Sid Ceaser Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
I did. Lomography gave me one to test out and give them my thoughts. I've got a big review planned for it but need to line up a wet-plate photographer so we can do a side-by-side comparison for the review first.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7379/13070202764_972d1ea707.jpg
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2917/13540055513_9ab84cbca3.jpg
A bunch of tests I've done so far can be seen here: Petzval
It's a very nice looking lens - I love that they went back to it's roots and went with brass. You can take the whole front lens element out if you want for self-cleaning. It has a good weight to it.
In my particular test lens, the geared focus is really loose - if I tilt the camera and lens even slightly it'll just rack to the end in either direction. I've been told that the final retail versions correct this. Because of that, I've been using this lens the exact same way I would if I were shooting with my 4x5 camera: a tripod, a viewing (hood) loupe and using Live View on my camera. That way I can zoom on the subjects eyes and get them in focus. The waterhouse stops are interesting. I'm basically shooting without any because I want the maximum effect from the lens, but it's nice that it comes with a whole mess of them. I honestly can't see someone wanting to shoot this thing at f/16 because it's just wasting the talents and able characteristics of the lens.
It has a learning curve. People used to shooting AF and auto everything won't like this. People wanting to use it as an "all around" lens won't like it. It's for portraits. You pretty much have to center the subject in the frame. It's big. It's heavy. It'll make you slow way way down to use. Which is absolutely why I love it.
The internet seems to be full of haters on this lens for whatever reason. They keep tossing the word "hipster" around with this lens. I love how quickly photographers want to alienate other shooters and call them names or insult them simply because of a lens. The lens is great for what it is. It's built really well. You can get nice sharp images.
Is it expensive? Absolutely. Should it be? Maybe not. I'd have a hard time coming up with $600 if I hadn't been gifted one. Then again, people buy fisheye lenses, or tiltshift lenses, or a whole plethora of lenses that might get minimal usage. Or over usage.
For the record, I listen to LP's along with my CD's and MP3's. I had 20x24" tin types for my wedding pictures. I guess if you want to hate on the lens and it's users, you'll have to dig on me as well.
My initial thoughts published by Lomo a few weeks ago
Cheers,
Sid
|