Five classic lenses compared

[DrTang]

5 lenses - same lighting, same camera to subject distance (about 12')

scanning introduces some perceived exposure differences because unlike contact prints where you can just use a standard exposure.. scanners do an auto expose thing and then I have to adjust that a bit..so..


#1 12 Inch Voigtlander 6b (I think) f3.3 (I think) at f5.6 (homemade waterhouse stop)
https://flic.kr/p/BKHNoc


#2 12" Gundlach Radar f4.5 at f5.6
https://flic.kr/p/BQGGvh


#3 14" Voigtlander Portrait f6 at f6
https://flic.kr/p/BT1m22


#4 19" Dallmeyer f6 lens at f6
https://flic.kr/p/BjuwtF


#4 500mm Berthiot Olor f6 at f6
https://flic.kr/p/BqSDPo

[Steven Tribe]

Very useful reference for seeing consequence of increasing focal lengths on composition. Things start getting more personal with the long Dallmeyer.

[StoneNYC]

Love your background.

I liked the 14" shot best, but honestly IMO you're much too far from the subject to gain the kind of emotional depth that would help (me personally) see real characteristic differences between the lenses. It also would be helpful if there were more distance from the subject to background to really show how the OOF areas appear. Also I believe the background is not sharp to begin with? So it's already slightly out of focus? That part could be wrong. But it throws off the ability to compare the OOF character.

I do love the background though. Thanks for sharing. I do like the 14" shot, I wish her foot weren't right at the edge of frame though, but trust me I know how the working conditions of LF can be, these are meant to be constructive not dismissive of the effort, lighting, subject itself, etc.

Be well,

[Stephen Thomason]

Very nice. Thanks for the post.

[DrTang]

Love your background.

I liked the 14" shot best, but honestly IMO you're much too far from the subject to gain the kind of emotional depth that would help (me personally) see real characteristic differences between the lenses. It also would be helpful if there were more distance from the subject to background to really show how the OOF areas appear. Also I believe the background is not sharp to begin with? So it's already slightly out of focus? That part could be wrong. But it throws off the ability to compare the OOF character.

I do love the background though. Thanks for sharing. I do like the 14" shot, I wish her foot weren't right at the edge of frame though, but trust me I know how the working conditions of LF can be, these are meant to be constructive not dismissive of the effort, lighting, subject itself, etc.

Be well,

well

I had to start too far back for the 12" lenses as I knew by the time I got to the 20" lens...I'd be really close

yes.. I wish I could afford a bigger studio..but alas..I'd say the model was about 7' or 8' from the background

the background is not painted super sharp..no

I was mainly looking at how each lens renders the dark/light transistions..It did strike me that the two Voigtlander lenses rendered remarkably similar

the Dallmeyer I am conflicted about..sometimes I like it sometimes I don't

the Olor is a cool lens less suited to dreamy portraits I think..the radar is also a little more hard edged than how I'm shooting right now as well...but might work down the road

next up maybe will be a showdown between the 12 inch radar and a 12" heliar

[StoneNYC]

well

I had to start too far back for the 12" lenses as I knew by the time I got to the 20" lens...I'd be really close

yes.. I wish I could afford a bigger studio..but alas..I'd say the model was about 7' or 8' from the background

the background is not painted super sharp..no

I was mainly looking at how each lens renders the dark/light transistions..It did strike me that the two Voigtlander lenses rendered remarkably similar

the Dallmeyer I am conflicted about..sometimes I like it sometimes I don't

the Olor is a cool lens less suited to dreamy portraits I think..the radar is also a little more hard edged than how I'm shooting right now as well...but might work down the road

next up maybe will be a showdown between the 12 inch radar and a 12" heliar

OH!

If it's the rendering if the dark/light I still prefer the 14 or the 500 personally. I see now what you were doing. Thanks. And I didn't realize she was so far from the background, I guess I expected the background to be more out of focus at that aperture, hmmm now I'm curious about my own lenses...

[pierre506]

Hoping to see more classic lenses' comparations~

[Jim Noel]

Although it is difficult to see minute differences on the screen, I prefer the Voightlander.
Do you have the sharpening on your scanner turned off? If not, that would help differentiate between the lenses.

[franeq]

I don`t understand to compare F3.3@5.6 lens to lens 4.5@5.6. Comparing 12" lens to 19" lens, what does it proof?

Every single lens show the nicest image at wide aperture - for that reason you buy faster lenses.

[StoneNYC]

I don`t understand to compare F3.3@5.6 lens to lens 4.5@5.6. Comparing 12" lens to 19" lens, what does it proof?

Every single lens show the nicest image at wide aperture - for that reason you buy faster lenses.

Trying to keep the f/stop similar to make the comparison about lenses, trying to keep most variables similar in testing one particular change at a time. In this case the FL changes so keeping the F/stop the same can help from a false idea of the difference through other factors.