down.

You know you should start writing notes when you shoot :)

Roland.

PS: attached is what I mean.
Click to expand...

Roland: You are "the man"! Could it that I used the 50/2 Luxon which Brian adapted to LTM? Does the strong coma suggest what already appeared as "weird" in earlier Luxon shots posted here?
I have such a suspicion, by the way. WhwnI took the photos at the Naval Aviation Museum, I recall that I used either the J-3 or the Luxon. I never changed the lens on that roll of film.

I would have written on the roll of film the name of the lens after completing the roll, but somehwo I must have forgotten to do this here.

Raid
 
I was thinking about the Luxon, Raid. There is something else strange
about the picture that I looked at: The focal plane is not exactly parallel to
the film (if you check the back rest of the bed (?) on the left vs.
the foot of your daughter on the lower right). This and the coma
indicates that the adaptation is not perfect. No criticism, though, that
was a cool project.

Nice photos as always ....

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