rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.9 #17 · Pre-order: Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.5 II Aspheric ($949-$1,049) | |
Fred Miranda wrote:
Regarding that B&W smoother or 'richer' tonality gain by using a lens with single coating vs multi. If you come across an experiment showing this, please post it. I'm a non-believer but have an open mind. 
We know that veiling flare lower contrast and that could potentially give us a flatter image with smoother tonality out of the gate but I think there is a some marketing behind this. After images are equalized in post-processing, I don't think any difference in contrast would be noticeable unless under heavy backlighting flare.
Well, maybe I should do an experiment. I have a bunch of 50s... On the scale of least modern rendering to most modern, I have the following 'vintage' lenses: Leica 50/1.5 Summarit, Nikkor 5cm/1.4 (Sonnar design), Zeiss Opton 50/1.5 Sonnar, Canon S 50/1.4 LTM, Leica 50/2 Cron Rigid. On the modern side I have: 50 Lux ASPH, ZM50/2 and Contax G 45/2.
The following is my 'gut feeling' about SC vs. MC:
Modern MC lenses seem to be pretty great at faithfully reproducing high contrast scenes as such. Given little internal light scatter, high sharpness and micro contrast, they benefit from pairing with a high dynamic range sensor. This gives a nice range of midtones bookended by deep shadows and brilliant highlights.
SC/older lenses seem to compress the tonal scale in comparison to MC lenses. IMO, the compressed tonality can be beneficial when working with a sensor with limited dynamic range. This was my experience, for example with the Leica 50/1.5 Summarit, working in sunny conditions with the M9 (8.7 stops base ISO dynamic range according to Photos to Photos). Compared to a modern 50, I found the images didn't blow out as easily. The tradeoff though was poorer fine tonal separation, which could lend to a 'muddy' look. But that's the tradeoff, it seems, with compressing the tonal range. Later in post, if you try to stretch it out again, there's going to be information missing. So IMO, the benefit of a SC lens is 'the look,' if that's what your after as the end result. And as to what 'the look' is, from a vintage lens, I'd guess it's a combination of lower contrast due to the coatings, combined with more SA, coma and more energetic bokeh. If I want high contrast and good micro contrast, I'll use a modern lens instead. I could reduce the contrast in post, but the modern rendering will still be there.
This is where I'm uncertain about the new Voigtlander 50/1.5 SC. It'll likely be somewhat lower contrast with greater propensity to flare, but the rendering, while showing some character in the sample images, isn't what I'd consider vintage.
|
