Re: [Leica] Using old lenses

["Dan Post" <dwpost@email.msn.com>]

Horst-
I am so glad that you found the redeeming qualities of the Summar! For
photographing women and children, it is wonderful! I am doing the photos at
my niece's wedding, at her request, and look forward to getting some really
nice portraits with the Summar... I remember years ago- spending vast
amounts of money on a Hassy lens for its sharpness, then spending slightly
less vast amounts of money on Softars to take the sharpness away... when all
I needed was a Summar!
Dan
- -----Original Message-----
From: A.H.SCHMIDT <horsts@actek.com.au>
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Monday, May 17, 1999 9:43 AM
Subject: [Leica] Using old lenses


>>
>
>A couple of weeks ago, I felt the urge of  having a bit of a go at field
testing
>some lenses I had never used, or on some very rare occasions only.All
lenses
>with one exeption where of 50mm focal length. The individual lenses where:
A
>cannon F1.2, a Summar f2 non coated , a Summar F2 coated, a Voigtlander
Nocton
>F1.5 and a Lens head from an old 1914 Kodak folding Camera. F7.7 130mm, The
last
>lens I used with the Visioflex III.
>The Camera used was a M3.
>My wife decided it would be a good idea to go in to Melbourne and its
>surroundings and select each motif from there.
>i took us both days of the weekend, but by the time we finished, we just
>realized how little we really knew about the city we lived in, and how
beautiful
>Melbourne is. We also found lots of  hitherto unknown cafe's and pubs.
>To the tests: All lenses where equipped with lens hoods. As big and as
bulky as
>possible.
>Each scene was done with all lenses. No tripod was used.
>
>The Cannon F1.2. This is a very impressive looking lens, but the
performance is
>not. The contrast was medium and so was the sharpness. When you looked at
the
>print, it didn't really grab you.
>For a better word, The picture looked boring. Why Cannon ever released a
lens
>like this, is beyond me, it must have given Cannon a bit of a bad name.
>
>The Voigtlander Nocton F1.5 Was just the opposite. The moment i looked at
the
>print, I was taken with it. It was the type of print one wanted to look
again
>and again. Fabulously Sharp and a lovely contrast. Even when shooting
nearly at
>the Sun, could I detect any flair. The out of focus areas are smooth and
not at
>all fuzzy. I think this lens is even better than my Dual Range Summicron.
>
>The 2 Summars. Both, the coated and the un coated had very clean glass with
no
>scratches at all on the front element. The picture quality of both lenses
where
>very pleasing. especially around F4 to F5.6.  The un coated lens, had a bit
less
>contrast and showed some flare, when photographing towards the sun. Both ,
the
>contrast and flair where mainly noticeable, when the prints of both lenses
where
>compared with each other. The coated version was a very good performer. I
don't
>think, I will use the un coated version much. It is to hard to control. The
>coated version however, i think is good enough to go anywhere with and not
be
>ashamed of the quality it gives. I also liked it wide open, when the image
>looked a bit softer, specially around the edges. In a couple of prints,
this
>enhanced the way it looked. The focus was more to the important part in the
>middle of the print. It was somehow a bit gemuetlicher looking. But this
worked
>only on some prints.
>
>The last one, was an  old Kodak lens. F7.7 130mm Kodak Anastigmat. Vintage
1914
>or so and of course un coated. The glass was clean. I think this is a 3
element
>lens. (Cooke triplet)
>It was used with the Visioflex.
>This lens gave me the biggest surprice. The image it took, was sharp, the
>contrast was very low, but this made the  prints look like pastel drawings.
This
>gave a fantastic effect. One prints showed  some Pine trees on the left,
and a
>track going past. The track was a beige colour with some darker wet spots.
It
>looked like it was painted with a soft brush. This was definitely one of
the
>Prints I will hang up .
>
>By the way, the film used was standard Fuji Colour negative 100ASA.
>
>The moral of the story: Try  different lenses on your Leica. No matter how
old
>or strange. Some may really not be worth while. (The Cannon 1.2) While
other
>have certain qualities you can not  reach with the very modern lenses.
>
>Horst Schmidt.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>