Zeiss too contrasty? Issues with shadows.

[drjoke]

ZM Sonnar 50mm was my favorite lens for a good part of this year. However, when I try other lenses with lower contrast, I seem to be able to get more details out of the shadows area of my slides.

This is especially true when I use high contrast film like Velvia; it seems that the ZM doesn't do too well in comparison to lenses with lower contrast.

I have no problems with lower contrast films like Provia though.

I read somewhere that high contrast lenses are supposed to bring out more details in the shadow areas, since it recognizes and pickups more details. I also have read the opposite as well. Now I am not sure what to believe.

 

[thomasw_]

I don't use the ZM 50/1,5, but I don't see this happening at all when using Velvia 50 and my ZM 50/2.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Yes, a contrasty lens will give a shorter tonal range with a high-contrast film. Apparently in the 1950s some peple preferred uncoated lenses with Kodachrome to 'fill' the shadows (with flare, of course).

Using made-up but believable numbers, imagine a scene with a contrast ratio of 64:1 and a film that can convincingly record a contrast ratio of 32:1. If the lens has a flare factor of 2, then the scene can record more or less 1:1 on the film. If the flare factor is lower -- unity, for an easy example (LF can come close to this) then you will have to sacrfice either shadows or highlights.

Then again, I'd dispute calling the lens 'too contrasty', as I do not believe such a thing is possible. Overly contrasty films (overdeveloped mono, short-range tranny) are another matter.

Cheers,

Roger