Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/12/12

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] IMG: The Adox is working!
From: kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour)
Date: Wed Dec 12 10:50:56 2007
References: <200712082026.32068.photo.forrest@earthlink.net> <F56EDDD0-58DE-4604-B597-B185A2338885@nathanfoto.com> <a2f8f4470712121008s65e70ecfw2536d18b2f7ab40c@mail.gmail.com> <200712121349.16361.photo.forrest@earthlink.net>

On Dec 12, 2007, at 11:49 AM, Philip Forrest wrote:

> I have some fantastically sharp Leica lenses (Summicron DR amongst  
> them) as
> well as a low contrast Nikkor 105 f/2.5 for portraits and a few very  
> high
> contrast Japanese optics.  I actually like working in lower contrast  
> & adding
> the contrast in prints.  I can add density to a low contrast print  
> but not as
> easily take it away from a high contrast negative.  As I'm sure most
> photographers here use a lens for a certain purpose each of my  
> lenses has a
> unique purpose and I use them to display these properties.  The  
> Xenon happens
> to be a wonderful lens wide open for portraits and stopped down its  
> great for
> general photography.  It's a TINY camera that is ultimately  
> pocketable as
> well and this is what I've been looking for.  The same result can't be
> duplicated by just throwing a modern lens out of focus.  I used to  
> love tack
> sharp, but I'm not taking photos for scientific purposes.  I'm just  
> capturing
> a fraction of a second in time as art.  That's all we do is make  
> art.  I
> don't sit over images of a brick wall with a loupe & try to buy my  
> way into
> the next sharpest lens.  I like capturing life in photos & if I've  
> got a
> working camera from WWII with a lens that works very well is there  
> any harm
> in that?
> Add to this that I'm a poor college student and I think my broken $9  
> Adox
> which I repaired and cleaned up is a nice accomplishment.  For me at  
> least.



snob...


:-)


Steve
>
>
> PhilFo
>
>
>
> On Wednesday 12 December 2007 13:08, Daniel Ridings wrote:
>> Dem's fight'n words!
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> I just happen to like my Elmars and think they're pretty sharp. These
>> two have been submitted to the yearbook.
>>
>> http://www.dlridings.se/paw/2007/20.html
>>
>> and ...
>>
>> Well, another Elmar shot.
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>> On Dec 12, 2007 7:49 AM, Nathan Wajsman <nathan@nathanfoto.com>  
>> wrote:
>>> While I like the first image, I must admit that I do not understand
>>> the point of purposely using uncoated, low-contrast, flare-prone
>>> lenses when perfectly good and affordable modern equivalents are
>>> available. The people who designed the old lenses 50 or 70 or 100
>>> years ago were not aiming for any "painterly" effects. They  
>>> attempted
>>> to design lenses to deliver as much sharpness as they could, given
>>> the technology at their disposal. While these lenses may have
>>> historical interest today, I honestly do not see any purpose in
>>> forsaking the progress that has occurred in optical technology  
>>> during
>>> the last several decades.
>>>
>>> If you want an unsharp picture, you get always get one with a modern
>>> lens--just throw the lens off focus, or use a slow shutter speed, or
>>> do some Photoshop magic. But you cannot get a sharp picture from an
>>> unsharp lens.
>>>
>>> Nathan
>>>
>>> On 9-dec-2007, at 2:26, Philip Forrest wrote:
>>>> I finally exposed a roll of XP2 today with the "new" Adox Adrette.
>>>> That Xenon
>>>> lens has a nice soft look to it at the wider apertures.  As the
>>>> camera is
>>>> scale focused, I need to get better at my distance estimation.
>>>> I encountered a light leak but that has since been rectified.  The
>>>> film is
>>>> still off in vertical register slightly, but that is an issue of
>>>> take-up
>>>> spool thickness.  The correct spool is on the way as I write.
>>>>
>>>> Here are a few photos with little to no manipulation in the
>>>> computer, light
>>>> leak and dust included.  Regardless, I'm really liking the
>>>> "painterly" effect
>>>> of the uncoated, low contrast, flare-prone Schneider lens.
>>>>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/2vp7lv
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/2mzjny
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/2re2hn
>>>>
>>>> More to come.
>>>> PhilFo
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more  
>>>> information
>>>
>>> Nathan Wajsman
>>> nathan@nathanfoto.com
>>> General photography:
>>> http://www.nathanfoto.com
>>> http://www.greatpix.eu
>>> http://www.frozenlight.eu
>>> Picture-A-Week: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
>>> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


In reply to: Message from photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Philip Forrest) ([Leica] IMG: The Adox is working!)
Message from nathan at nathanfoto.com (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] IMG: The Adox is working!)
Message from dlridings at gmail.com (Daniel Ridings) ([Leica] IMG: The Adox is working!)
Message from photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Philip Forrest) ([Leica] IMG: The Adox is working!)