Small Format SOFT focus lenses

**goamules** · 12-May-2017, 09:54

Thanks, I'll read that. I don't consider a filter or add on to a lens a "soft focus lens". Like we know, in Large Format soft focus came about very early, even in the wetplate era, then in the 1900s Pictorialism era, then the Hollywood glamour era. Then kind of died except some portrait studio work. The soft of the 1970s was often done with a filter, on 35mm. And you can tell by looking at the shots. There are levels of SF quality....

**goamules** · 6-Jul-2018, 17:43

Playing with a Summitar at a brass era car museum, kind of felt like 'Galli Style'.

**Tin Can** · 6-Jul-2018, 18:02

Your images drove me to https://kenrockwell.com/leica/50mm-f2-summitar.htm to learn more. He covers it I suppose.

Before eye surgery I rejected all RF but now it’s all I can shoot. An M3 M2 may be what I want now.

Been testing Topcon MF RF but modern film holders don’t fit only wood ones.

I wish I had worked on Brass Era cars. My oldest challenge was a Stutz Bearcat. Drives like a 50’s truck but very regal.

Originally Posted by goamules

Playing with a Summitar at a brass era car museum, kind of felt like 'Galli Style'.

**goamules** · 7-Jul-2018, 04:11

Yeah, I've always found it funny how LF photographers want lenses that are soft, swirly, have wild bokeh and 35mm photographers want super sharp with no edge aberrations. It should be the opposite. I find precise small format lenses boring, like a shot from a cell phone ("perfect"). I look for and keep the more primitive, early small format lenses that show some character. The Summitar seems to be one of those, and I enjoyed using it on my trip to Maine this month.

**Andrew Plume** · 7-Jul-2018, 04:26

Hi Garrett

good work as ever

when I owned an M3 I had a Summitar and read a lot of the on-line reviews, it seemed to me to be unpopular because of the lack of sharpness but like you, that was exactly what appealed

best regards

andrew