W/NW: What's so special about Elmar-M?

[katgut@earthlink.net]

"There are, as you note, many variables in the image-making process (scanning, PS, etc.). In my personal experience, for instance, I have found film/developer combinations to have a strong impact on the final look of an image. But if you are going to take the perspective that innumerable variables make conclusions impossible, then there is no point in asking your question, or even participating in this forum, for that matter."

Not to belabor the point, but one could, theoretically, simply take the same shot with two different lenses and keep all else-film, development, PS--the same.

 

[Ghiom]

Many people speak about lense's specific signature...

I don't think that people here are looking for any kind of "technical" tests (which one has the best this or that)...

 

[hlockwood]

Well, the Dr. does ask a valid question. What is special about the Elmar?
One can't simply post a couple of photos and say how great a lens is (especially when a couple are out of focus). If you're going to make claims about a lens, you must post the subject taken with another lens as well.
The variables introduced in scanning and PS render the whole excercise futile.
I'm skeptical that it does any better than my Canon FD 50 1.8--a lens that can be had on Ebay for $5--, although I have yet to test the Canon side-by-side with my newly-acquired Elmar-M 50. When I do I'll post the results.

I tend to agree with your conclusions regarding other lenses. And when you add in the film used, the "signature" of the lens is further obscured.

My attraction to this lens is based on a couple of factors. First, I like images that are sharp and contrasty (not everyone's taste.) The Elmar-M does that nicely, but, of course, other lenses do that as well.

That the lens is small, and even smaller when collapsed, makes for a compact kit that is pocketable.

And I have to admit, I like the look of the lens on the camera. 😛

Harry

 

[Ghiom]

I guess that is just the right confession...
subjectivity
I also do like the way it looks and its collapsing size, but can not figure out about choosing to keep it or not... may be just too "crispy" to my own taste...

 

[Pherdinand]

no doubt it's a good lens.
What i find strange/funny is, when somebody makes such a great image, and then tries to give all the merits to a ...lens!
Is it humble modest character or is it a real 'believer' (gearhead)?

 

[jja]

Pherdinand, very good point (not that you were talking about me re: great images 🙂)! I'm with you 100%, the greatness (or mediocrity) of an image finally depends on the photographer's vision and a little bit of luck. Having said this, I definitely see differences in character between my various lenses, though sometimes these differences are almost impossible to describe. And while I'm a bit of a gearhead, I'm no 'believer.'