Lenses with the most "character"?

Shooting in open shade is optimal for the older lenses. In strong light, newer design lenses with better coating perform better.
 
NickTrop said:
Interesting thread. In my comparatively small (not to mention comparatively cheap) collection of lenses, hands down it's the Leica M39 50/2 Summar. That lens is nothing but "character". Has enough of whatchya call "character" for any ten lenses.

Distant runners up is the Ashi Super-Takumar M42 screwmount with the radioactive element and the Jupiter 9, 2/85.
|
Click to expand...

Nick,

Do you mean the 50mm/1.4 SMC as the "radioactive" lens?
The Summar is great for photos without strong light sources. In open shade, it gives you very pleasing results. My J-9 isnew to me, so I cannot comment on it yet.
 
perhaps

perhaps

you were so blinded by the national geographic subject matter coming to life, you didn't realize some slight out of focusness 😛

Pretty sure that somewhere Zeiss (Cosina) acknowledges the focus shift, explaining they wanted a true reproduction, but would adjust users lenses on request.

Gabriel M.A. said:
ooooh. I see it; that's interesting.

Well, I guess the very unscientific tests (compared with graduated rulers, no less) I did a few years back will need to be redone, for a broader, office- and family-friendly audience.

All I need is a ruler. My measuring tape died a month ago.

Sorry Lord Fluff, to hijack the thread; but this is part of the character of some lenses, isn't it? 😱
Click to expand...
 
raid said:
Nick,

Do you mean the 50mm/1.4 SMC as the "radioactive" lens?
The Summar is great for photos without strong light sources. In open shade, it gives you very pleasing results. My J-9 isnew to me, so I cannot comment on it yet.
Click to expand...

Yes. The older ones had it. Up to a certain serial number (forget now, had that lens for a little while now...) The 50/1.4 is what I'm talking about but mine isn't "super" multicoated. The lens I own is 50/1.4 super tak prior to their super multicoating. One of the all-time great 50's.

Use that J-9! Loverly portrait lens, and post some examples when you do - please. Love to see the J-9 in the hands of one of the masters here, (this means you Raid 😀
 
Thank you, Nick.

I have several SMC lenses and a few Takumar and Super Takumar lenses. I have rediscovered how wonderful lenses they are.

As for using the J-9, I certainly will do it. I have few lenses in Contax mount, and that's why I recently added a J-9 and a Sonnar 13.5cm to the CZJ 5cm/2 Sonnar.
 
Last edited:
A clean Summarit with shade first or Summitar second.

Third is the Zeiss Sonar now being sold new, 1.4 or 1.5. Be sure it focuses at 1.5 instead of 2.8 as the originals did.
 
I have a soft spot for the Summitar. Its sharp enough and has nice rendition especially with black and white. I have been tempted to buy a Summar (which is even more character ridden) from time to time but have resisted the temptation on the basis that the Summitar is the same on steroids. That is similar but technically a better lens. Besides its hard to get a Summar in good condition. To my way of thinking the Summitar produces an image that has a nice 1950s "look." A bit like some recent examples posted of James Ravellious's picture taking efforts. He was renowned for using "old glass" becuase of the look it gave. Not sure if he used a Summitar but my feeling is that shots I have taken with the Summitar have more or less this kind of look. I have a Summarit as well but prefer the Summitar.

http://www.jamesravilious.com/

PS I am not sure what the design type of the Summitar is, but in general that where I have seen photo examples taken with Sonnar types of lenses (various focal lengths) I am very favorably impressed.
 
Last edited:
The original Zeiss Jena Sonnar 5cm/2 gives me very nice looking results. The glass results in warmer color tones, but in a pleasing way. Among Leica lenses, I like the Summar and the Summicron V1.
 
For me these lenses are the Summitar (coated), 21mm Super-Angulon-M, Summilux 35mm pre-ASPH and Noctilux. All of them have some special character (at least for me). 🙂
 
I have a Nikkor 1.4 and noticed a strong tendency to flare ( or veiling flare or coma).

Would you please post more pictures with the Nikkor as I am learning to explore the potential of this lens.

Thanks
 
If the OP is looking for L brand lenses, then besides the summitar, summar, summarit and pre-asph summilux already mentioned, I would recommend trying the Summicron 50/2 DR; it is a lens that I wish I still had in my bag....

You can usually find a good specimen for much less than a summilux🙂

yep. seller's remorse.
 
One of my favourite lenses with character is the 1930 Hektor 50mm f2.5. It is a bit soft at 2.5, but ii has a great "feel" to it. Smooth tones and it is also one of the best looking of the collapsible screw-mount lenses. Difficult to find with clean glass and they can have sticky aperture controls.
The Summar is a hoot - it was a bit of a sensation when it came out, but it has look all its own. Soft and "pearly" type highlights. Usually comes with a scratched front-element which adds to its character.
The Summitar is very nice. It is smooth as silk and it is also one of the lenses that even looks good. It also has one of the most impressive sets of aperture blades. Nice "bowl" shaped bunch of petals when you stop it down.
Of the modern (post war) lenses, the 105f2.5 Nikkor LTM/S-mount/F-mount is a classic. Not the sharpest of them, but does it ever "draw" well.
Of course, the 50mm f3.5 Heliar off the Bessa T is another great piece of glass. About as good as it gets in sharpness and contrast, but it has a feeling of "roundness" and 3D effect that most other modern lenses lack. A bit oddly shaped, but that is outweighed by its performance.
I like the old Summarit's, but I cant say that they have great character. They are good performers but a bit "soul-less".
Fully agree with previous statements about the Zeiss C Sonnar 50mm f1.5 - it has very much become a favourite of mine, stuck on a M2. Great performer and "signature". I have no idea if mine is a "f1.5" or "f2.8" biased one. Having taken 1000's of shots with it - I have not found anything to complain about.
The 35/1,4 pre-asph Summilux is just a damned good lens. It does have some idiosyncrasies, field curvature, a bit of "halo" effect when shot wide-open - but again. it does have a signture that is its own. I am eagerly awaiting the VC 35/1,4 SC - has been promised for this month and I want to see if it can duplictate the performance of the Classic S-lux 35.
 
