Most beautiful rendering

[fferreres]

Because of the great shots with Cine-Projection lenses shown here, I also wanted to mention my favorite slide-projection lenses so far in terms of rendering:

One is the Braun Ultralit PL 90 mm f/2.4:

https://flic.kr/p/2nGRXd7

https://flic.kr/p/2nGW3td

https://flic.kr/p/2nGW2ZT

the other one the Braun Ultralit PL 90 mm f/2.8 B-MC with variable aperture (aka Reflecta Agomar):

I select you!

https://flic.kr/p/2nNaue5

Yell out, color!

https://flic.kr/p/2nSoAfr

The colors on these are contagious. Do you think the lens carries significant influence or is just the scene, in case you wondered about the color thing. It's the hardest to test or assess, but it's a reason I like some of the older Leica lenses (eg. Elmar 135/4)

 

[Mike Micro 43]

Is there such thing? What lenses, really the one you think best represent beautiful rendering, are your most precious glass? Pictures of the lens encouraged along with some sample image.

If beautiful equates to super-soft bokeh I suggest the ISCO Ultra-Star HD-Plus projection lenses (the red ones F/1.85):

Mike.

Very impressive shots. Excellent work with both of those lenses! I have a Isco Ultra-Star HD (Blue Star) and while that isn't bad in terms of sharpness and rendering, it shows significantly more CAs than your images suggest the Red Star lenses do. Are they equivalent to the Schneider Cinelux?

Hi,

These projection lenses do vary - I've had samples which are not very good at all and then others which are fabulous. I think they suffered from a hot and high-vibration environment when attached to a cine projector.

I only find bad CA in the longer focal lengths, say over 120mm. The shorter ones tend to be better.

The Red ISCO's are unique as far as I know and don't have a Schneider equivalent (except a few were rebadged as Schneiders in a *black* casing). These red ones have amazing soft-edged bokeh and sharp centres - my best one is an 80mm.

Mike.

 

[simple-joy]

I find the Elmars to have some of the most beautiful renderings. While they still have some character, there's more to it than sharpness. They are crisp but not overworked. They deliver color clarity but are not over-saturated. They deliver contrast, but are not harsh. They produce clear lines but in a very natural way. They pretty flat but not flat as a macro lens. Overall, they see the world in the best possible light, and always with gentle, positive spin on things.

The images are convincing, if imperfect, they tend to err in the side of beauty.

Great shots! Because of your fascination with Elmar-lenses and their rendering I'm really curious, if the old Elmar enlarging lenses render in a similar way. Are all Elmar lenses 4 element or are there different designs?

 

[simple-joy]

Hi,

These projection lenses do vary - I've had samples which are not very good at all and then others which are fabulous. I think they suffered from a hot and high-vibration environment when attached to a cine projector.

I only find bad CA in the longer focal lengths, say over 120mm. The shorter ones tend to be better.

The Red ISCO's are unique as far as I know and don't have a Schneider equivalent (except a few were rebadged as Schneiders in a *black* casing). These red ones have amazing soft-edged bokeh and sharp centres - my best one is an 80mm.

Mike.

Thanks a lot. Do you use the 80 mm on full-frame?

 

[Mike Micro 43]

Hi,

These projection lenses do vary - I've had samples which are not very good at all and then others which are fabulous. I think they suffered from a hot and high-vibration environment when attached to a cine projector.

I only find bad CA in the longer focal lengths, say over 120mm. The shorter ones tend to be better.

The Red ISCO's are unique as far as I know and don't have a Schneider equivalent (except a few were rebadged as Schneiders in a *black* casing). These red ones have amazing soft-edged bokeh and sharp centres - my best one is an 80mm.

Mike.

Thanks a lot. Do you use the 80 mm on full-frame?

No I use it with a focal reducer on Micro 4/3 where it becomes ~58mm F/1.3

Mike.

 

[Mike Micro 43]

Because of the great shots with Cine-Projection lenses shown here, I also wanted to mention my favorite slide-projection lenses so far in terms of rendering:

One is the Braun Ultralit PL 90 mm f/2.4:

Prison with a view

https://flic.kr/p/2nGRXd7

Ultralit grass

https://flic.kr/p/2nGW3td

Feeling punny today?

https://flic.kr/p/2nGW2ZT

the other one the Braun Ultralit PL 90 mm f/2.8 B-MC with variable aperture (aka Reflecta Agomar):

I select you!

https://flic.kr/p/2nNaue5

Yell out, color!

https://flic.kr/p/2nSoAfr

I would also recommend the ISCO Cinelux-AV 150mm F/2.8 if you need a longer focal length, but it does have some purple fringing.

