Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,995   Posts: 1,524,283   Online: 867
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24
  1. #21
    Eric Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Calgary AB, Canada
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    4,238
    Images
    73
    I have an Elmar 90mm f4 lens that is very sharp, but wow don't point it at any bright lights! Beyond that it's a great lens and takes wonderful B&W and colour photos.
    www.ericrose.com
    yourbaddog.com

    "civility is not a sign of weakness" JFK

    "The Dude abides" - the Dude

  2. #22
    phaedrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Waltershausen, Thuringia, Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    463
    Images
    11
    More on the Heliar, and on SPUR DSX 32. Experiential again, I'm sorry to say ;-)

  3. #23
    Mark Antony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    East Anglia,UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    772
    Images
    38
    Not really sure how this is a comparison. This is a Heliar with modern lens coating vs a sandblasted 1950's lens?
    I think you'd find if you tested a good Elmar say a red scale or late Lanthanum glass version that they are quite similar in performance.
    Here is a 1940's Elmar that has no scratched front element.



    no prizes for seeing the make of beer on the bench from this 1947 lens



    I think you'll find there is very little difference in performance.

  4. #24
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Antony View Post
    Not really sure how this is a comparison. This is a Heliar with modern lens coating vs a sandblasted 1950's lens?
    I think you'd find if you tested a good Elmar say a red scale or late Lanthanum glass version that they are quite similar in performance.
    Here is a 1940's Elmar that has no scratched front element.

    I think you'll find there is very little difference in performance.
    Not to mention - there's a definite "soul" in your shots. Certain lenses have feeling. It's long been a gripe of mine with Canon lenses, for instance. Canon makes optically quite excellent lenses - I don't think any of us can argue that - but their approach is much too clinical for me. The resultant shots, while they look nice, are almost too perfect in their rendition. Don't get me wrong, I'll still throw an L prime on my 1V and shoot it occasionally, but I generally prefer my Nikkor and Leica glass for their character.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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