Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/02/25

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] 15 SE first impressions
From: Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 1998 18:35:11 -0800

You are experiencing what Ted & I have been championing for the past year.
People who see your photographs will exclaim... "how'd you do that!"

Jim

At 08:36 AM 2/27/98 +1100, you wrote:
>G'day Guys and Gals,
>
>I've now shot my first roll of film through the R7 and with the 15mm Super
>Elmar. It arrived just as I was about to decorate our new branch in Bacchus
>Marsh, so Helen and I headed down to the "Marsh" to shoot some scenes. For
>tele shots we used the Rollei 3003 and the R7 had the 15 and a 50. When the
>shots came back, there was an initial disappointment. On analysis however
>we slowly 'loved' the wide shots more and more, as we recognized that our
>dismay was due to some of the outstanding features of this lens. Let me
>explain, and please comment and critisize, as I need to learn more about
>this lens if I am to take it to Japan in April.
>
>The lens is almost normal. We had expected more of a wide angle distortion
>that we were used to with our other lens. When it was not there we went
>'ho-hum', but the more you looked, the more you thought 'gee these are
>bizarre, and very good.' Some shots were with the lens focused at its
>limits, and these had a quality all their own, so my summary of the lens
>is;
>
>This lens will take a scene and if held horizontally will reproduce an
>image which seems to mimic real life, with only minimal distortion. The DOF
>is of course huge, and the clarity of the image out to the corners is
>great. Wide open there is a slight drop off vignetting of about 1 - 1.5
>stops which seems to disappear as the lens is stopped down. Even held off
>horizontal, the wide angle effects are minimal, but ----
>
>when focused closer than about 2 - 3 feet, the lens takes on a new quality.
>Its DOF disappears and at very close range, the background develops a
>swirling motion which seems to sent the image at its edges speeding off the
>page. This can create a focus on the static central figure. One rose shot
>almost looks as if the flower is moving away from its background and coming
>towards the lens, [which given that it was about 2" from the front element
>is not surprizing].
>
>As you can see, I'm a bit taken aback by the qualities. How do my initial
>impressions fit in with experience? Guidance needed ;-)
>
>Cheers
>
>Alastair Firkin,
>
>http://users.netconnect.com.au/~firkin/AGFhmpg.html
>