bayernfan
Well-known
yes, i'm glad i own both. i came so close to selling the summaron.
raid
Dad Photographer
I sold the 35/2.8 not knowing yet of its qualities.
teddy
Jose Morales
Hello everyone, here are a set of photos from the Summaron 35/2.8. I've been giving it some love and attention. I hope some of you enjoy these.
Old sheds near Lobethal and pears
Leica M3, Leitz Summaron 35/2.8, Kodak Tri-X, Rodinal 1:100 @ 60 mins
Old sheds near Lobethal and pears
Leica M3, Leitz Summaron 35/2.8, Kodak Tri-X, Rodinal 1:100 @ 60 mins
robert blu
quiet photographer
Hmmm, never sell lenses...but you can find again another one
robert
PS: excellent photos in this thread, but I'm afraid are the photographers to make them so good...not just the lens! Bravo to everyone!
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
m2, summaron 35 2.8, tri-x 400
Giulio
These shots look digitally over-sharpened. They are great shots! Why not kill the excess sharpening and re-post?
giulio stucchi
Well-known
Hi Rob,
thanks for your input.
The 3 photos are straight scans from my Epson V600 without much or any post production.
I am one of the less knowledgeable person when it comes down to photo editing and this is also the part of my workflow I like the least.
I quickly re-process one of photo, please have a look and let me know it looks better to your eyes:
Original:
Rev:
Cheers
Giulio
thanks for your input.
The 3 photos are straight scans from my Epson V600 without much or any post production.
I am one of the less knowledgeable person when it comes down to photo editing and this is also the part of my workflow I like the least.
I quickly re-process one of photo, please have a look and let me know it looks better to your eyes:
Original:
Rev:
Cheers
Giulio
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Giulio, to be honest I prefer the first version, the second version is too pale.
I think Rob F. is aiming at the "Unsharp Mask" setting in Photoshop, if you are using that. This is a digital device to make your picture to look sharper than it actually is.
Usually I put it on an amount of 343% at a radius of 0,1 pixels. That gives me the sharpness of a normal analog print. However, if you make a smaller copy of your picture to show it on the web ("save for web") you'll have to back to about 30% at a radius of 0,1 pixels, otherwise the picture gets an unpleasant look.
Erik.
I think Rob F. is aiming at the "Unsharp Mask" setting in Photoshop, if you are using that. This is a digital device to make your picture to look sharper than it actually is.
Usually I put it on an amount of 343% at a radius of 0,1 pixels. That gives me the sharpness of a normal analog print. However, if you make a smaller copy of your picture to show it on the web ("save for web") you'll have to back to about 30% at a radius of 0,1 pixels, otherwise the picture gets an unpleasant look.
Erik.
giulio stucchi
Well-known
Thanks Erik.
I tried the suggested settings and I am ending up getting almost the same look as my first photo.
Normally I just scan and adjust the levels (if necessary to my eyes).
I never really spend too much time on editing, my bad.
Giulio
I tried the suggested settings and I am ending up getting almost the same look as my first photo.
Normally I just scan and adjust the levels (if necessary to my eyes).
I never really spend too much time on editing, my bad.
Giulio
Muju79
http://muju.tumblr.com/
Giulio,
in case you're using the Epson Scan software there's a very good chance that the software is applying a sharpness mask by itself which in my opinion is too strong and always leads to over-sharpened looking scans.
To prevent this, you have to work in "Professional mode" and make sure the "unsharp mask" box has no tick. In my version of the software the tick goes back on by itself after each new preview and scan, which I find quite annoying because sometimes I forget to remove it and I have to scan again.
https://files.support.epson.com/htmldocs/prv5ph/prv5phug/scan2_4.htm
Cheers.
in case you're using the Epson Scan software there's a very good chance that the software is applying a sharpness mask by itself which in my opinion is too strong and always leads to over-sharpened looking scans.
To prevent this, you have to work in "Professional mode" and make sure the "unsharp mask" box has no tick. In my version of the software the tick goes back on by itself after each new preview and scan, which I find quite annoying because sometimes I forget to remove it and I have to scan again.
https://files.support.epson.com/htmldocs/prv5ph/prv5phug/scan2_4.htm
Cheers.
Hi Rob,
thanks for your input.
The 3 photos are straight scans from my Epson V600 without much or any post production.
I am one of the less knowledgeable person when it comes down to photo editing and this is also the part of my workflow I like the least.
I quickly re-process one of photo, please have a look and let me know it looks better to your eyes:
Original:
Rev:
Cheers
Giulio
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Yes, I think it does look better! I'd like to see the third of the three above, done that way, as I think it needs the most help. The little speckled details in the coat, and on the ground, jump out at me too much. Perhaps a lower contrast would help.
bucs
Well-known
This lens has gone up in price over the last couple of years. Used to see the non goggled version go for $800 now theyre north of 1k
giulio stucchi
Well-known
Guys,
I will have a look and rescan these checking for the right settings as soon as I have the time for it (end of the week possibly).
Thanks everyone for the inputs.
Cheers
Giulio
I will have a look and rescan these checking for the right settings as soon as I have the time for it (end of the week possibly).
Thanks everyone for the inputs.
Cheers
Giulio
giulio stucchi
Well-known
m2, summaron 35 2.8, tri-x 400
Giulio
Giulio
ptpdprinter
Veteran
Interesting: some of the images are super sharp; others, not so much.
teddy
Jose Morales
Most possibly others camera, exposure, development and scanning technique. Not the lens.
--
giulio stucchi
Well-known
m2, summaron 35 2.8, tri-x 400
Giulio
Giulio
bayernfan
Well-known
it's sharp. i tested mine against a couple 35mm primes that are known to be "sharp", and it was the sharpest.
it was ahead of its time when it was released, as many 60s Leica optics are known to be.
giulio stucchi
Well-known
m6, summaron 35 2.8, tri-x 400
Giulio
Giulio
teddy
Jose Morales
A day at the Adelaide Zoo
Leica M2, Leitz Summaron 35/2.8, Adox CMS 20ii, Rodinal 1:200, 20 mins @ ISO 6
I've had 4 of these Summarons, and found that the one with slightly more contrast is the one with purple/blue
coatings compared to amber/purple coatings. Not much, but there is a difference.
This lens is sharp.
Leica M2, Leitz Summaron 35/2.8, Adox CMS 20ii, Rodinal 1:200, 20 mins @ ISO 6
I've had 4 of these Summarons, and found that the one with slightly more contrast is the one with purple/blue
coatings compared to amber/purple coatings. Not much, but there is a difference.
This lens is sharp.
giulio stucchi
Well-known
Love this family portrait Jose!
I am considering some slower iso film for the summer but i am so used to trix that chaning it will be difficult for me.
Keep posting!
Giulio
I am considering some slower iso film for the summer but i am so used to trix that chaning it will be difficult for me.
Keep posting!
Giulio