Old Lens Performs Well. Plus.... the re-purchase of an old favorite lens which I sold to buy a lens that weighs a lo

 I like older gear. I like gear that I've mastered over the years instead of kinda got functional with in a couple of weeks. And I like lenses that were not optically compromised by lens designers hellbent on answering market demands for outrageous ranges of focal lengths and ultra high speed apertures. I've always understood that slower lenses from premium makers can be superior at their working apertures because it's easier to hit manufacturing tolerances with more modest specifications and it's easier to design for quality if you aren't brushing up against the very edge of what might be possible. Physics wise.

Given the choice I'll always take an f4 zoom over an f2.8 zoom if both are made to high standards by top makers. Why? Well cameras with BSI sensors have almost unlimited ISO ranges now so I don't need the one stop more light gathering power for any real reason. But by choosing the slower lens I get a package that's smaller, lighter and can be made to more stringent tolerances ---- which leads to better performance at critical (open) apertures. The brilliant Leica lens expert, Erwin Puts, wrote that optical engineers told him that it takes a 4X increase in manufacturing precision for each doubling of a lens element diameter. Let that sink in. If a manufacturer uses the same process for fast lens elements as they do with slower (smaller diameter) lens elements the win goes to the slower product. If they are already working at the maximum precision the slower lens has the potential to be 4X more precise. And that plays out with macro lens designs across all camera and lens makers, as well as in microscope lenses and enlarging lenses. This is probably why you don't see f1.2 enlarger lenses in catalogs --- or in real life. 

So, at least as sharp and potentially better optically corrected, smaller, lighter, less cost to purchase. All wins for the slower zoom lens, for sure. What do you give up? One stop of light gathering potential. 

When Leica made lenses for the R mount they made a progressive series of 35-70mm lenses. Each generation improved over the one before it. Near the end of the run of Leica R SLR systems they made two different versions of the traditional 35-70mm lens. One is the 35-70mm f4 ROM lens that I recently bought and the other is a 35-70mm f2.8, constant aperture zoom, which I could never justify buying. 

I got a screaming deal on the mint condition 35-70mm f4 version that I bought. Coupled with a Novoflex adapter I can use the lens on all my L mount equipment. I'm reasonably sure Leica also made an R to M mount adapter as well which means I could use the lens on an M camera if I'm willing to  use it in a "live view" mode. I paid well under $1K for both the lens and the adapter. 

The lens isn't perfect. It has a bit of distortion at both extremes of the focal length range. But I hesitate to even use the word "extremes" since we're talking a very small range of focal lengths compared to many modern zooms. The distortion can be easily corrected in post and the distortion isn't complex or ample so you won't lose much of your file should you decide you need to correct. The tonality and sharpness is good and the lens is charming to use. All metal. Smooth focus and zoom rings. A nicely clicked aperture ring, etc. 

The f2.8 ROM version of the lens is nearly twice as heavy, bigger by about 50% and currently sells, used, for anywhere from $8500 to $12000, currently. I haven't used the lens personally but I've read so many reviews comparing the two as well as comparing MTF charts from Leica which show very small differences in overall performance. That's a huge cost difference if, in effect, one is only really getting one stop more light gathering --- or a modest decrease in depth of field when used wide open. 

I've used the 35-70mm f4 a lot recently and have become attached to it. But I've also been right sizing my lens inventory in other ways. I found that I had three very competitive version of both the 35mm M lenses and the 50mm M lenses. I traded them in a partial trade deal with a photographer friend who made a compelling case for needing M lenses for his SL2 cameras. Part of our trade deal was me receiving a "like new" Panasonic 24-105mm f4 S lens. I owned one previously; bought it back in 2019 for the Panasonic S1 cameras I was using at the time. 

It got replaced by the Leica SL 24-90mm lens when I traded off the Panasonic bodies for the Leica bodies. But it was, in retrospect, a mistake to let that first 24-105mm lens go. It was a very nicely done lens albeit in a polymer compound body. The benefit over the Leica zoom is in weight and size. And also the incorporated in lens image stabilization which works well enough. In conjunction with the newest Panasonic bodies it can give a photographer up to 7 stops of image stabilization because it works with the IBIS of the bodies. 

Compared to the Leica, price wise, it's almost in the category of a "crash" lens. So when it's pouring rain outside or there is a risk of damage or loss involved on a shoot the Panasonic is an easy choice. I'm sure the Leica out performs the Pana but certainly not by much and not enough to move the needle if you don't have clients to impress. I wanted one back for the extra focal length at the long end and, well, if I drop it and destroy it I won't cry as hard. Or much at all. 

The Panasonic lens is not all that much smaller than the Leica and while they are slightly different in weight the Leica feels heavier in the hand because it's more dense. I wish both lenses had been designed with integral tripod mounts because using them in vertical orientations on tripods is --- daunting and frustrating. That nose tips down quickly. A quarter inch tripod screw just isn't enough. I have since gotten a Novoflex tripod mount attachment for the Leica lens and it works quick well. Having both lenses gives me the option of using the Leica when verticals are mandatory.

And, just a note, for some reason I like the older SL version of Leica mirrorless cameras better than the newer models. Don't know why and I don't care. Love that I have the choice. 

On Topic for VSL:  Tomorrow will be the first day back to swim workout in over two weeks. I'm watching swim races from previous championships and Olympic games on Youtube to try to remind myself about how to swim. The swim bag is already packed and in the trunk of the car. I can't adequately express just how damn happy I am to be going back. I'm starting to think that daily swims are like crack cocaine...

Tangential targeted news for the blog in general: When I drove to Fredericksburg, Texas a couple of weeks ago my windshield got smacked by an errant roadway pebble. It left a tiny 2mm divot on the lower right side of the glass. Yesterday I drove to San Antonio on the scariest interstate highway ever (IH35) and had a second roadway meteorite hit near the center of the windshield. I bought a kit to repair the divots. It worked just fine on the first, smaller one. I'm waiting till morning to see how the other repair pans out. I was miffed. B. pointed out that I can afford to replace the entire windshield if I need to. That doesn't really help my mood. And points to the need for trashy back-up cars for traveling to and from areas of high construction and highway mess. Maybe an older Ford F150 pick-up truck with an anti-gravel, high pressure wind jet that plays across the windshield and keeps windshields safe. If that's not already an invention someone needs to get on that right away. It would also do away with the need for windshield wipers.

Currently celebrating our Purple Jubilee here in VSL. That's the 16th Anniversary of writing nearly all the time about PHOTOGRAHY. Send me any excess money you have lying around and I'll write some more. But by saying that we are not entering into a legally binding contract and I reserve the right to take your excess money and use it on either a new windshield or a case of really nice wine. 

Triggered much? Naw. 

More fun stuff in Hyde Park.

Interior, antique, inter-urban suburbia. It's a thing.

 

There is a wonderful, older neighborhood to the north of the University of Texas at Austin campus called Hyde Park. So many of the original 1940s and 1950s cottages and small houses are still standing having resisted the desire on the part of developers and their nouveau riche clientele to tear them down and replace them with grotesque and oversized white box mansions with black trim. That's not to say that these smaller, 800 to 1200 square foot dwellings are inexpensive. Far from it. Like most close-in properties in Austin they range from about $700K to $1.2K, depending on the lot size. Because that's what real estate developers and investors are most interested in. The house is just something to deal with. Within days of most closings in the neighborhoods to the west of campus the bulldozers show up and the house is scraped off the lot and disposed of. Then construction starts and the "new and improved" replacement. 

Somehow Hyde Park has developed some sort of partial immunity against reckless and stupid re-development. People in this neighborhood tend to buy houses out of nostalgia (and no little measure of good taste...) and the desire to renovate them (maintaining the original footprint) and make them into comfortable and more modern homes. 

I love walking through that neighborhood. The expression of ownership is sweet and seems wholesome. Not a "show off" exercise but the desire to make something quite comfortable for the long term. 

