[Klaus]

Quite interesting article:

http://blogs.zeiss.com/photo/en/wp-conte...Planar.pdf



I didn't know that there was a Zeiss 50mm f/0.7 (auctioned for 90.000$ lately).

[PuxaVida]

[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1311250875' post='10178']

...

I didn't know that there was a Zeiss 50mm f/0.7 (auctioned for 90.000$ lately).

[/quote]



Correction: 90.000€... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> And another 1.000.000€ is needed for the trip to the dark side of the moon <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />...



There are brilliant articles writen by Mr. Nasse which can be found in Zeiss site. And this one is again very interesting (especially the section where the MTFs for different distances are compared).



Thanks for sharing, Klaus.



Serkan

[dave9t5]

[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1311254027' post='10179']

Correction: 90.000€... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> And another 1.000.000€ is needed for the trip to the dark side of the moon <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />...



There are brilliant articles writen by Mr. Nasse which can be found in Zeiss site. And this one is again very interesting (especially the section where the MTFs for different distances are compared).



Thanks for sharing, Klaus.



Serkan

[/quote]



Thanks +1. Very interesting and well-written article with a lot of practical comments.



I liked the commentary about the Planar f/0.7. "...and no, you can't adapt it for your SLR, you wanker!" I'm paraphrasing, of course, but it was as if the authour was reading my mind and anticipating my next question!



The section on field-curvature, lens tests and MTF curves was very balanced and practical as well.

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1311250875' post='10178']

Quite interesting article:

http://blogs.zeiss.com/photo/en/wp-conte...Planar.pdf



I didn't know that there was a Zeiss 50mm f/0.7 (auctioned for 90.000$ lately).

[/quote]



The lens originally was a 70mm f1, funded by the Nazi's in 1941 to guide weapons at night.

In 1966 the project was revived by NASA to photograph the shadow side of the moon. To the 70mm f1 lens 2 elements were added which condense the light (a 0.7x TC which brings the focal length to 50mm and the f-value to 0.7).



There were 10 produced, 6 bought by NASA, for the Apollo program (moon shots). 3 bought by Stanley Kubrick, and one kept by Zeiss.



I suspect the ones being sold at times are the Kubrick ones.



About Stanley Kubrick using the lenses:

http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/sk/ac/len/page1.htm



A scene shot with the 50mm f0.7 lens (candle light):

http://youtu.be/-FE1Y8TwhBY

[backcountryskier]

f/0.7



That would be handy for freezing action, when shooting a black labrador dog catching a frisbee in the back of a cave on a moonless night.

[Klaus]

Here're a couple of product images from the 50/0.7:

[url="http://www.marcocavina.com/omaggio_a_kubrick.htm"]http://www.marcocavina.com/omaggio_a_kubrick.htm[/url]

[PuxaVida]

[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1311312625' post='10183']

Here're a couple of product images from the 50/0.7:

[url="http://www.marcocavina.com/omaggio_a_kubrick.htm"]http://www.marcocavi...o_a_kubrick.htm[/url]

[/quote]



For my taste, Barry Lyndon is the worst movie Kubrick has ever shot. Now I understand why... It is too much effort for directing of photography compared to the cinematography as a whole <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />...



OTOH, the capabilities of such a (modified) lens for cinema is amazing...



Serkan

[miro]

I have spent some time to read the whole article. Beside from easy and funny part there are lot of deep thoughts. I have read the MTF article in the past. Last night I spend few hour to read the bokeh article.

At the end of the day I understand how difficult is to design good photographic lens. /just a little bit :-)/. Actually the optical design is full with compromises. And that is not everything.



The optical design is small part of modern lens. Let’s say 35-40%, and then it comes to mechanical design, electronics and software. I realized that again a few weeks ago when I look how my brother disassembles, repair and assemble my Tokina lens.

The way of locking back from design to test phase is not easy either.



I like Zeiss article because they are trying to explain such deep things to broader group of people. Actually everybody finds own fun reading articles e.g. One find fun in 50/0.7 lens story another the history of planar design, another the technical/scientific part behind this design, another the advantagers and limitation of this design and how to use it in photography.



I’m going to read/ and understand / the ZEISS bokeh article next weekend.





Have a nice wekend,



Miro

[Guest]

The optical design is full of compromises because it is physics <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='B)' /> The one thing that helped me most to understand physics at colleague, the core so-to-speak, was that in physics, everything is a give and take. If you gain something, there MUST be something to give away and one has to look for it. The trick is to gain what is needed and to give what can be afforded to lose.



Indeed, the Zeiss articles are real diamonds. One can divine the massive competence of the author and its effort not to permanently fall back into scientific language. It is one thing to master optics, but it is another thing to excel in didactics as well and to be able to transfer the knowledge to others with a less solid ground of experience.



Christian

[PuxaVida]

[quote name='TheChris' timestamp='1311328434' post='10193']

The optical design is full of compromises because it is physics <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='B)' /> The one thing that helped me most to understand physics at colleague, the core so-to-speak, was that in physics, everything is a give and take. If you gain something, there MUST be something to give away and one has to look for it. The trick is to gain what is needed and to give what can be afforded to lose.



Indeed, the Zeiss articles are real diamonds. One can divine the massive competence of the author and its effort not to permanently fall back into scientific language. It is one thing to master optics, but it is another thing to excel in didactics as well and to be able to transfer the knowledge to others with a less solid ground of experience.



Christian

[/quote]



Agreed with the the "give & take"... I guess that's why "interchangable" lens concept is a marvel of modern photography (although some very looong zoom ranges try to undercut the strength of it...<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />)