The "look" of three 50mm

[regit]

I took these when trying to match film to lens and thought that it may be interesting for some to see the relative differences in the "look" they give.

M7+TP in Diafine 4+1

 

[andyturk]

Excellent post! Are the differences only due to the lenses? If so, you might have captured the elusive "glow" on the right-hand shot.

 

[Beniliam]

Congrats for your post. I really can appreciate the differentes between the Summilux - Sonnar - Summar. I want to buy the Canon 50mm 1.5... I like the sonnar formula appearance

 

[regit]

Excellent post! Are the differences only due to the lenses? If so, you might have captured the elusive "glow" on the right-hand shot.

They are all subjected to the same treatment. The Summar does looks more "glowy" than the rest. But it also has lower contrast and more flare. Those who like the Summar would say it is glow, those who don't would say it is just flare ... I like Summar, so ... 🙂 But one have to be careful shooting against bright light source.

 

[regit]

Congrats for your post. I really can appreciate the differentes between the Summilux - Sonnar - Summar. I want to buy the Canon 50mm 1.5... I like the sonnar formula appearance

Thank you 🙂 I personally like the Sonnar best as I think it is a good all-rounder. It is the smallest and has the best bokeh of the lot... The only thing that is perhaps lacking is resolution...

 

[RayPA]

Agreed. A good and valuable post. I like the 'lux.

🙂

 

[ray_g]

Thanks for sharing this, regit. Were these all shot at the same aperture?

BTW, for those who may be interested, there are some sample photos on PNet showing the "adequate" sharpness of the underrated Summar

 

[Rich Silfver]

Great samples.
Personally my taste is more in line with what the 'lux delivers - sharp and contrasty.

 

[Honus]

Nice post. Any of the three images, standing alone, would be well-received. I agree that the 'lux delivers more punch and sharpness.

I'm curious about the development, though. I assume 'TP' means Technical Pan. What does the '4+1' mean? Does it mean 4 min. in solution A and 4+1 (5) min. in solution B?

I would appreciate knowing the exact film and development time because the tonality of these shots is beautiful.

- robert

 

[Will]

Thanks for the post,

I like the result from the sonnar...

Cheers





Will

 

[regit]

Thanks for sharing this, regit. Were these all shot at the same aperture?

BTW, for those who may be interested, there are some sample photos on PNet showing the "adequate" sharpness of the underrated Summar

Hi Ray, they were all taken at f2.

 

[regit]

Nice post. Any of the three images, standing alone, would be well-received. I agree that the 'lux delivers more punch and sharpness.

I'm curious about the development, though. I assume 'TP' means Technical Pan. What does the '4+1' mean? Does it mean 4 min. in solution A and 4+1 (5) min. in solution B?

I would appreciate knowing the exact film and development time because the tonality of these shots is beautiful.

- robert

Hi Robert,

Yes, when I said TP, I meant Technical Pan. 4+1 means 4 min in solution A and 1 min in solution B.

 

[gbb]

Hey, Regit

I'd definitly vore for tthe lux and sonnar over the summar, unless you actually want that low contrast look. Great to see more results from my TP, good to see you're enjoying it. Have you trid it in a different developer, like Rodinal or Technidol? Cheers,

GBB

 

[Frank Granovski]

The first pic looks best, the second pic looks ever so slightly under exposed, the third one most definitely looks under exposed. 😎

 

[jmilkins]

Very interesting example thanks regit.

And with the hole in the ozone layer it's some times difficult for us to avoid those bright light conditions eh ? 😉

 

[regit]

Hey, Regit

I'd definitly vore for tthe lux and sonnar over the summar, unless you actually want that low contrast look. Great to see more results from my TP, good to see you're enjoying it. Have you trid it in a different developer, like Rodinal or Technidol? Cheers,

GBB

Hi GBB, I've not tried other developer. Being a newbie to film, I've yet to graduate from diafine .... ok, I'm quite a lazy person as well 🙂

 

[regit]

The first pic looks best, the second pic looks ever so slightly under exposed, the third one most definitely looks under exposed. 😎

Do you mean overexposed? 🙂

 

[rover]

Well done, thank you

 

[Frank Granovski]

That's the one. 😎

 

[regit]

Very interesting example thanks regit.

And with the hole in the ozone layer it's some times difficult for us to avoid those bright light conditions eh ? 😉

Unfortunately, that is too right 🙁 But we just have to make do with what we can...

... avoid sunlight if I can ... (taken before blue hour) ...

MP+Sonnar 50/1.5+Plus-X in Diafine 4+4

... in the worst case, take UV pictures 🙂

M7+Helios-103 53/1.8+B+W 403+Plus-X in diafine 4+4