Low contrast lens for high contrast situations?

sanmich

sanmich

Veteran
Local time
4:48 AM
Joined
Nov 3, 2006
Messages
3,420
I suddenly wondered....

These old lenses we love to talk about, yunno, not the modern stuff...

We know they are good for, say, pleasant portraiture.

But is anyone deliberately using them when shooting in harsh light to achieve a contrast reduction?

My question is mainly BW oriented. we have very strong lights most of the year, and I often find myself struggeling with the contrast, mainly through the developping processing.

Or should I follow that rule given to me once by a local photog:

"Son, shoot in the winter, print in the summer" :D
 
I think so, at least my photos show the Zeiss is the most contrasty compared to the more vintage one, but it shows more in colour than BW
 
Michael, although lenses are characterised as having high contrast or low, those terms are relative. The only reliable way of dealing with very high or very low contrast is with a suitable choice of sensitive materials and processing.
 
I use low-contrast lenses for high contrast conditions, learned from experience. A Nikkor is going to blow the highlights, a Summarit, collapsible Summicron, or Elmar will preserve them. No amount of post-processing is going to restore the image if the recording medium becomes saturated. With digital, the problem is worse as the detector response is linear. Film has a more graceful plateau for the extremes. I have an old Digital monochrome IR camera that is the extreme for saturating. I use 1/3rd stops for bracketing; no modern conveniences such as a Monitor and Histogram on it.

I also use the lower contrast lenses for C-41 Black and White film. The machine prints are usually too contrasty, the collapsible Summicron tames it.
 
Last edited:
It's exactly what I like about my 50/2 Summicron DR and 90/4 Elmar.
 
Brian Sweeney said:
I use low-contrast lenses for high contrast conditions, learned from experience. A Nikkor is going to blow the highlights, a Summarit, collapsible Summicron, or Elmar will preserve them. No amount of post-processing is going to restore the image if the recording medium becomes saturated. With digital, the problem is worse as the detector response is linear. Film has a more graceful plateau for the extremes. I have an old Digital monochrome IR camera that is the extreme for saturating. I use 1/3rd stops for bracketing; no modern conveniences such as a Monitor and Histogram on it.

I also use the lower contrast lenses for C-41 Black and White film. The machine prints are usually too contrasty, the collapsible Summicron tames it.
Click to expand...

Brian,

Thanks!! I really need to try it now..

About the Nikkors, You mean modern SLR primes or older LTMs?

If the coll 'cron is one of them, I take it that the Summitar should be in the bunch too, right?

What about a chrome canon 1.8?

Thanks...
 
I do that all the time, I go to Mexico every year and it is harsh sun even at nine in the morning. Here in California we have more harsh days than not, last week in Berkeley I did this with an almost Holga like lens from the early fifties.

2457411551_4e160cdc66.jpg
 
> About the Nikkors, You mean modern SLR primes or older LTMs?

The older Nikkor LTM's are Sonnar formula lenses, and are higher contrast than the Leitz lenses of the day. They can blow highlights.

>If the coll 'cron is one of them, I take it that the Summitar should be in the bunch too,
> right?

Yes- The Summitar is a good one for handling high-contrast. I prefer the Summicrons for sharpness.


> What about a chrome canon 1.8?

In the middle!
 
Brian Sweeney said:
>

Yes- The Summitar is a good one for handling high-contrast. I prefer the Summicrons for sharpness.

quote]

On a test at full aperture, I have measured only small differences in sharpness between the Summitar and coll 'cron and only at the periphery of the frame.
The centers were pretty much the same.

Isn't even this difference in the corner dissapearing when stopping down?
Click to expand...
 
john, that shot is a fine example of the concept. me, i'm in the process of swapping out some modern lenses for older. now have two canons, 35/2.8 & 50/1.5, with a rigid cron on the way soon. the 50/1.5 is new to me, but it seems to handle contrast well and it has that wonderful sonnar quality wide open.

i have regretted selling my DR cron two years back in pursuit of more modern lenses. i realize that some say my problem can be solved via wiser exposure, but i can't manage it. i like highlights well under control ... and i believe the older lenses will help. And if the light is not harsh? Then I get a retro look :)
 
I have a coated Summitar and collapsible Summicron, both nearly perfect. Both compare well at the center, and stopped down the edge difference is gone. The Summicron has less astigmatism, ie less swirly Bokeh. The Summitar Swirlies are not as pronounced as Summarit Swirlies. By F4, all of these lenses are outstanding.

I just picked up an Uncoated Summar. Cleaning marks on the front optic, but looks quite good. I see a shootout coming for Classic Leitz 50mm lenses soon...Elmar, Summar, Summitar, Early 1952 coll. Summicron (Thorium), Late Collapsible Summicron, Type I Rigid, Type 2 Rigid, and a Summarit.
 
It finally occurred to me that when Erwin Puts calls a lens "low to medium contrast" he's making a quantitative rather than qualitative comment. I now think of low to medium contrast as PREFERABLE to "sharper" and contrastier lenses. My w-Nikkor 35mm F2.5 is way to contrasty for me in sunlight. I think that a lower contrast lens is what will produce what we call "micro contrast." That's what gives roundness and 3-dimensionality to faces, etc. I'm a complete convert!
Vic
 
Last edited:
I took the Retina Reflex-S and Retina IIIS out last weekend with the Schneider 50/1.9 Xenon, 85/4 Tele-Arton, and 35/2.8 Curtagon. I'll need to do some scanning! These lenses really strike a balance between contrast and sharpness. In between the Leitz lenses and Nikkors.

I may have to buy another 50/1.9 Xenon and convert it to LTM.
 
Nice to see some people not married to the "more contrast is always better" mentality. Here's a couple examples of the more moderate contrast results I like in my shots. First one the 50/2 Summicron DR, taken on a VERY bright sunny June afternoon. But look at the shadow detail I was able to maintain!

171010241_64f3089b3c_o.jpg


And this one, same lens, with Ilford PanF+ and Rodinal no less(!), yet still great moderate contrast:

192398846_e27a531237_o.jpg
 
Just a thought for Nikon DSLR photographers- the original F-Mount 5.8cm F1.4 Nikkor and 5cm F2 Nikkor-S are the lowest contrast Nikkors that I've used. I'm betting a lot of wedding photographers that blow the highlights of the Bride's dress might want to try one!
 
rich, what i appreciate in your examples is how well you held the highlights in check despite placing the exposure on the high end. also, you've got that "3D" quality going in the first shot, i believe just for the reasons you state. as i said earlier, that's why i'm circling back to older lenses myself.
 
MCTuomey said:
rich, what i appreciate in your examples is how well you held the highlights in check despite placing the exposure on the high end. also, you've got that "3D" quality going in the first shot, i believe just for the reasons you state. as i said earlier, that's why i'm circling back to older lenses myself.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your comments Mike. I should also add that under such bright conditions I will shoot the film at a lower ASA (in this case Shantou ERA100 shot at about 50-80, I think) and then pull back my development time about 20%. This is a classic way to help exactly what you mention in keeping highlights in check and getting good detail in the shadows.
 
I found most Japanese lenses to be too contrasty, even the older ones. They are sharp but lacking shadow details. Also I found older German triplets (like the Agfa Apotar) handle high contrast very well and giving more of the 3D oil painting look and thereby lessening the chances of eye fatigue. But with these older lenses, the use of lens hoods would be mandatory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom