Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,735   Posts: 1,515,472   Online: 1082
      
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 43
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    650
    Images
    15
    The fact that after Summitar and Summicron there is nothing even slightly better is quite significant.

  2. #32
    Mustafa Umut Sarac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    İstanbul - Türkiye
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,674
    Images
    108
    Apo Macro Elmarit 100 mm and other Elmarit teles are excellent also.

  3. #33
    segedi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    344
    Images
    2
    My SLRs narrowly outnumber my rangefinders, bit the rangefinders get more use. Smaller, lighter and more portable than their mirrored cousins.

    But I know I've missed some shots that an AF SLR would have nabbed. Just need to improve my RF technique.

    As for lens resolution, it really doesn't matter if a medium format back or large format film holder doesn't keep the film flat...
    -----------------------

    Segedi.com

  4. #34

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Johannesburg, South Africa
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by georg16nik View Post
    philosomatographer, You need to wet print 35mm negatives for a few years with, at least Leitz Focomat V35 in order to "get it".
    Years ago, Zeiss did very detailed scientific resoultion tests with different films and their Zeiss lenses. The results were published on their website in the camera lens news 17, 19, 20, 24 and 30.
    250 lp/mm at f5,6 and 400 lp/mm at f4., Dr. H. Nasse, chief optical designer at Zeiss, has confirmed this on many occasions and in combination with the high res. films that I mentioned earlier such numbers are scientific facts.
    Lens resolution is not the strongest side of the larger formats.
    Pardon my ignorance, but I have been wet printing B&W negatives from 35mm (Leica, Olympus, Nikon), Medium Format (Mamiya, Linhof panoramic), and Large Format (using T*ED Nikkor and APO Schneider lenses) for a couple of years. The notion that a Leica rangefinder could even approach the quality of medium or large format is utterly ridiculous - if you even try to push this point any further, you will reveal yourself to be nothing more than a Leica Fanboy. Yes, the 50mm on my Leica is, from a technical perspective, probably the best lens I have, but only just. It's not a Leica lens, but it does outperform any Leica lens (and being a 50mm f/3.5, it should). The OM Zuiko 250mm f/2.0 - which I use a lot - is probably as good "on film" - even at f/2.0. It's a near perfect lens.

    However, the 5% that these lenses are superiour to my best medium- and large format lenses, can in no shape or form make up for the vastly larger film area. It's just ridiculous to even try, so let's not go there. The high resolution numbers you quote from Zeiss (yes, I am well aware of these tests - it was with the ZM Biogon 25mm f/2.8) are at an impossibly low contrast ration, and simply not suitable for general photography. On the other hand, I can push ISO 400mm film in my large format camera, and produce a print with superiour contrast and acutance to any print from any 35mm setup, especially if one had to use a modified microfilm with crappy contrast characteristic to try and capture 200lp/mm or above. Some decent articles have been written about this.

    Your brand snobbism goes to the extreme if you think that if I do not print through a Leitz Focomat enlarger, I am not "getting it". If you knew anything about this yourself, you'd know that, at any reasonable magnification, we are fully diffraction-limited. Furthermore, I actually used a Leitz Focotar enlarging lens in my (perfectly aligned) Omega D5XL enlarger, and promptly sold it when I started using the later EL-Nikkor enlarging lenses. Not only are they consistent across small, medium- and large format, but (for example) the EL-NIkkor 50mm f/2.8 (last version, designed by the designer of that unrivaled feat, the Nikkor 13mm f/5.6 - Mr. Mori) is superb. Anybody who thinks another enlarging lens, versus this lens, will produce inherently better prints, is a liar.

    Lastly - some people here have the mistaken notion that medium or large format cameras cannot keep the film flat. If anybody on this planet consistently shoots at a wide open aperture, it's me. It's part of my style. This requires very precise positioning of the film plane. I have never had any issues. If you could see these prints, you'd realise that no little Leica 35mm could ever produce these, no matter what film inside or lens upfront:



    Let's consider this silly, silly debate around a Leica 35mm being better than medium or large format closed, right? If you're serious about your darkroom work, 35mm just doesn't cut it. Still, I carry my Leica M3 around everywhere, it's a jewel to use.
    Last edited by philosomatographer; 11-14-2011 at 01:50 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    650
    Images
    15
    Actually, there a few of us who pushed 135 format to the max, MaximusM3, Thomas Bertilsson, Henning Serger, Film-Niko and many others..
    As Massimo wrote it many times, with Leica the limit is the film.
    There was a thread by Thomas Bertilsson http://www.apug.org/forums/forum41/9...ate-about.html
    post #6 have an interesting read http://www.qpcard.se/BizPart.aspx?tabId=76

    Also, we participated in a thread about Highest resolving power BW film, chemistry, paper http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/9...try-paper.html

    Since You have't printed with Leitz Focomat V35, there is no way to know what I am talking about.
    There are other good enlargers and lenses as well. Omega, Nikon are not one of them, thou.

    As far as rangefinders, Leica, Zeiss and Voigtländer are the best of the best.
    Its pretty much started from those companies, as Voigtländer is the first camera manufacturer in the world.
    After WWII, everyone else stepped onto those companies experience and patents.
    You are probably to Young and/or unexperienced to know what I am talking about.
    No pun intended.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Bothell, WA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    522
    Images
    1
    If the limiting factor is film... isn't that still a limit? I don't think anyone is debating that there are 35mm lenses with higher resolving power than medium/large format lenses. Its the print that matters in the end.

    Assuming we're enlarging 35mm/120/4x5/etc sufficiently large, the resolving power of the 35mm doesn't matter at some point compared to the film size difference. The medium/large format lenses don't need as high a resolution unless you assume the same magnification ratio as with 35mm.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    650
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Legge View Post
    If the limiting factor is film... isn't that still a limit?...
    With Agfa Copex-Rapid or Adox CMS 20, developed in their dedicated developer the limit is seriously lifted.
    They are keep improving the situation.
    Awesome resolution and gradation.
    If You dare trying it.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Johannesburg, South Africa
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by georg16nik View Post
    Actually, there a few of us who pushed 135 format to the max, MaximusM3, Thomas Bertilsson, Henning Serger, Film-Niko and many others..
    As Massimo wrote it many times, with Leica the limit is the film.
    There was a thread by Thomas Bertilsson http://www.apug.org/forums/forum41/9...ate-about.html
    post #6 have an interesting read http://www.qpcard.se/BizPart.aspx?tabId=76

    Also, we participated in a thread about Highest resolving power BW film, chemistry, paper http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/9...try-paper.html

    Since You have't printed with Leitz Focomat V35, there is no way to know what I am talking about.
    There are other good enlargers and lenses as well. Omega, Nikon are not one of them, thou.

    As far as rangefinders, Leica, Zeiss and Voigtländer are the best of the best.
    Its pretty much started from those companies, as Voigtländer is the first camera manufacturer in the world.
    After WWII, everyone else stepped onto those companies experience and patents.
    You are probably to Young and/or unexperienced to know what I am talking about.
    No pun intended.
    That's great for you, it really is. But I don't appreciate your abrasive and insulting tone.

    I just told you, I have printed through a Leica enlarging lens, and much prefer the nikkors. (or what - are you telling me the physical enlarger body "makes all the difference" ?) You really are welcome to go ahead and play with your 35mm, and I actually have no real interest in convincing you otherwise. By your own admission, you are not really up to shooting larger formats - and that's fine by me. Applying your own words - only once you master ("master" - not "use once a year" like you said you do) larger formats, will you have any way of knowing what I am talking about.

    To the original poster, I am sorry that the argument with this abrasive, combative fanboy has derailed the intent of your thread. I am not going to debate the matter further with him in the hope that discussion on the original topic returns. My final word on your topic: My rangefinder camera(s) have also kinda taken over, but that's because my Linhof Technika is a rangefinder

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    650
    Images
    15
    No worries, no insult and as I said no pun intended.
    Enlarger is not just the lens. There are other important parts as well. Focomat v35 is unique.
    Linhof Technika is a great camera, I used to have Linhof Super Technika but somehow, along the way replaced it with the Sinar P.

  10. #40
    Rol_Lei Nut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hamburg
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,118
    Quote Originally Posted by philosomatographer View Post

    I just told you, I have printed through a Leica enlarging lens, and much prefer the nikkors. (or what - are you telling me the physical enlarger body "makes all the difference" ?)
    I agree that comparing 35mm and medium format is apples and oranges...

    However I have used many enlarging lenses (unfortunately not the Focotar) and found that the Nikkor 50mm 2.8 was at the *lower* end of the 5-6 element design range, easily beaten by the basic Componon and Rodagon models.

    In fact, the 4 element Meopta Anaret came close to the Nikkor, but that's more a great compliment for the Anaret rather than a negative for the Nikkor.
    I also used the 4 element Nikkor 50mm 4.0, but that was very disappointing (maybe the doggiest Nikon product I've used).

    About enlargers: I do see differences between models, obviously between condenser and diffusion designs, but also not all condensers are created equal.
    I certainly find it possible that the Foctar enlarger could have a "superstar" condenser system which makes a visible difference (we are talking about an entire projection *system* here) and I've heard claims about its quality from several reliable sources as well.
    M6, SL, SL2, R5, P6x7, SL3003, SL35-E, F, F2, FM, FE-2, Varex IIa

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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