I have now read several comments saying this 50mm is good for black and white images. That's puzzling to me. The same has been said about the Sony FE 40/2.5 G.
In my experience it really doesn't matter much which lens I use for B&W. My usual workflow includes custom color profiles for the lens and camera combination used. That's to get a neutral starting point for further processing. After that I do whatever is needed and I can't say I have any lens that is especially suited for color or B&W.
So, what is it making a lens suited for black and white? Low macro contrast as many legacy lenses give us? High macro contrast as many modern lenses (the 40G for example) give us? Something else? or, is it just something to say when gotten happy with a B&W conversion?
In experience, some lenses are stellar for b/w. I didn’t know the ZA 50/1.4 was considered one, but I found this pretty quickly after shooting it for not long.
I think there is the very high contrast hyper clean looks like I got out of the 35 Lux FLE. The ZM 35/1.4 and Leica Q2 lenses I’d also qualify as being here. That works well with minimal posting, I you don’t need to push files a ton in post to make them pop, and the files don’t get crunchy like when you push a flat lens to look micro-contrary.
Then there is the old school, SA type lenses. I always find the old Mandler lenses produce epic b/w whites for my tastes. My Contarex 85/2 was great for this.
And there’s some lenses that are in between. The Pentax 31 ltd was simply gorgeous. I found the BPM could give a little bleed and SA in b/w in a way that didn’t really work for color. The 35i + BPM gave me results I loved.
My general experience is, lenses that are great in color are great in b/w. No matter what era, maker or rendering style. And I used the same pre-sets across all lenses and bodies. Similar to color, I find it’s usually fine tonal high frequency separation of complimentary palate.
And on film, like color, I find some of my lenses I don’t like as much for b/w on digital are flipped and great. Like my CV’s. But I found my 31 ltd less desirable on b/w film when trying Tri-X400, Across100, Ilford Delta etc.
I have now read several comments saying this 50mm is good for black and white images. That's puzzling to me. The same has been said about the Sony FE 40/2.5 G.
In my experience it really doesn't matter much which lens I use for B&W. My usual workflow includes custom color profiles for the lens and camera combination used. That's to get a neutral starting point for further processing. After that I do whatever is needed and I can't say I have any lens that is especially suited for color or B&W.
So, what is it making a lens suited for black and white? Low macro contrast as many legacy lenses give us? High macro contrast as many modern lenses (the 40G for example) give us? Something else? or, is it just something to say when gotten happy with a B&W conversion?
In experience, some lenses are stellar for b/w. I didn’t know the ZA 50/1.4 was considered one, but I found this pretty quickly after shooting it for not long.
I think there is the very high contrast hyper clean looks like I got out of the 35 Lux FLE. The ZM 35/1.4 and Leica Q2 lenses I’d also qualify as being here. That works well with minimal posting, I you don’t need to push files a ton in post to make them pop, and the files don’t get crunchy like when you push a flat lens to look micro-contrary.
Then there is the old school, SA type lenses. I always find the old Mandler lenses produce epic b/w whites for my tastes. My Contarex 85/2 was great for this.
And there’s some lenses that are in between. The Pentax 31 ltd was simply gorgeous. I found the BPM could give a little bleed and SA in b/w in a way that didn’t really work for color. The 35i + BPM gave me results I loved.
My general experience is, lenses that are great in color are great in b/w. No matter what era, maker or rendering style. And I used the same pre-sets across all lenses and bodies. Similar to color, I find it’s usually fine tonal high frequency separation of complimentary palate.
And on film, like color, I find some of my lenses I don’t like as much for b/w on digital are flipped and great. Like my CV’s. But I found my 31 ltd less desirable on b/w film when trying Tri-X400, Across100, Ilford Delta etc.
I have now read several comments saying this 50mm is good for black and white images. That's puzzling to me. The same has been said about the Sony FE 40/2.5 G.
In my experience it really doesn't matter much which lens I use for B&W. My usual workflow includes custom color profiles for the lens and camera combination used. That's to get a neutral starting point for further processing. After that I do whatever is needed and I can't say I have any lens that is especially suited for color or B&W.
So, what is it making a lens suited for black and white? Low macro contrast as many legacy lenses give us? High macro contrast as many modern lenses (the 40G for example) give us? Something else? or, is it just something to say when gotten happy with a B&W conversion?
In experience, some lenses are stellar for b/w. I didn’t know the ZA 50/1.4 was considered one, but I found this pretty quickly after shooting it for not long.
I think there is the very high contrast hyper clean looks like I got out of the 35 Lux FLE. The ZM 35/1.4 and Leica Q2 lenses I’d also qualify as being here. That’s works well with minimal posting, I you don’t need to push files a ton in post to make them pop, and the files don’t get crunchy like when you push a flat lens to look micro-contrary.
Then there is the old school, SA type lenses. I always find the old Mandler lenses produce epic b/w whites for my tastes.
And there’s some lenses that are in between. The Pentax 31 ltd was simply gorgeous. I found the BPM could give a little bleed and SA in b/w in a way that didn’t really work for color. The 35i + BPM gave me results I loved.
My general experience is, lenses that are great in color are great in b/w. No matter what era, maker or rendering style. And I used the same pre-sets across all lenses and bodies. Similar to color, I find it’s usually fine tonal high frequency separation of complimentary palate.
And on film, like color, I find some of my lenses I don’t like as much for b/w on digital are flipped and great. Like my CV’s. But I found my 31 ltd less desirable on b/w film when trying Tri-X400, Across100, Ilford Delta etc.
Apr 23, 2024 at 01:47 PM
Previous versions of nehemiahphoto's message #16530536 « Sony Planar T* FE 50/1.4 ZA tests »
