Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,908   Posts: 1,521,520   Online: 883
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Tijeras, NM
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,246
    The poor quality of carl meyer lens is somewhat exaggerated.. Often they can be purchased for a price less than the value of the shutter they mounted in.

    http://groups.google.com/groups?q=carl+mey...68.1.101&rnum=2
    art is about managing compromise

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    South Pasadena, CA USA
    Posts
    470
    It's all relative, isn't it? Anyone seen Mark Tucker's use of loupes as Hassalblad lenses, or Domenico Foschi's quest for the fastest, oldest, "most character" lenses? Or Sally Mann's?

    Maybe what would help would be some kind of guide that compares resolution, contrast, coverage, etc for ALL lenses, including the Mark Tucker Plungercam.

    dgh

    David G Hall

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    747
    I thought the "answer" from the tests done awhile back on older lens was if they got stopped down far enough they all acted about the same. The small aperture overcame anything positive the designers could provide.


  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    South Pasadena, CA USA
    Posts
    470
    Robert,

    I'm not sure if you were answering my post or not, but not everyone's looking for the same thing, such as sharpness. Maybe it already exists, but I would to see a chart that shows many qualities of lenses so you could tell the more "creative" ones from the sharper ones, etc.

    dgh
    David G Hall

  5. #15
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,158
    Images
    20
    The character things, though, aren't always easy to quantify in a useful way. I'm sure you could quantify all the aberrations in a Heliar at f:4.5, for instance, but it would be difficult to translate that into a visual description of what the lens looks like when used for portraits at a certain subject distance range.

    A conventional list of items "to avoid" would probably be useful to someone with a Sally Mann or Mark Tucker sensibility as well, because they might want to see what happens when you use precisely those lenses that are to be avoided. Many of the Sally Mann lenses were damaged lenses, maybe with a cell missing or separation or severe surface damage--lenses about which no useful predictions could be made, and the same goes for loupes, eyeglasses, magnifying glasses, Holgas and such. The chance element is part of the attraction.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    David,

    That is an interesting and valid observation. I hadn't thought of it in those terms, but I agree with your observations. Thanks.
    Art is a step from what is obvious and well-known toward what is arcane and concealed.

    Visit my website at http://www.donaldmillerphotography.com

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Just north of the Inferno
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    750
    Images
    27
    Hey, the right tool for the right job. I just bought an old Kodak Anastigmat 7.7 with a ball bearing shutter because I wanted a nice, softer, uncoated lens to play with. Hell, the thing has a BUBBLE in the front glass! I have yet to mount it properly, but I can't wait to see what it does!

    Besides, it was like $20.00.....

    Official Photo.net Villain
    ----------------------
    [FONT=Comic Sans MS]DaVinci never wrote an artist's statement...[/FONT]

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    453
    Folks,

    Interesting comments by David and Robert. I ran across an old usenet thread about portrait lenses where Steve Grimes and others recommended using, among other things, close up lenses (diopters).

    So I scarfed a used Vivitar set, taped the #4 (250mm focal length) to a shutter, and it actually did very well. Nice smooth look. Have yet to test it on landscapes, but that's a spring project.

    Thanks!

    Steve

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,030
    Perhaps things like sharpness, coatings, etc...being a matter of taste for most of us, isn't really "list-able" if I understand your question, however things like shody workmanship and poor engineering---the sort of stuff that is a waste of LF dollars(like, I understand, Tilt-all 4x5 holders) would be valuable things to avoid and might "make the list," if one were to be compiled. Of course anything included would be suspect since a contributor might not have the knowledge to evaluate something fairly, especially used equiptment. If I were to get a trashed Betax shutter, I might assume that all Betax shutters(maybe all Wolly shutters) are junk--which they aren't!. I might not take into account that I only paid six bucks at a yard sale (found it in a cigar box with Junior's Rock Collection)for the thing, or neglect to add that info to my gripe.----Cheers!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin