December 22, 2020: Difference between revisions

From Gerald R. Lucas
(Created entry.)
 
(Updated entry.)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Large|Riverside and Downtown Macon with the SL}} {{C19|274}}
{{Large|Vintage Lenses}} {{C19|274}}


{{dc|S}}{{start|ince our [[December 11, 2020|last photo stroll]],}} I [[December 15, 2020|received the SL]], so we had to do another. Today’s weather was equally nice, so Giles and I began at Riverside Cemetery (and Oak Ridge) this time, before heading downtown.
{{dc|M}}{{start|att Osborne, [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC53fwC0Sd600bDMPYtbVGbg on the YouTubes], has me thinking}} about vintage lenses. After [[December 16, 2020|Steve Huff’s lauding]] of the [https://amzn.to/3av7rep Voigtlander Heliar 3.5/50mm], I’ve been thinking about mounting some more vintage glass to my SL. His video “[https://youtu.be/FWFGAtcph0w 5 Vintage 35mm Lenses]” walks through a couple of good choices, one of which I’ve owned before.


Today, I used the 50mm Summicron for most of my shots, switching it briefly for the Trioplan, since I just got my M42 to L adapter. Since I’m interested in the [[December 16, 2020|Voigtlander Heliar 3.5/50]], I decided to take many of the same shots at f/2 and f/3.5 to see the differences. For example:
. . .


<gallery mode=packed-hover heights=550px>
I think, too, I need to start categorizing my photos based on what lens I’m using. Going back though the year or so I was into buying, trying, and trading lenses, I poorly documented just what I was using. Going through my Photos’ stream, I can often infer what phots were taken with what lens, but I should have been more diligent about the process. Ever heard of keywords? Duh. I don’t really want to go back and add categories to ''all'' the photos I’ve uploaded—maybe thousands at this point—but I definitely will from this point forward, like this for the {{c|Trioplan 2.8/100}}.
File:20201221-riverside-03.jpg|f/2
File:20201221-riverside-04.jpg|f/3.5
</gallery>


I probably prefer the f/2 rendering, but the bokeh on the f/3.5 is still pleasing and the image subject is noticeably sharper. While the medium-format, three-dimensionality that I love is there with both images, it’s more prevalent on the f/2. I used f/3.5 on some of the images below.
<gallery mode=packed-hover heights=250px>
File:20201221-riverside-01.jpg|
File:20201221-riverside-02.jpg|
File:20201221-riverside-05.jpg|
File:20201221-riverside-06.jpg|
File:20201221-riverside-07.jpg|
File:20201221-riverside-08.jpg|
File:20201221-riverside-09.jpg|
File:20201221-riverside-10.jpg|
File:20201221-riverside-11.jpg|
File:20201221-riverside-12.jpg|
File:20201221-riverside-13.jpg|
File:20201221-riverside-14.jpg|
File:20201221-riverside-15.jpg|
</gallery>
Man, the 50 is a performer, for sure, and though I like the 35mm focal length better, it’s always a joy to use this Summicron. The last image of the flowers was shot with the Trioplan. It’s a bit glowier (what the kids call a “vintage rendering”) than I’d like; I have to be sure the glass is clean.
After some time at Riverside and Oak Ridge, we decided to see what we could capture downtown. Neither of us had been there in a while—really since the start of the pandemic—and many small businesses have gone under, unfortunately. It felt pretty deserted for a Monday afternoon. Still, the Xmas lights were on, and I’m glad there was not much activity.
<gallery mode=packed-hover heights=300px>
File:20201221-macon-02.jpg|
File:20201221-macon-03.jpg|
File:20201221-macon-04.jpg|
File:20201221-macon-05.jpg|
File:20201221-macon-06.jpg|
File:20201221-macon-07.jpg|
File:20201221-macon-01.jpg|
File:20201221-macon-08.jpg|
File:20201221-macon-09.jpg|
</gallery>
In all, the SL performed well. I noticed that my battery seemed to discharge pretty quickly, but I did bring it along with less than a full charge. Still, I’ll have to watch that. Additionally, I notice that even though I tell the camera what lens I’m using, that information does not show up on my EXIF data. Other than that, I am enjoying the SL and plan to for years to come.
See Giles’ galleries for his images: [https://media.gileshoover.com/p227896219 Riverside] and [https://media.gileshoover.com/p555761000 downtown].
{{Leica}}
{{2020}}
{{2020}}
[[Category:12/2020]]
[[Category:12/2020]]
[[Category:Landscapes]]
[[Category:Equipment]]
[[Category:Cityscapes]]

Revision as of 11:25, 23 December 2020

Vintage Lenses covid-19: day 274 | US: GA | info | act

Matt Osborne, on the YouTubes, has me thinking about vintage lenses. After Steve Huff’s lauding of the Voigtlander Heliar 3.5/50mm, I’ve been thinking about mounting some more vintage glass to my SL. His video “5 Vintage 35mm Lenses” walks through a couple of good choices, one of which I’ve owned before.

. . .

I think, too, I need to start categorizing my photos based on what lens I’m using. Going back though the year or so I was into buying, trying, and trading lenses, I poorly documented just what I was using. Going through my Photos’ stream, I can often infer what phots were taken with what lens, but I should have been more diligent about the process. Ever heard of keywords? Duh. I don’t really want to go back and add categories to all the photos I’ve uploaded—maybe thousands at this point—but I definitely will from this point forward, like this for the Trioplan 2.8/100.

Retrieved from "https://grlucas.net/index.php?title=December_22,_2020&oldid=13677"
Powered by MediaWiki