Mike.

 

[fferreres]

I find the Elmars to have some of the most beautiful renderings. While they still have some character, there's more to it than sharpness. They are crisp but not overworked. They deliver color clarity but are not over-saturated. They deliver contrast, but are not harsh. They produce clear lines but in a very natural way. They pretty flat but not flat as a macro lens. Overall, they see the world in the best possible light, and always with gentle, positive spin on things.

The images are convincing, if imperfect, they tend to err in the side of beauty.

Great shots! Because of your fascination with Elmar-lenses and their rendering I'm really curious, if the old Elmar enlarging lenses render in a similar way. Are all Elmar lenses 4 element or are there different designs?

I think the 50/3.5 would be similar to the 50/3.5 LTM and M, and the 65/3.5 Viso, sometimes called Macro, is a similar optic. The Elmar 135/4 has a removable head which can also be mounted on bellows. The 90/4 also has a removable head, and while the character is fantastic, it's resolution lacks and aberrations are more obvious.

Leica later used Elmar to mean slower lenses, and variants like Tele-Elmar, Vario-Elmar, Tri-Elmar, Elmarit, Elmar-C, they are all a different thing and not the same thing. The Elmars can't compete on resolution and other fronts with the likes of Fujinon EX, Apo Rodagon, much less a the better Tomioka lenses. They are just 4 elements and optimized for things like portrait.

I find that with age, some may develop some outlining in the bokeh balls. A clean copy should have very little of that, and be gone by f4, a tiny bit closer than full wide. You can date with serial. I think all 65mm will be a more modern computation, and if there's any enlarger made prior to 1952 it likely will resemble the pre war Elmars (single coated, more balanced, slightly lower res than the Red Scale ones).

 

[backsidewalkaround]

Is there such thing? What lenses, really the one you think best represent beautiful rendering, are your most precious glass? Pictures of the lens encouraged along with some sample image.

If beautiful equates to super-soft bokeh I suggest the ISCO Ultra-Star HD-Plus projection lenses (the red ones F/1.85):

Mike.

Very impressive shots. Excellent work with both of those lenses! I have a Isco Ultra-Star HD (Blue Star) and while that isn't bad in terms of sharpness and rendering, it shows significantly more CAs than your images suggest the Red Star lenses do. Are they equivalent to the Schneider Cinelux?

If you're interested I could do some comparison shots. I have quite a few of the ISCO and Schneider lenses, but haven't played with them in the last 5 years. I'm interested myself how they're doing.
I'd open a new thread, when I'm done.
Let me know.

 

[simple-joy]

If you're interested I could do some comparison shots. I have quite a few of the ISCO and Schneider lenses, but haven't played with them in the last 5 years. I'm interested myself how they're doing.
I'd open a new thread, when I'm done.
Let me know.

That would be very interesting, if it's not too much work. Thanks a lot!

 

[simple-joy]

Thanks a lot. Do you use the 80 mm on full-frame?

No I use it with a focal reducer on Micro 4/3 where it becomes ~58mm F/1.3

Mike.

Thanks - seems like a great idea. Are some of your sample shots from the first post taken in this manner as well?

 

[simple-joy]

The colors on these are contagious. Do you think the lens carries significant influence or is just the scene, in case you wondered about the color thing. It's the hardest to test or assess, but it's a reason I like some of the older Leica lenses (eg. Elmar 135/4)

Thanks a lot! I would say that the lens plays a role when it comes to color because the image it produces impacts the way I tend to process it, although I would rate the combination of sharpness/lack thereof, OOF look and transitions etc. as significantly more important overall.

--
Experimenting manual lens enthusiast.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/simple_joy/

 

[simple-joy]

I would also recommend the ISCO Cinelux-AV 150mm F/2.8 if you need a longer focal length, but it does have some purple fringing.

Mike.

