11 Nov 2018神無月
Schneider’s representative lens Xenon 50 mm. It might be difficult to handle if it is a film.
Schneider’s old lens is fewer than other manufacturers. The quality and price are impressive one rank, but it may be said that handling is a difficult lens.
Schneider Kreuznach / Xenon 50mm F1.9 M42 1966
Xenon 50mm is a relatively expensive category in our old lenses.
I think that you can enjoy the stability and contrast of the lens of Schneider and I think that compatibility with the digital camera is very good.
I will try it with a film camera.
– Test the prestigious Schneider’s standard lens Xenon 50mm with a film camera
– About focus deviation in film
I think that it will collapse from the area where the shadow area exists at a stretch. It felt most this time.
I feel that good contrast has come out in digital, but I also feel that the taste of the lens can not be expressed on film.
Middle range to highlight expression is a very nice feeling is very nice.
The expression above the midrange is very sensitive.
If I brighter a little more, I thought that the atmosphere would come out and adjusted slightly brightness.
ah I see.
It might be kore.
This lens may be better compatible with film than high key.
Bread texture is very good.
Softness and side hardness are transmitted.
I wrote it a little while ago, but the expression changes naturally depending on the film, so there is a compatibility as well.
If you use a good film it may be a lens that has a wider range of expression.
Although this taste is not bad, it is still feeling that I want another expression in the representation of the shadow area.
By the way it feels like I felt the same feeling, even at Curtagon 35mm I took a while ago.
I would like to mention a notch film when I calm down.
I feel that it is not bad as a photograph, but it seems like it can not be said that it is like this lens
Rather than aiming to express properly, I also thought that it was better to take pictures with the atmosphere and atmosphere like Jupiter-9 as the axis.
To be honest, I thought that I could not grasp the taste of the lens, so put another film.
The goodness of the weather seems to have helped a lot and it seems that there is a relatively atmospheric atmosphere.
However, the expressions in the shadow area are somewhat difficult.
I’m satisfied if I get a contrast like this one.
Looking at this taste, I think that this lens is suitable for portrait.
I feel that the aperture of F1.9 which is easy to blur and the expansion of the lens at the distance of a person are just right for portrait.
It is not a person, but it is funny that expressions are coming out somewhat.
Probably for portrait.
About defocus in film
Descriptions were good for the second film, but I decided to think twice as much because there was a lot of focus defocus.
Apparently it seems that the focusing side is small, and if the immediate background is far away it has taken the focus position there.
So it is absorbed even if the focus is deviated somewhat if the focal plane is big enough, and I wonder if it matched at the time of shooting in the first place.
Even if the focusing surface is small, I think that focus is easy to grasp, even if the contrast of such a focused surface is high and shadows are easy to understand.
Composition with blurring and contrasting tendency may be pretty because the focusing surface is established even if it is ambiguous.
What I thought this time
Naturally, since it can not be confirmed when filming it, it seems that it is difficult to pursue the taste of the lens unless you try to develop subtle differences depending on the lens.
It feels good that it will become a neta which keeps taking it with it, but also the mind of a talk that is a little distant. . .
The camera is Praktica MTL 5 made by Pentacon, fourth generation in 1983.
It is in good condition. I will make it a main camera for a while.
Film is Fujifilm's standard ISO 100 36shots.
Similar lens posts