Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/06/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Don I approached your post with a reasonably open mind. You are an excellent shooter whose work I really respect. Unfortunately, read through your several times and still end up confused and dazed. I wonder how many good images might pass to the "ones that got away" category while fiddling with or deciding on what lens is best? Besides considerable size,weight and cost, the difference between a 902.8 and 90 2.0 is only one stop. (or one shutter speed reduction) The 90 2.8 surpasses (in all tests I've read) the 2.0 in image quality until the 2.0 gets to about 5.6 and it "catches up". I've owned 85's 90's 105's (best med tele ever IMAOPIRHO) with German and Japanese ancestry. I've spoken nicely and listed to what they were trying to tell me but never have they become drama queens. Is it strictly a Russian thing? I also became a bit mystified about the wrinkle routine you espoused. (I've got more than my share of them and avoid Micro Nikkor mirror shots whenever I can) A lens at F 4 should show a bit better performance and depth than 2.8 or 2.0 and would seem to make wrinkles snap.Now licking the filter on the lens and rubbing it a bit could help? I certainly understand and agree with you about the tool aspect and would not consider photographing while skewing around with a pot. It does seem as if too many tools to choose from might well muddy the water when seeing is needed. Avedon would have looked pretty klutzy donning an M4 and following around a hot shot Magnum photog. I'll bet HCB would also screw the pooch if trying to simulate Avedon in the studio as well.. One other thing (or maybe two or three and I'll cease and desist) and it relates to PJ and "street photography". That term makes me rush to the old medicine cabinet for the bottle of TUMS. Whomever was the jerkoff that linked those two words together should be forced to drink HYPO. Still, if you are outside doing slice of life image making while trying your best to seem unobtrusive, previsualization works wonders. I don;t feel as if it is necessary to hump an 8x10 and do wild outback mother nature photography to practice previsualization. Don't know if it was Adams or Minor White who coined the term but it is a lot more important to me than what the camera companies are shilling as new and improved. Walt p.s. Just though of something else and then I'll de-yap. I'm too forkin old to carry all the junk around I used to. Funny, started with Pentax and did ok. The longer I worked in the field the more crap I acquired. One day I looked up and saw two shooters on assignment. Both were more than accomplished but one had a couple of F's hanging around his neck and the other was loaded up. One under equipped photographer ready for anything and one over equipped photographer ready for nothing. That moment jumped out at me and is still firmly embedded. It might have helped me more in doing "PJ" than had a tiny HCB perched on my shoulder and whispered squeaky little instructions in my ear. Don Dory wrote: > B.D. > We are not talking about getting the best out of a lens. Every lens > has a > flavor, some are just stronger than others. Yes, I primarily use the 90 > F2.8 if I don't know what will present itself. But if I know that I > will be > doing a mans portrait and I want something dramatic then the Russian > 85 gets > used. If I know that I will be shooting a person who is a little self > conscious about lines, age marks, or wrinkles then the 90 F4 comes > out. If > I am going to a jazz club and I know the 75 will not be long enough I > will > bring the 85 or 90 F2 for reach and speed. Why carry the weight when > I will > be out in good light? > > As to collecting, these puppies are too beat up to be collectible. > Besides, > for the most part they cost less than $100 each so not a major > expense. The > point is that these are tools, when you are turning a bowl you don't > use a > skew for everything nor do you use a large gouge for everything. Avedon > didn't use a 8X10 for all his work. Ted didn't use an M for sports at > the > Olympics when he was 100 yards from the action. > > Many on this list are looking at lenses from the PJ point of view or > street > photography. For those applications being in the correct place with a > good > eye and film in your gate or available electrons to push is what is > important. There are other applications for photography that work > better if > you understand what you want the image to look like before you use PS to > play. > > By the way, about time that someone got off the government feedback and > spent their own money for stem cell work. Good on Harvard, I hope > they get > a lot of valuable patents for genuinely useful procedures. > > Don > don.dory@gmail.com > > > On 6/5/06, B. D. Colen <bdcolen@comcast.net> wrote: > >> >> Oddly enough, most great photographers do not travel the world with a >> half-a-dozen or more 90s or 50s in their kits, Don, they work with one. >> And >> their skills provide the subtle difference because they know how to get >> the >> best out of their chosen lens under all circumstances. >> >> >> On 6/5/06 10:12 PM, "Don Dory" <don.dory@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Robert, >> > Ahh, but they are not redundant. For everyday work, the 90 2.8 is >> perfect. >> > Want fabulous portraits that are almost impossible to create >> otherwise, >> then >> > the Russian 85 F1.5 or Biogon 1.5 are very hard to beat. Need a sharp >> lens >> > that doesn't render fine detail like facial blemishes then the 90 F4 >> Elmar >> > is just the ticket. Need more speed but sufficient acuity then the 90 >> > Summicron or the 90 Canon Serenar are perfect if somewhat large. >> > >> > Lens choice can be just like choosing a red wine, subtle differences >> make or >> > break the choice. >> > >> > Don >> > don.dory@gmail.com >> > >> > >> > On 6/5/06, Robert Schneider <schneiderpix@mac.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> He also never said, "If your pictures aren't good enough, you need a >> >> shi*load of redundant lenses." >> >> >> >> rs >> >> ______________________________________ >> >> >> >> www.robertschneider.com >> >> www.schneiderpix.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Jun 5, 2006, at 9:57 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote: >> >> >> >>> Capa never said "If your pictures aren't good enough, you need a >> 90." >> >>> >> >>> Jeffery Smith >> >>> New Orleans, LA >> >>> http://www.400tx.com >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org >> >>> [mailto:lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of >> >>> Christopher Williams >> >>> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 7:37 PM >> >>> To: Leica Users Group >> >>> Subject: [Leica] Re: 90mm's >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Looks fine to me. I figure Jeff may still be busy with 50's so >> >>> someone may >> >>> need to corner the 90mm market. I just checked and found I have 5 >> 90mm >> >>> lenses! >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Chris >> >>> >> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >> >>> From: "Kenneth Frazier" Subject: Re: [Leica] 90mm's >> >>>> The pictures I just posted were taken with one. >> >>>> >> >>>> Ken >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Leica Users Group. >> >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Leica Users Group. >> >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Leica Users Group. >> >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Leica Users Group. >> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >