Finding a little love for the Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 Macro. This lens is a gem and it's lighter than the Zeiss Contax. I really like the output and while it may not be quite to the Zeiss Contax level it's pretty darn close. BTW - this was shot at f/8.
rji2goleez wrote:
Beautiful Stephen. What's your thoughts on image quality of the Voigtlander 65/2 vs the Loxia 85?
Thanks for your kind words. I think they are both great. If I had to have only one, I would choose the Voigtlander. The Loxia is just as sharp and is as contrasty—great drawing style for landscape. The Voigtlander is more versatile with its macro capability and is better corrected for CA. I think the Voigtlander has a more neutral coloration than the Loxia lenses (certainly more neutral than the Loxia 50, at any rate). All that having been said, both are great lenses, and if I am not needing macro, I will take one or the other based upon focal length as any other difference between them is of lesser importance.
Luvwine wrote:
Thanks for your kind words. I think they are both great. If I had to have only one, I would choose the Voigtlander. The Loxia is just as sharp and is as contrasty—great drawing style for landscape. The Voigtlander is more versatile with its macro capability and is better corrected for CA. I think the Voigtlander has a more neutral coloration than the Loxia lenses (certainly more neutral than the Loxia 50, at any rate). All that having been said, both are great lenses, and if I am not needing macro, I will take one or the other based upon focal length as any other difference between them is of lesser importance.
I've just been stunned by the color rendering of the Voigtlander. I only had the Loxia 85 briefly and decided to go with the ZM for size and a focal length I just don't shoot very often even though I like it. I'm thinking maybe going to a 100mm with the Voigtlander like maybe the C/Y 100/3.5. Funny, I owned that lens for a time as well!
Stephen, I don't care what lens you used, your last set is stunning! And Samuli, as well (what else is new?) And Werner, as ever. And John, splendid! And of course some R&R (Ronny and René)!
rji2goleez wrote:
I've just been stunned by the color rendering of the Voigtlander. I only had the Loxia 85 briefly and decided to go with the ZM for size and a focal length I just don't shoot very often even though I like it. I'm thinking maybe going to a 100mm with the Voigtlander like maybe the C/Y 100/3.5. Funny, I owned that lens for a time as well!
I cannot disagree with you. The Voigtlander 65/2 is as good a lens as has been made for FE mount for what I can tell—just terrific—sharp from wide open, flat field, plenty of contrast, no distortion, neutral color, well corrected, and lovely to use. What’s not to like? The Loxia 85 is no slouch, tho. As for 100mm, I cannot comment on the C/Y 100/3.5 as I have never used one. Will look forward to enjoying the fruits of your labor with whatever lens you end up with! 😀
Frogfish wrote:
It's a conundrum. I've generally found that people in '3rd world countries' generally seem to display far less angst to having their photo taken (not applicable to Morocco !), in some they are even keen, whilst in the 'West' people are far more reticent, or likely to be aggressively against, having their shot taken, especially men. However without taking candid shots there would be almost no commentary on life in the 21st C in those countries/cities.
BTW I was 'taught' that when taking street shots you should always be shooting people's faces unless there is a specific reason for the shot not to (e.g. reflection in a window shows it or for a silhouette). Of course it requires far more 'nerve' on behalf of the shooter but I've almost always found that a smile after the shot deflects most potential objections. If you want a straight up portrait just ask !
I really don't get the point of shots of people's backs. One of the best street shooters here (and on other forums) is Lieutenant Z and you rarely see him post anything but face-on shots....Show more →
Your point that without candid shots there would be no record or commentary of everyday life is one of the factors that motivates me to photograph people in public places. The French culture minister made the same argument in the NYT article I linked to when she “argued that it was unacceptable to prevent professional photographers from sharing their vision of the world with future generations.”
“Without them, our society doesn’t have a face,” she said. “Because of this law, we run the risk of losing our memory. This is even more unacceptable when you consider what’s going on online, where millions of images circulate without us knowing how they were taken and in what circumstances.”
I’d suggest that stripping out all (or nearly all) of the context by standing back with a long lens represents the same failure of nerve as taking pictures of people’s backs. But there are exceptions, such the photo taken from behind of pedestrians crossing a street that René Nadler (xwing15) posted on page 2490, which I regard as beautiful, expressive, and truthful.
Jonathon, you make excellent points. I hope Françoise Nyssen can do something about changing the law. But, at the same time, seeing people "in the public eye" hounded like animals is something that I find repulsive.... there is a fine line....
philber wrote:
Stephen, I don't care what lens you used, your last set is stunning! And Samuli, as well (what else is new?) And Werner, as ever. And John, splendid! And of course some R&R (Ronny and René)!
Merci beaucoup Philippe! As above, from you, that is high praise. 😀
For my 2,000th post I thought I should actually share an image. While dramatic light makes for beautiful photos, I think fog is my favorite condition to shoot in. This was in Bar Harbor, Maine and taken with my A7 and FE 55.
