[Leica] 90/2.8 R vs. 90/2 R??

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

On 2/23/07 2:58 PM, "Bob Shaw" <rsphotoimages@comcast.net> typed:

> This thing about skin textures is very real.  Believe it or not, I shot
> a B&W portrait of my sister-in-law (probably a mistake in the first
> place) using really soft available light through a window using the R
> Vario Elmarit 28-90 Asph at 90mm.
> 
> I stopped it a 5.6 for a little bokeh beginning just behind her ears.
> 
> Me?  I was very proud of it.  A really great likeness of her with,
> typical Leica Elmarit gradations using Ilford XP-2 S Super.  Minimal
> Contrast and Brightness adjustments and a very minor crop in Photoshop
> Elements.
> 
> Says she hates it.  So I Photoshopped it.  A crease here, a mole there.
>   Nothing draconian.  You know the drill.  She still hates it.
> 
> Why?  You got it; too detailed.
> 
> I have the portrait in my home office.  I still like it.
> 
> But now I know why, years ago, Zeiss came up with their Softar lens
> line, and why a lot of old portrait and Hollywood movie photogs had a
> jar of Vaseline in their Grip Bag.  Imagine cleaning that off the lens
> after the shoot.  Yuk!
> 
>

There are a lot of people on lists who have kept current on modern
photography technique but despite this you hear every day on the lists this
ongoing thing like its a consensus about a separate category of lens
performance which makes for a "Portrait" lens. Other than focal length that
is. With that really insipid bit on "a lens should not be less old than the
women it's focused on". That really gets me.
Believe me modern photographers do not pick out a sharp contrast lens for
the bulk of their work and then something else softer and fuzzier to
photograph a person.
I want the lens I use to photograph a person; Head shot. Head and shoulders.
Half, full length you name it... To be as a high quality image performer as
any other lens. If not more so. More so. And people is mainly what I shoot.
Preferably with film I'd use a 90 APO ASPH Summicron. And for a head shot a
135 APO f3.4 Telyt M. if i'm shooting it with my D200 my 85mm 1.8 for heads.
For people and fashion I use believe it or not an inexpensive but sharp as
heck  and compact and lightweight 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor
if there is enough light with no flash as its sharper than all getout and
zooms like a son of a gun.
With a Hasselblad I'd use a 180. Or 100. Or the 120 macro. A Nikon Macro
with the Nikon by the way I'd use. Gets the split end on their nose hairs.
astoundingly sharp glass.
It goes without saying I don't use any diffusion.
I don't even use "soft" lighting. Hard edged light.
Nobody complains.

Look at the top photographers websites.
See any diffusion?
Anything remotely fuzzy wuzzie?
If you do it's because somebody slipped.

No you can find soft stuff. But its not to hide "flaws" on a persons face.
Its because they're walking around shooting everything with full second
exposures or some such weird digital thing. Or wide open and they missed
their focus. And thought it was groovy.

Mark Rabiner
New York, NY

markrabiner.com