Thanks for the suggestion - I will keep that in mind. I do have a Leitz Elmarit-Pro 150 f/2.8 though, which is considered to be among the very best slide projector lenses in that focal range. Have only done a couple of testshots though:

Dotted!

https://flic.kr/p/2nK5CUN

Spotted!

https://flic.kr/p/2nK5CYa

--
Experimenting manual lens enthusiast.

simple.joy

Explore simple.joy’s 4,274 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[backsidewalkaround]

If you're interested I could do some comparison shots. I have quite a few of the ISCO and Schneider lenses, but haven't played with them in the last 5 years. I'm interested myself how they're doing.
I'd open a new thread, when I'm done.
Let me know.

That would be very interesting, if it's not too much work. Thanks a lot!

I hope I'll find the time on the weekend. If I don't manage to do much, I'll post only a few shots at first.

 

[fferreres]

If you're interested I could do some comparison shots. I have quite a few of the ISCO and Schneider lenses, but haven't played with them in the last 5 years. I'm interested myself how they're doing.
I'd open a new thread, when I'm done.
Let me know.

That would be very interesting, if it's not too much work. Thanks a lot!

I hope I'll find the time on the weekend. If I don't manage to do much, I'll post only a few shots at first.

I just bought a few of these :-( They seem really nice if not very small. I like they are almost all f2, seems some kind of standard. I have no idea how I will adapt these things. I am also wondering if anyone does metamorphic photography. While some have expressed they don't like it, I find panoramic (2.5x1) portraits very very nice - there's a lot of the image that isn't the person. I usually just crop, but wondering if an anamorphic will be better.

 

[D Cox]

I find the Elmars to have some of the most beautiful renderings. While they still have some character, there's more to it than sharpness. They are crisp but not overworked. They deliver color clarity but are not over-saturated. They deliver contrast, but are not harsh. They produce clear lines but in a very natural way. They pretty flat but not flat as a macro lens. Overall, they see the world in the best possible light, and always with gentle, positive spin on things.

The images are convincing, if imperfect, they tend to err in the side of beauty.

Great shots! Because of your fascination with Elmar-lenses and their rendering I'm really curious, if the old Elmar enlarging lenses render in a similar way. Are all Elmar lenses 4 element or are there different designs?

I think the 50/3.5 would be similar to the 50/3.5 LTM and M, and the 65/3.5 Viso, sometimes called Macro, is a similar optic. The Elmar 135/4 has a removable head which can also be mounted on bellows. The 90/4 also has a removable head, and while the character is fantastic, it's resolution lacks and aberrations are more obvious.

Leica later used Elmar to mean slower lenses, and variants like Tele-Elmar, Vario-Elmar, Tri-Elmar, Elmarit, Elmar-C, they are all a different thing and not the same thing. The Elmars can't compete on resolution and other fronts with the likes of Fujinon EX, Apo Rodagon, much less a the better Tomioka lenses. They are just 4 elements and optimized for things like portrait.

I find that with age, some may develop some outlining in the bokeh balls. A clean copy should have very little of that, and be gone by f4, a tiny bit closer than full wide. You can date with serial. I think all 65mm will be a more modern computation, and if there's any enlarger made prior to 1952 it likely will resemble the pre war Elmars (single coated, more balanced, slightly lower res than the Red Scale ones).

My copy of the 65mm Elmar was made in Canada. I think I bought it in the 1960s.





Don Cox

 

[Mike Micro 43]

Thanks a lot. Do you use the 80 mm on full-frame?

No I use it with a focal reducer on Micro 4/3 where it becomes ~58mm F/1.3

Mike.

Thanks - seems like a great idea. Are some of your sample shots from the first post taken in this manner as well?

Yes they all are

 

[backsidewalkaround]

If you're interested I could do some comparison shots. I have quite a few of the ISCO and Schneider lenses, but haven't played with them in the last 5 years. I'm interested myself how they're doing.
I'd open a new thread, when I'm done.
Let me know.

That would be very interesting, if it's not too much work. Thanks a lot!

The new thread is online ;-). I'm sure you'll find it.

 

[Juyal]

1.8 g dx 35 mm Nikon (surprisingly beautiful even on fx bodies)

Most faulty lenses stimulate the most beautiful rendering. I think they look attractive because of their unique drawbacks.


Cheap Helios is unbeatable.

 

[fferreres]

I feel similarly, although these flaws are usually not random but a result of having to make hard trade offs and consider what is more valuable or beautiful given all constraints, lens goals and … the motivations and aesthetics of the intended users.