It's a shame people aren't putting up example shots taken with their fav lens. ]
Why? As mentioned, it's not always about the pictures, at the end of it....
That's one from the Panomar 12mm fish I listed as 'a' favorite. Prone to flare, this shot suffers, comic effect of close up distortion, is a cheap trick; rest of the image is pretty mediocre, at best, shot on cheap OOD print film; BUT, doesn't matter. Its a FUN lens to play with. Fish are a tricky thing to fry; with such a wide angle of view they are demanding to use, to get a decently centered exposure, and avoid hot spots and flare, and use well, let alone creatively beyond the immediate comic nose effects. Incredibly limited control, that one had just three aperture settings and is fixed-focus. BUT still a lot of satisfaction to be gained from playing with it; which is totally unrelated to how wonderful the results I may or more often probably don't get from it may be!
That, I think was shot with the Ziess 50, also listed as 'a' favorite. It's actually a composite of three individual B&W images, shot in close succession, through Red, then Green then Blue filters to obtain the colour-separations to compile into a single 'Tri-Chrome' montage, a pastiche of a technique of the early pioneers of colour photography.. suffers a couple of developing faults too, where I think I got the rather stiff modern film kinked on the spiral... again, the results here, are almost utterly irrelevant to the lens I used,; IT certainly didn't cause the colour shifts or dev hot-spots!
But so what? I enjoyed using that lens, and the 'feel' of it clunking into place when I screwed it onto the camera; when I set the aperture and that too, very mechanically clicked into engagement, and the focus, stiff and positive, but smooth, all just 'nice' to operate. The results are not particularly inspiring; "Could do Better" the teacher would say on the report card. For sure; but missing the point a little, I was having 'Fun' and got a lot of it; first playing with an old clock-work film camera, that is just a pleasure to use, as well as the lens; more still after when I developed the film in the kitchen sink; and yet more still, when I scanned the negs into the computer and set about montaging them into the composite colour image.
The photo, at the end of it all, is almost irrelevant! It was the whole process to get there that was where the joy was to be found.. not in the results or any technical capability or excellence of any individual piece of hardware might have used.
They are examples of images from my 'favorite' lenses... but does this explain to any-one why they garner affection from me. or add anything to the discussion to help explain WHY those lenses are such favorites?
It's an interesting insight into different approaches and values in photography; examples I have shown were both made significantly with conventional 'film' cameras at point of capture, and I have put more store in the act of using them, than the results I believe I so whole-heatedly fail to get with them, so often, rather than applauding one lens over another, for the effect or excellence I might occasionally achieve with any of them....
Should a lens, or a camera, ONLY be regarded as 'special' if the results the photographer might obtain with it, are in some-way 'special' because of it?
First Wedding
Two Cuties
The Cat
The Head
drip in motion
Into the fog
Scrappy
Peacock
KMW_9397
Erica
CardiffBayRZ-Optima-2015-01
StFagans-Retro80s-07
Leander-ACROS100-02