21mm 3.4 Super-Angulon

Summarit-M 5cm f1.5

35mm summilux pre-asph

Noctilux

I own all these lenses and therefore I am biased. However, I am always astounded at how unique and different each of these lenses are. I could easily (most of the time) differnetiate them on print by just looking a few seconds.

They are unique for sure.
 
Tom A said:
I am eagerly awaiting the VC 35/1,4 SC - has been promised for this month and I want to see if it can duplictate the performance of the Classic S-lux 35.
Click to expand...
I have seen a comparison of both lenses (35 Summilux pre and the new CV 35/1.4 SC) in a Japanese camera magazine yesterday. In the article, two example shots were shown, both were taken at f/1.4 with an M8 in BW, the subject was a young lady in front of trees at daylight (high contrast). Whereas the Summilux showed some softness and a smooth bokeh, the CV was much sharper but also showed higher contrast. The bokeh of the CV was simply ugly, swirly and harsh.

In a different magazine the CV 35/1.4 MC was compared to the Summilux 35 pre. In this comparison, two photos - taken at night against strong point light sources - both at f/1.4 were shown. (Don't remember the camera) Here the Summilux showed some flare but the CV (MC) handled the strong highlights very well.
 
Actually, although it is probably not what Lord Fluff was thinking about, but I believe all the same, that another lens with a unique look is the Biogon 21/4.5 - not for the softness or glow, but for how it can render tiny details and for its total absence of distortion. It is a virtual replica of the Hasselblad SWC in 35mm format. A lens which is in my opinion certainly superior to the C/Y Distagon 21, so much sought after by all FF Canon users.
 
Thanks for all the responses so far.

A few points arising -

When people say "pre-asph summilux" do they always mean the 35 or does it apply to the 50 too?

I'm not limiting this debate to just Leitz either - I and my wallet will cheerfully accept non-Leica suggestions.

And mfogiel - I can't resist this though I don't want to hijack my own thread - I did say "performance" - there are many Canon lenses that out-perform any RF lens simply by existing - how about the 16-35 and 24-70 constant f2.8 zooms for example? And who says you get to limit it to 0-50? 🙂 My ultimate Canon lens is the 85 f1.2 - a lens with a phenomenal amount of character.
 
Lord Fluff
I know what you mean, however I think for most RF users, this type of camera is really limited to 50mm fl, and the lack of zooms is seen as an advantage in terms of the way you learn to visualize the world in terms of your preferred fl. There are some users who still find it enjoyable with a 75mm, or even 90mm, but for obvious reasons of dof, lenses faster than, say 75/2 are hard to focus off center, so even if you find people who swear by the 75/1.4 or 50/1, I think it is better to use an SLR for this type of shooting.
 
mfogiel said:
Lord Fluff
I know what you mean, however I think for most RF users, this type of camera is really limited to 50mm fl, and the lack of zooms is seen as an advantage in terms of the way you learn to visualize the world in terms of your preferred fl. There are some users who still find it enjoyable with a 75mm, or even 90mm, but for obvious reasons of dof, lenses faster than, say 75/2 are hard to focus off center, so even if you find people who swear by the 75/1.4 or 50/1, I think it is better to use an SLR for this type of shooting.
Click to expand...
I'd suggest that the Summilux 75 has a distinctive look (perhaps rising to "character"?) even when not used at full aperture:

(click to enlarge)

I'd suggest that in use it is quite different from an SLR, as well as producing a different look (much though I'd like to try the Canon 85/1.2). And, no, I don't believe an SLR is "better" for this type of shot, at this (longer than 50mm) focal length (though they are better at others, and for other things).

...Mike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Did Nikon really blow Leitz and Zeiss out of the water in 1950? Not quite, but....
Replies
9
Views
1K
aoresteen
aoresteen
J
  • Article Article
How Canon Reinvented Itself for Mirrorless and Now Leads the Market!
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
JeffS7444
JeffS7444
J
  • Article Article
Collecting Cameras: It can be an obsession, but a little rationality helps!
2 3
Replies
52
Views
4K
Muggins
Muggins
J
  • Article Article
The Kowa SET R2: A leaf shutter SLR for $150 or 7 lens cine set only $111, 000 KOWABUNGA !
Replies
1
Views
381
NIKON KIU
NIKON KIU
F
The Lens Repair Apocalypse: Repair Shops INUNDATED with work, and will get worse.
2 3
Replies
55
Views
5K
WoodallP
WoodallP
Back
Top Bottom