Ronald M
Veteran
I would not get one. Nobody ever could make a decent monochrome print with a 2.8 Planar Rollie, Hasselblad, Contax RTS. Zeiss has no skill at all. Listen to all the internet gossip. How could Zeiss possibly start now with the ZM lenses . Oh I know. They are made in Japan. Ya that Japanese glass is great for monochrome.
kipkeston
Well-known
I have the biogon for now but I'm planning on getting the planar soon. Avotius Would you mind sharing your scanning techniques?
juno_lau
Established
drewbarb said:
but i still can't understand...
mfogiel said:
mfogiel focused on the rear border of the cup, so it is the side far away from the camera, right?
to in order to made the front border sharp, so it is the side close to the camera?
so the DOF is actully in front of the focus point???
( |________| : DOF , [] : focus )
so which one is right for the planars?
1. camera |________________[]
2. camera []________________|
and is this apply to all planar, including the soviets?
thanks
jsuominen
Well-known
juno_lau said:
If I remember correctly mfogiel has a Sonnar lens, which is from the older patch and it's optimized for f/2.8. At wide open f/1.5 - and some smaller apertures, too - the lens front focuses. So, in order to get on-a-spot sharp images at f/1.5 mfogiel had focused on the rear border of the cup. That is what he is also explaining here:
...if I understood it correctly.mfogiel said:
And it has nothing to do with ZM Planars, because only ZM Sonnar 50/1.5 has this special feature.----
Edit: BTW the DOF at f/1.4 and f/2 is this according to one Leica-M lens tech paper:
at f/1.4 -> 2cm in 0.8m; at f/2 -> 2.7cm in 0.8m
at f/1.4 -> 3.2cm in 1m; at f/2 -> 4.5cm in 1m
So, focusing is not easy at close range. Here are four samples at wide open. First one has a small focus error - made by the photographer - but the rest of shots are on-spot:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2075/2022383812_0d552ea5dd_o.jpg (Millenum Nikkor-S 50mm/1.4 at f/1.4, 0.9m)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2017/2021557159_5f85278d41_o.jpg (vintage Nikkor-S.C 5cm/1.4 at f/1.4, 0.9m)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2193/2021792349_cf00e16f92_o.jpg (CV Nokton 50mm/1.5 LTM at f/1.5, 0.9m)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2051/2021367933_b83f2e7581_o.jpg (C/Y Carl Zeiss T* Planar 50mm/1.4 at f/1.4, 0.9m)
All shots were made with camera on tripod with Kodak Tri-X 400TX b&w film. And no beer was used, when producing these shots.
Last edited:
Marc-A.
I Shoot Film
x-ray said:
Thanks Don for you advice. I know you're right, but the path to the good photography is long and twisting for an amateur like me. If there was such a magic bullet ...
Best,
Marc
willie_901
Veteran
Roger Hicks,
As a C-Sonnar (unmodified) owner I appreciate your sharing the advice of Dr. Nasse, and how this advice has worked well for you. I too enjoy C-Sonnar photos and, while I rarely use RFs for shots closer than 6-8 feet, I do not find the lens difficult to use wide open.
Is the following summary correct for an early C-Sonnar lens (unmodified by Zeiss) ?
o f 1.5 focus on the intended focus point and take whatever DOF there may be (this is what I do)
o at f 1.5 DOF will be more in front of the subject than behind it
o as you stop down (and DOF increases), assume practically all of the DOF is behind (further away from the lens) your intended focus point
Thanks in advance,
willie
As a C-Sonnar (unmodified) owner I appreciate your sharing the advice of Dr. Nasse, and how this advice has worked well for you. I too enjoy C-Sonnar photos and, while I rarely use RFs for shots closer than 6-8 feet, I do not find the lens difficult to use wide open.
Is the following summary correct for an early C-Sonnar lens (unmodified by Zeiss) ?
o f 1.5 focus on the intended focus point and take whatever DOF there may be (this is what I do)
o at f 1.5 DOF will be more in front of the subject than behind it
o as you stop down (and DOF increases), assume practically all of the DOF is behind (further away from the lens) your intended focus point
Thanks in advance,
willie
x-ray
Veteran
Marc-A. said:
There is no magic bullet or everyone would own one. Just pick a film, developer and lens and stick with it. Jumping form fil to film, developer to developer and lens / system to another only slows the process of refining technique. This is why I suggest taking classes / workshops from credible professionals and learn better photography. The money is better spent that way than a car load of new equipment. IMO I'd rather be known for great photographs than the kind of camera in my bag. Anyone can buy a camera but not everyone can use it like an artist.
jbf
||||||
Marc-A. said:
I dont get what you mean by "plastic" rendition. What do you mean by this? You mean that the highlights are extremely "poppy" or blown? If that is what you mean, I would attribute that to scanning/developing maybe? I dont know.
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Willie,willie_901 said:
First, I don't know the answer, but broadly, I believe you are right. All I'd add is that for close-up portraits at full aperture with an unmodified lens, I'd be inclined to focus on the tip of the nose, not the eyes. Or have the lens modified!
Sorry I cannot be more help.
Cheers,
Roger
back alley
IMAGES
is it fact that new zm 50 sonnar lenses have been calibrated for 1.5?
i have read differently in some places.
has anyone confirmed this with zeiss or it's distributors/dealers?
joe
i have read differently in some places.
has anyone confirmed this with zeiss or it's distributors/dealers?
joe
willie_901
Veteran
Roger,
Thanks for your thoughts.
willie
Thanks for your thoughts.
willie
Krosya
Konicaze
back alley said:
Unless it's just changed, and I mean JUST - it's not true. I'e. Sonnar 50 is still calibrated to 2.8. Reason I say this is - about a month ago I emailed Zeiss with this specific question and thats what they told me ( I think I posted it here some place). They say that they still make Sonnar 50 calibrated to 2.8, but offer a recalibration for free to 1.5 while lens is still under warranty.
So, as I got this answer about a month ago, I'd imagine thats where things still are. Unless, of course Zeiss JUST changed that. Best way to find out - go to Zeiss site and email them with this question.
drasko
Newbie
Hi Roger,
You are saying : "Handling focus shift on the Sonnar is very easy. As you stop down, treat all the d-o-f as if it were BEHIND the focused point."
As I understand, looking at the object, all DOF (in-focus area) will be after (behind, more far away) from the focal point. So if we focus on the eyes, then ears will be more in focus.
So if we want to have focus on the eyes, we have to set-up the focus on the ears and lean back few inches, right ?
BR,
Drasko
You are saying : "Handling focus shift on the Sonnar is very easy. As you stop down, treat all the d-o-f as if it were BEHIND the focused point."
As I understand, looking at the object, all DOF (in-focus area) will be after (behind, more far away) from the focal point. So if we focus on the eyes, then ears will be more in focus.
So if we want to have focus on the eyes, we have to set-up the focus on the ears and lean back few inches, right ?
BR,
Drasko
drasko
Newbie
From what I understand, Roger said exactly opposite : "As you stop down, treat all the d-o-f as if it were BEHIND the focused point" - i.e. DOF will be more __BEHIND__ the sunject then in front of it.
Which is correct ?
Or to depict this with an example - if I want the focus on the eyes, should I focus on the ears or on the front of the nose ?
BR,
Drasko
drasko
Newbie
Mfoigel,
this is not how I understood what Roger was saying. He said : "As you stop down, treat all the d-o-f as if it were BEHIND the focused point", which would imply that focal point is on __CLOSE__ BOUNDARY, and after it the DOF begins not FAR boundary, where DOF ends.
Roger is suggesting :
camera -> [f---------]
and you are suggesting :
camera -> [---------f]
where f is focal point and [---] is DOF.
Which one is correct ?
BR,
Drasko
drasko
Newbie
This is not what I understood. I understood that when stopped down - there is no focus shift, and the actual DOF corresponds to what you see in the RF. Problem comes when you open wide. Then the focus shifts.
For Marek, it shifts closer to lenses (in front of the the subject, so you should focus on the ears to get eyes in focus)). For Roger it shifts away from the lenses (behind the subject, so you should probably focus on the tip of the nose to get eyes in focus).
I am asking this because it is these ~5cm that is annoying me on wide open lenses.
I actually take portraits very often, and then you would go for wide open. But somehow eyes often come out of the focus, and I have an impression that focus shifts more towards the ears.
This seems to be contrary to what Marek was talking, as it appears that RF in this case is giving me focus on the CLOSE BOUNDARY of the DOF, so everything behind (behind the eyes, thus the ears) fall into the focus.
BR,
Drasko
silent1
Well-known
I've been using my ZM Planar 50mm on black and white film for a while now and can't really complain. Here's a couple of examples:
Turtle
Veteran
This lens is high contrast but nothing that cannot be adjusted for with a touch more exposure (by downrating film perhaps 1/3-1/2 a stop from what you are used to and reducing development if required.
IMHO it gives beautiful B&W images.
IMHO it gives beautiful B&W images.
Richard G
Veteran
This wonderful shot is from the Crazy about the Planar thread. I could live with this lens. I have the Sonnar. Love it. The focus shift is manageable. I think the Sonnars may differ lens to lens. Mine front focuses at 1.5 by 1cm or so at minimum focus distance, and the focus point moves back to the RF focus point at about f2.5 and goes further back with smaller apertures but the DOF enlarges, pretty much negating the focus shift.
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
A Gorgeous lens for B&W...
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/helenartemishill/7875552222/]
A Bitter Sweet day... by helenhill_HH, on Flickr[/URL]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/helenartemishill/7875552222/]
A Bitter Sweet day... by helenhill_HH, on Flickr[/URL]