Re: Matching lenses - distortion/Digression

[Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxx>]

John Bercovitz wrote:

> I wonder if this means there is a market for lenses with various
> distortions.  Could be an attachment set like closeup lenses.
> Unless you think this is a case of, "If you can't be with the one
> you love, love the one you're with."

Right off the top of my head, I can immediately think of the "soft focus
portrait lenses" which many manufacturers offer for premium prices. They
are often tessar-type lenses of about 2x normal fl which are soft wide
open and which sharpen up stopped down.

The Imogon (Rodenstock?) large format lens is rather famous in this
realm; I think they use a series of adjustable-sized holes to control
the degree of softness.

The whole reason for the toy camera and pinhole cultists to pursue their
thing is to achieve varying degrees of low resolution/distortion.
Photographers such as Wee Gee (late in his career) were rather famous
for introducing rather wild distortions in his prints using various
lenses and prisms. And of course perspective distortion (really
perspective mismatch) from wide angle lenses is a current flavour of the
year, especially high angle stuff shooting down for some reason; go
figure.

Classic camera shooters still often choose late-model Tessar-lenses
Rolleiflexes (such as the T) over Planar/Xenotar models for reasons of
wanting the character (roundness/plasticity) of the less-corrected
design. This is reflected in the current prices of these cameras.

Zeiss Softars are quite expensive and still in common use today for
Hasselblads, Rolleiflexes, etc.

Anybody think of anything else?


Eric G.