Today I took a break from Thanksgiving and driving between cities and just walked. I'd driven over to the neighborhood to have a Cuban sandwich at my favorite local sandwich shop, New World Deli. Afterwards it seemed the right thing to do to walk from independent bookshop to independent bookshop and to savor the quiet charm and visual soothing of a neighborhood not at odds with itself.

I also got reacquainted with the comfortable, teutonic Leica SL and the old, R series 35-70mm zoom lens. A quiet and pleasant postprandrial stroll with a reliable and chatty camera as an aid to paying attention. 

Hope your Thanksgiving went well...

A bright red hose. Or a very long, very skinny red snake.

 Caution: Some commenters may be triggered by the color red...

Reflection removal tool in Lightroom. It works.

 

After.

Before.

THIS POST MAY BE "OFF TOPIC" FOR YOU BUT IT'S RIGHT ON TARGET FOR ME AND I'M CELEBRATING IT.

 

Ready for the start of the race at the USMS Short Course Nationals.

I love to swim. I've been side-lined from daily swim workouts for the second time this year. Each time for two weeks. Reason? Skin cancer surgeries. That's a month out of 2025. And my brain/subconscious tells me that it's unacceptable. Finally, today, I had an appointment with my dermatologist's nurse. She removed the stitches, checked out the healing process and declared that I am now fit and able to go back to swim practice. Of course the pool will be closed Thursday and Friday for the Thanksgiving holiday but I'm thinking of jumping the fence and getting some surreptitious yards in ... but I won't because at heart I am a (sometimes) rule follower and also because I'd hate to do anything that might get me kicked out of the club if I got caught. 

I'll be in the pool right at eight o'clock a.m. on Saturday morning. And, after tomorrow, no more bandage changing. No other maintenance required. New goggles at the ready. Swim suit, back-up swim suit and second back-up suit at the ready. Hope I remember how to do all four strokes...

All these images are from the 2007 USMS Nationals Competition that happened at the Swim Center on the UT campus. Our local team was well represented. Swimmers came from all over the county to compete. Happens once a year for short course and once a year for long course (outdoors). Get your tickets now.

Cameras? Lenses? Who cares if there is swimming that can be had???

Depression and denial starting to lift. Energy returning. Optimism on the horizon. Finally!!!

The warm up pool. Separate from the two competition pools.

Warm ups.

Winding down the inventory. Kinda fun to see white space instead of black, Codura nylon cases of stuff everywhere.

 I'm starting to have a lot of fun handing off no longer needed gear to younger photographers. And doing trade deals with photographer friends of mine who are also trying to rationalize what they have with what they really need as they too are determined to shrink their gear footprints.

The sigh of sheer relief at giving away three huge and heavy C-Stands was palpable. Glorious. Freeing. Ditto with a whole silly collection of softboxes. Last week a friend called to see if I had any Godox hotshoe mount flash units I could part with... you bet! A box full. Take a couple.

I've spent the better part of twenty years anxiously planning for worst case working scenarios which mostly never happened but did happen enough that I was constantly able to rationalize owning two or three of everything which I considered to be critical to the success of remote assignments and tightly time sensitive projects. After all, if your 80mm lens for your Hasselblad decided to crap out while you were on assignment in post Soviet St. Petersburg, Russia, in the dead of winter, in 1995, the chances of replacing it in a day were slim to farcically pure fantasy. Having a second copy at hand seemed (and still seems) prudent. 

Even in the digital age the idea of redundant back-ups seemed prudent. I got endless unwelcome critiques over my desire to always have at least two identical camera bodies for work. Three always seemed even better to stave off risk. But here's the partial logic behind the plan: Imagine you are out on a dusty, windy day in far north Texas photographing a bunch of construction people building a lake. Yeah, a lake. You'll need a wide angle zoom for expansive establishing shots and a longer zoom, something like a 70-200mm lens for portraits, details and, well, because you can't always get as close to giant earth moving machinery as you'd like. Safety and all that.

If you have one camera body you'll need to change lenses multiple times during the day. And you are not doing so in a climate controlled building. You are changing lenses while standing a mile or so from your rental car while the wind is whipping dust around at 20-30 mph. Well, you might be changing lenses if this was your first location photography rodeo. The grizzled old pro has two working bodies with the correct lens attached to each one. Both on straps. Both immediately accessible. And the bonus is that if the lenses don't come off your weather resistant camera (and are themselves weather resistant) you stand a good chance of not getting a kaleidoscope of dust all over your very precious sensor. And that's a win that keeps on giving all the way into post production. So....is that second body overkill? Or just good, solid planning? And that third body? It's there just in case...

Throughout my career I tried to stave off failure by bringing copies of just about everything I would need to get the jobs done no matter what mother nature or clumsiness tossed in my path. My favorite story from back in the film days was of a big, national shoot my company was doing for a hardware store chain. We were re-creating a little league baseball game complete with paid model kids, chaperones, make-up people, assistants and the like for a series of print ads. On the afternoon of the shoot we had an unexpected sand storm move into the area. Or a dust storm. Or maybe it was a storm of small, windswept particles. We were already on site when the sky turned orangish and the contrast lowered must enough to make everything look really, really good on film. Nobody was suffering respiratory distress and most people were successful at keeping the flying particulates out of their eyes so we continued on, taking advantage of very dramatic and unique lighting. 

We were shooting with industry standard Hasselblad film cameras. 500 C/Ms. No electronics, just lots of gears and stuff with fine mechanical tolerances. And very much not weather sealed.  After the first few set-ups the camera I was shooting with locked up. Died. Refused to cycle. The client looked .... very concerned.  I reached into one of our big, rolling Pelican cases and pulled out a second 500 C/M camera body with an attached lens and we shot without issue for the next hour until the flying particles infiltrated the second body and it ground to a stop. At this point the client-side art director gulped and was certain the shoot was over --- and we still had six or seven critical set-ups to shoot. 

Back to the Pelican case for yet another body and lens which we used to get through the rest of the shoot. We packed up, drove back to Austin from San Antonio and dropped the film at the lab. The film  looked great. The client was thrilled and remembered and reminded me for years about how surprised her team was at the fault tolerant/redundancy that was part of our service. Over time that one client added about mid-six figures to our bottom line. Because we had the back-up we needed to complete a very scheduled constrained project in spite of Mother Nature's surly weather. Competency brought loyalty.

The three H-blads went into the service facility to get cleaned, lubed and adjusted. They served me well right up to the more mature part of the digital onboarding (circa 2002). 

But now? Now if a camera fails while I'm out drinking coffee, walking down S. Congress Ave. or otherwise just out screwing around? No harm, no foul. If a camera jams I'll be momentarily chagrined but I won't disappoint anyone if I don't keep making images that day. The camera will go off to service and another one will get the nod to go out on the next day. It's no longer an existential business crisis if a camera gets wonky. It's just a mild inconvenience. And I no longer feel like I need to carry an extra. Hard to change habits though. Working on it.

I have a friend who wants to trade me a really cool, L mount zoom lens and asked me if I had any M 35mm or 50mm lenses I didn't need anymore. Seems I had collected, in short order, three or four 50mm lenses and three 35mm lenses for the M cameras. I had a couple of minty Zeiss lenses that would be a good fit for his M needs. I get to winnow down the M stuff while adding a longer zoom. Truth is I might have just given him the lenses had he not mentioned the zoom. He's a good friend. Been there through thick and thin. 

Two big video tripods left this year when I realized I hadn't put a camera on either one in about 18 months. It's amazing how much stuff one accrues when doing photography or video commercially. And how much one can get rid of if there are no clients to worry about.

It may seem excessive, to anyone who hasn't had to depend on their gear to put food on the table, pay the mortgage, pay taxes, pay for insurance and put kids through pricey colleges, to have so many options at one's fingertips. But I'm proud that I didn't go overboard and buy a second SUV/car for assignment work. You know, a back-up car. Just in case. I could have driven one and the assistant the other on every out of studio assignment. Because you never know when a splooter valve will fail on your way to the client location. Right? What's that line called? OCD?

Now the studio looks twice as big... 

Several things to discuss today. The small, "cheap" Leica DLUX8, the "delete reflections" feature in Adobe's latest rev of Lightroom Classic, and David's Ice Light.

 

I'll start with my continuing review of the DLUX8; the small, agile and surprisingly good micro four thirds, compact camera from Leica. Like almost all new cameras in 2025 the files are more than satisfactory for any use you might have on the web. I included a black and white conversion from a .DNG color file above for one particular reason. The original file, exposed for bright sun on a white sign, plunged the bottom half of the frame into deep shadow. The people in the bottom third of the frame were in the shadow of the building to the left and this was taken in the last afternoon when the late Autumn sun is lower in the sky here. With a few clicks in post processing I was able to bring up a remarkable level of detail in those shadows. I used a brush tool in the selections menu to select the shadow areas. It was a big brush with lots of feathering. With the area selected I brought up the shadows and the overall exposure in this selected area. I used the clarity slider to bring back some of the missing midrange contrast. That's it. Three minutes of post.

I expect this sort of shadow recovery potential from full frame cameras with BSI sensors but it still surprises me to see just how much can be realized from a smaller, older sensor when the camera maker optimizes internal software correctly. 

The second image down from here is the same scene in the original color but with all the other tweaks made. My preference is almost always for the color images instead of the black and white images with the exception being in classical portraiture where color seems to me like more of a distraction. For street scenes it seems to me that color adds more information to the overall mix and so more to chew on. 

Just a note. These images were fun to take and are part of my near constant practice of taking photographs under different conditions and in different formats. They were not and are not intended to be portfolio pieces nor am I requesting critiques of the content and style. I'm adding them to this blog to show various technical features that we can use in our more serious work. This is like an afternoon of golf, but for photographers instead... Practice at the driving range of life.

The DLUX8, like its older Panasonic cousin the LX100ii, is a fun camera to carry around because it weighs so much less than a full frame camera with an attendant interchangeable lens. It's small and unobtrusive and, if you are Veblen-Paranoid you can always put a very small piece of black tape over the tiny red logo and everyone will most probably assume that you are carrying around a very cheap, entry level camera. But really? Nobody gives a shit about cameras anymore. Not out on a tourist street on a sunny day. There's so much else to look at. And all those people you think are judging you based on your camera? They are not. They are too busy thinking about their credit card balances at 19% or what they are going to have for lunch. Or that their shoes hurt their feet. But really, not about your camera. 

Color version of top image.

While I tend to reflexively use the 70mm (e) end of the camera's built in zoom lens it's nice to have a 24mm (e) end of the lens for those times when a wide angle is actually just right. I used the 70mm for the above images but when I, like a groundhog, saw my shadow I zoomed to the wide end to include the entire scene. Sometimes it's fine to shoot at 24mm (e) as long as you have stuff you want to include in the frame. 

I am currently appreciative of the Austin Motel. It's right in the middle of the prime shopping road in South Austin. Just south of Lady Bird Lake/The Colorado River and downtown. It used to be a seedy refuge for drug dealers and prostitutes but that was thirty or forty years ago. Now it's a lively and respectable hotel for hip tourists and was, this past Summer, the Austin epicenter for a Nikon product rollout and played host to a bevy of tattoo'd and pretentious "influencers." At the same time the Austin Motel has a very egalitarian feel to it. Rocky's walk up bar in the courtyard is funky and cool and only open til 10pm. Everyone is welcome to drop by and snag a mojito or some other fun beverage at the bar and then lounge on one of the outside sofas, sit around on puffy chairs or sit at umbrella crested tables and chill with friends. No pretention. No brand-checking involved. 

