Seeing some of the Noctalux shots taken outside posted here got me interested in trying wide open aperture shots outside. I tried some with the fastest lens I own, an old Zeiss 50mm f1.5 Sonnar.f1.5 outside What do you think of that wild bokeh-it feels to me that the backround is actually in motion. I would probably never thought to use 1/1250 second at f1.5 outside for a portrait if not for the posting of the Noct shots here. Shows you how you can get stuck taking the same kind of pictures over and over again. Thanks to all the posters here who keep me from stagnating in my image making endeavors.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), October 03, 2001

Answers

Very interesting "motion" effect. I like the colors, too. I see some of the motion effect in some Noct photos, too. Kind of like a "swirl" action. Weird. Lately I've been using TMX-100 instead of the 400 just so I can open up more in daylight. One of these days I'll try to get some posted.

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@alaska.net), October 03, 2001.

The background looks as if it were painted for scenery in a play. I too have been inspired to try to replicate the shots like those with the Noct' outdoors in good light. I have been using my Nikon and 50mm f/1.4, (fighting every impulse to buy a Noctilux). I can shoot wide open on aperture priority and the top speed of 1/8000th of a second lets me forget about over exposure. This project is making me consider a Konica Hexar RF, so I can use my Leica lenses wide open at 1/4000th. The look is unique enough to make people wonder what you did, especially people that are using those f-slow to f-slower variable aperture zooms where everything is perpetually hyper- focused.

Incase some of you didn't see the origonal post with the Noctilux photos, they are at:

noct' shots

and:

more noct' shots

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), October 03, 2001.

Andrew, What film were you using?

-- richard le (rvle@bellatlantic.net), October 03, 2001.

Using a filter to block excessive light at f/1 is a good idea. I'm simply amazed at those shots on the Shinozuka site, particularly the ones at the beach. Al, if that's not enough to entise you into buying a Noctilux, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS!!!!! :-)

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@mail.com), October 03, 2001.

I used what would have been a very high speed film for that 1950's vintage lens, "ASA" 100 speed Fuji Superia. In indirect lighting, f1.5 and 1/1250 top speed was just about right on the exposure. I wish they still made some 25 speed negative film.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), October 03, 2001.

Andrew:

I think this is what bokeh afficionados call 'bad bokeh'! :-)

-- Muhammad Chishty (applemac97@aol.com), October 03, 2001.

"This project is making me consider a Konica Hexar RF, so I can use my Leica lenses wide open at 1/4000th."

Good thinking. Even though I've finally sold the RF, this was definitely one of its strong features. Fortunately, from the point of view of using f/1 outdoors, there is also the option of 2x/4x neutral density filters - cheaper and easier to focus 8^)

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), October 03, 2001.

I like the shot & its bokeh, but I'm a big fan of Zeiss glass (the f/1.5 Sonnar is a particular favorite--I have 5 examples, pre & post-WWII) & the shallow depth of field look (particularly for portraits & street photography).

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@cris.com), October 03, 2001.

I like the effect as well. Shows you that good and bad can be in the eye of the beholder. The Noctalux shots wide open look very strange as well, and I could see how someone would think it was bad bokeh.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), October 03, 2001.

I think that's outstanding bokeh, Andrew, Renoir smooth and creamy. Boy do I love 1.5 sonnars! Alas my eyes can no longer handle the squinty Contax range/viewfinder -anybody know what it would cost to adapt one of these beauties for an M3? I know some were made in LTM but I've never run across one for sale.......

-- david kelly (dmkedit@aol.com), October 04, 2001.

Al, how are the experiments with the 1.4 Nikkor working out? Just another Nikon lens would be so much easier to slide past She Who Must Be Obeyed...........

-- david kelly (dmkedit@aol.com), October 04, 2001.

Al, Now you have tempted us with a Noctilux or to "break ranks" and use a Hexar for its extra speed. Seriously, it does teach the merit of a bit of lateral thinking. Those are wonderful shots. Thanks for posting them. I'm interested in the tech talk on this forum, but seeing images and being stimulated by the technical and composition techniques of others is particularly welcome from my point of view.

-- Tim Gee (twg@optushome.com.au), October 04, 2001.

David, the E. German Carl Zeiss Jena 50/1.5 Sonnars (w/ "T Coating") in LTM do appear on eBay now & then, I think in the $300+ range. I've also seen a pre-WWII CZJ 50/1.5 in LTM but can't remember what it went for. Another, more expensive but also more versatile, alternative is to go to Japan & get a new Contax RF-to-LTM adapter for about $800 (see Stephen Gandy's overview of these adapters, old & new, @ www.cameraquest.com/adapter.htm)--then you can also mount your 85/2 & 135/4 Sonnars on your M3!

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@cris.com), October 04, 2001.

David,

Regarding the Nikon with 50mm, the results are mixed. I went to Salt Lake City, where I use to live and took advantage of some life sized statuary near Temple Square. There are many life sized statues of couples, children playing with their mother in a circle, and very diverse backgrounds of varying distances. These allowed me to really play around with no fear of boring anyone standing there posing. The statues are very accurate, so I had to work to avoid the normal things like eye socket shadows. The light was pure sunny-16, with that great contrast of a high altitude setting. The results...

Yes, I can get that great selective focus with the normal perspective. Yes, the images are very sharp right on the focus plane. But... as much as I hate to talk of things that can't be quantified, the background just is not as good as those with the Noctilux. It is very harsh. Specular highlights in the background draw the eye, as apposed to the smooth look with the Leica lens. I would use this set up, but I would always know that I am not getting the best results possible, although if I factor in the money, (I paid 150 Dollars for this manual focus AI Nikon f/1.4), I can't really complain. Anyone that shoots at f/8 all of the time should just try this experiment for a mental shift. You really have to plan the shot, since so little of it is sharp, you must know what is important.

My next thought is to get the f/1.2 Nikkor, and or the Konica and use my Summicron at f/2.0. I really am adverse to ND filters, (justified or not, but I don't even use UV filters on any of my lenses), so I'd rather use the faster shutterspeed to allow the use of the wide aperture. My biggest fear is that I'll spend more than the price of the Noctilux, trying to determine if I can live without it, and then end up buying it later anyway.

David, I don't have a scanner or website, but if you are interested, I would be glad to send you a few slides in the mail if you would want to look at them to see the potential of the f/1.4. Just e-mail me if you would like to see them.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), October 04, 2001.

Well, Andrew, I feel a bit of a heretic, but I am not sure I really like the bokeh of the Sonnar - certainly it does not seem to compare with the Noctilux, or a good current 'cron or 'lux. It is difficult to compare directly with the Noct. images that Al has referred us to, as they are black and white, but they, to my eyes, do have beautiful bokeh, whereas the Sonnar is not particularly pleasing to me. It has a "look" alright: but I am not sure I like it.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), October 04, 2001.

These wide open shots are really great. Something zooms are not capable of - another reason to stay in the zoom-free rangefinder world ;-). To those who like to 'try' the zeiss sonnars: Look out for those Jupiter-3 LTM - lenses, especially from the 50s and early 60s. These are an exact copy made on the same machines (the very first even out of the original parts) as the Sonnar 1.5/50. These usually are quite cheaper, somewhere around the US$ 70 range, the sonnar 2/50 copies (Jupiter-8) are even cheaper. And wide open both are really nice ...

Kai

-- Kai Blanke (kai.blanke@iname.com), October 04, 2001.

I got from my experiments that all of normal lenses having the triplet design (whether simple or complex one) produce almost a similar bokeh, which differs from a bokeh producing with a normal lens of Hauss-type design. For example, an Elmar, Tessar, Triotar, Meyer-Primarplan, Sonnar f2.0&f1.5 make double-image and uneven (harsh or “in rags”) bokeh, while a bokeh of Summar, Summitar, Summarit, Leitz-Xenon (all are low-contrast wide open), and CZ Biotar, SK Xenon, pre-asph Summicron/’lux is more pleasant, so as a background images are looking more even washed out in both directions: vertically and horizontally and no double images. A bokeh depends on a speed of a lens too of course, but a lens design is more important for an “bokeh’ image”. It’s my subjective conclusion, of course. However BTW, the triplet design lens has a strong difference between sagittal and tangential values of frequency-contrast characteristics, but these ones of the Hauss-type design lens are almost equal. That’s why a Planar 3.5/75 is better than a Tessar 3.5/75 in all respects. But sorry, it’s for other forum.

-- Victor Randin (ved@enran.com.ua), October 05, 2001.

Andrew, and all;

Yesterday I went to the movies, the film: "Luzhin strategy", I actualy don´t know the title in english, but is the closest traslation to what it is in spanish; well it is a great film, and if you can see it, there is a scene when she goes into a lake on a boat, and in a couple of times she is photographed with a small tele and the ligthing of the hotel at nigth to her back, and this lens is for certain wide open; beautiful couple of seconds, and you can see it twice.

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), October 05, 2001.