I don't have an Aero Ektar, but I considered them for a while. And I shoot other very fast lenses. Definitely the problem is the super short depth of field. I know with some of my fast lenses it is just an inch or two of sharpness. You or your subject lean forward or back 3 inches after putting the film holder in, and your shot is out of focus. I like tripods and sitting models a lot for super fast lenses.
Garrett
flickr galleries
Personally, the Aero/Speed is an experiment in hyper-speed shooting for handheld, spontaneous shooting in dim environments (bars, streets at night). Digital is superior but doesn't have the "feel" for me, and 35mm is a little too harsh sometimes. I will be trying out medium format for this instead though to see if the mid-sized film works out better compared to the cost/weight of the Aero.
It's also fun to freak out other photographers with this beast!
There are some fun medium format combinations that have similar effects. The old Graflex Norita 66 had an 80/2 lens. The Contax 645 AF SLR has an 80/2. I think the big Rollei 6008-series had a 80/2 Xenotar. Their were a few Russian-East German fast lenses.... Not sure if Mamiya had any fast glass.... The nicest combination might be the F-series (electronic shutter in camera) Hasselblads with the Zeiss 110/2.
Frank, Mamiya has an 80 f/1.9 for the 645.
cropped to square format, Aero 7" f2.5
My beautiful Cordoba by ☃㋡ chubby dude ㋡☃, on Flickr
And it's a fantastic lens. You can see some of what I've done with mine on flickr here. Note: not all of them are wide open, so you'll have to browse a bit to find those, but 3 favorites: 1, 2, 3.Originally Posted by Tom J McDonald
I also have the 105mm f/2.5 for the Pentax 67 and it is super sexy with a similar though equally characteristic look, though the camera (for me, anyway) leaves a lot to be desired, handling-wise.
You really can't go wrong with the f/1.9. I love mine so much I want a second one, though FWIW I do know a guy who wants to sell his 110mm f/2...
I have a standing offer back in the US to trade my 105mm/Pentax 67 setup for a 178mm Ektar and I'm reeeeeeally tempted, though the Pentax is such a keeper I'm not sure I can go through with it!
Last edited by David R Munson; 8-Nov-2011 at 07:48. Reason: Side effects of ADD
The 150 mm f2.8 has the same depth of field at the same framing for portraits and closeups. You get less background, and a longer working distance than with the 110 mm f2.0. The only real problem is that indoors you can run out of space - in small rooms you can't back up enough to get the right framing - and some (not me) feel you end up too far away for rapport with the sitter.
The F 150/2.8 is so cheap now that I'm seriously considering getting a second one as a backup. FE versions - all FE versions - are still expensive though.
Accounting for final print magnification and final print CoC, the only thing that affects depth of field is numerical aperture i.e. distance to subject and the physical diameter of the lens aperture itself. The hole in an Aero Ektar must be at least 1.5 or 2 inches in diameter. I can't imagine any medium format camera with a (non-relative) aperture that big.There are some fun medium format combinations that have similar effects.
That said, I had an AE but sold it to buy something else. It wasn't up my alley, but I hope someone out there is having fun with it.
Science is what we understand well enough to explain to a computer. Art is everything else we do.
--A=B by Petkovšek et. al.
Not looking for DOF, just speed
I shoot a lot in really dim places. 35mm is fun but sometimes I don't want the grain of 6400 ISO with such small film. Also I don't like flash.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks