To show how a small adjustment can make a big difference, this image was taken with the "Under" setting at -2. It's a subtle change, but it lower contrast and adds a slight glow softening the highlights a bit.
ILCE-7RM2Voigtlander PORTRAIT HELIAR 75mm F1.8 lens75mmf/1.81/320s100 ISO-0.3 EV
I knew a photographer about 15 years ago that had a body of fashion and headshot work that looked like this. It wasn't flattering then, and I don't see how it's flattering now. The effect is far less "flattering glow" and more "blurry, out of focus, and ill advised" to my eye.
It's an interesting lens, that is for sure. That said, I cannot fathom a use case where I'd find this kind of output useful or appealing. I am personally irked by heavy handed in-lens effects that are impossible to "recover" if you want a "normal" file as well, though, so to each their own!
I like it, I am actually a sucker for this type of rendering.
I have sooo many soft focus lens of differing mounts and formats, it's crazy.
Shrug, I seem to not be able to shake it off, definitely addicted, sigh...
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, I did mean the 35mm Summilux pre-asph. It was not a mistake. Even though it is not a 75mm, I was specifically referring to it because the SA setting can be fine-tuned to create a similar effect. You can get glow on the subject in focus and outlining with added structure in the background from over-correction, similar to what we see with the Leica. The 73mm f/1.5 Sonnetar also has a comparable character, and with the right SA adjustment, the Voigtlander 75mm f/1.8 Portrait Heliar might get even closer to that look.
Interesting! How do you fine tune the SA on the 35 Lux Pre-ASPH? Is it an aftermarket mod? I thought you meant that it could be adjusted out of box/was intended to be adjust, like the the MS Optics 73/1.5.
What a magnificent lens, could it be a good Sonnetar-like solution?
Are the flares of the lenses(if ever it produces some) are impacted in their rendering by the different settings.
buggz wrote:
I like it, I am actually a sucker for this type of rendering.
I have sooo many soft focus lens of differing mounts and formats, it's crazy.
Shrug, I seem to not be able to shake it off, definitely addicted, sigh...
PLEASE make a Z mount!
There's not much point in waiting for a Z mount. Just adapt and get shooting.
My FE 75/1.8 Portrait Heliar arrived yesterday.1430 USD shipped from Germany and the distributor said this was the first copy sold on the Polish market..I like that lovely mist when spherical aberrations are undercorrected.Also bokeh bubbles,created sometimes when correction ring is set for "over", resemble that of Trioplan 100/2.8.Very promising.Hope to post some pictures soon
Peire wrote:
My FE 75/1.8 Portrait Heliar arrived yesterday.1430 USD shipped from Germany and the distributor said this was the first copy sold on the Polish market..I like that lovely mist when spherical aberrations are undercorrected.Also bokeh bubbles,created sometimes when correction ring is set for "over", resemble that of Trioplan 100/2.8.Very promising.Hope to post some pictures soon
Looking forward to seeing your images from this lens, Peire. Just a quick tip: try using the SA ring with a light touch. There are 10 settings in total, 4 over and 6 under, but I have found the best results usually come from just 1 or 2 clicks in either direction. When I first got the lens, I pushed it all the way in both directions to see what it could do. It was fun to experiment, but most of my keepers were taken when I showed a bit of restraint.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Looking forward to seeing your images from this lens, Peire. Just a quick tip: try using the SA ring with a light touch. There are 10 settings in total, 4 over and 6 under, but I have found the best results usually come from just 1 or 2 clicks in either direction. When I first got the lens, I pushed it all the way in both directions to see what it could do. It was fun to experiment, but most of my keepers were taken when I showed a bit of restraint.
Thank you Fred for your valuable input.I have read carefully your previous posts on this matter as well.My preliminary tests confirmed that either.The only max position that entice me still is rather on the undercorrection side in order to create some specific mood when necessary.We will see
Fred Miranda wrote:
You went for that dreamy look (under -6), and it works really well for your subject...especially in the first image. Looks great!
Thank you fred.Yes.I operated between -3 in -6.What I dislike about -6 is hard,dark vignetting.Other subjects will probably require different settings.I have to find out.
Some people just aren't fans of the effect and that really comes down to personal taste. My wife, for instance, doesn't like it at all and thinks the lens makes the image appear "blurry". I show her it's actually sharp when zooming in but she still isn't convinced by the overall rendering.
Personally, I appreciate the aesthetic when it's applied with intention, especially in the kind of dreamy and ethereal context you shared. I think there's definitely a place for it, even with the stronger settings. The more subtle adjustments, like dialing in just a 1-step effect, can already make a noticeable difference and still feel natural enough for general photography..
.I like that lovely mist when spherical aberrations are undercorrected.Also bokeh bubbles,created sometimes when correction ring is set for "over", resemble that of Trioplan 100/2.8.Very promising.Hope to post some pictures soon