I'll be back here after the Thanksgiving weekend to see the Motel's yearly forest of fake Christmas trees while taking random photos and sipping a mocha from Jo's next door. A fun way to experience S. Congress. 

What I really like is what the Motel has done with the pool. They've turned a big, kidney shaped pool from a Texas motel staple into a "swim club" where anyone can buy a day pass, float in the cool water under the Texas sun and get refreshments from the bartender at the poolside bar. Last I checked a day pass was a measly $10. USD. So slow down on plans to build that pool in your back yard. You'll probably meet more interesting people here.

A camera note: The eye detect AF on the DLUX is actually quite good. While I was using it yesterday I noticed a hit rate for the camera of over 90%. Sure, it's wedded to a contrast detect AF system so it's not lightning fast but it's certainly fast enough for most work with happy humans. As far as metering goes I've come to expect that Leica have engineered in a little bit of underexposure in order to protect from the highlights burning out. It usually works just fine but once in a while I do find myself tweaking the exposure to a plus one third stop. It's a habit to try and nail exact exposure but since I like to shoot the camera in the raw mode it's really not necessary. 

My last thought (today, at least) about the DLUX is about power. Not the power of infinite vision but the power of the battery and the camera's use thereof. The batteries the camera uses are small, about 1000 mAh. But the camera seems parsimonious when it comes to power use. And, of course, you can enable extra battery stinginess in the power saving menu. Since most mirrorless camera use includes "pre-chimping" or getting your shot set up on the LCD screen or in the EVF the need for post shot chimping is negligible. Yesterday afternoon I shot about 350 raw files over the course of two hours. When I got back home the battery indicator in the camera menu showed over half full. That's great. That means, for me, that even on a long day of spirited shooting I need only bring along two small extra batteries to be confident of getting through the entire day without having to shut down for lack of power.  

For the archly paranoid about battery use I should mention that the camera can be charged and powered via the USB-C socket on the camera's side. If you are going from location to location in a car it's easy enough to top off the in camera battery during travel. 

I included the image above not (just) because I like the disjointed look of the wooden arms against the white plastic head and torso but because there was, when I took this image, a bunch of bright reflections in the window, one of which covered about 25% of the top and right hand side of the mannequins head. 

I'd read about the reflection erasing feature in Lightroom and gave it a try. Amazing that with one click all those distracting reflections were deleted and replaced with believable reconstructions of the underlying details.  Same with the image just below....

And, of course, I am a sucker for images with large swaths of red or blue...

Take a look at the black and white image directly above and the color image directly below. The lower image is the color original. But it started life with the same horizontal reflections that you seen in the black and white photo. I used the same Lightroom "reflection eraser" on the color image but not on the black adn white image. Mostly so I could show off the difference. And because reflections in a black and white image don't seem to bother me as much as reflections in color images. Who knew?

And, by the way, the images just above were shot at f2 with the lens at 70mm's equivalent. 

I think the bokeh, especially obvious in the color image, is calm and beautiful. Who

knew it would be so smooth in an m4:3 compact camera?

The two images directly below are the same frame. The top frame had the reflection deletion tool enabled while the bottom one did not. Again, not for the portfolio but to facilitate thinking about software tools and their potential applications for various kinds of photographs. Note the decluttering on the left hand side of the frame...

No editorial content. Just for fun.

Same.

And one more time...

there are things I like about the color image just above and things I like about the black and white version of the same image, just below. I'm happy to shoot in DNG+L. Jpeg (mono). I like having the choice but my personal preference, more and more, is for the additional information color provides. 

Yesterday it was a bit chilly. I stepped out of my "coffee comfort zone" and ordered a mocha instead of my usual, boring drip coffee. It was delicious. Too much sugar but delicious. A splurge in the middle of a fine afternoon of photos.

I was hoping to run into my friend, David, while I was downtown. I was not disappointed. He showed up at dusk at Jo's Coffee and we proceeded to catch up on events and share whatever insights we could muster. David shoots stuff with a Canon R5 and mostly the Canon 85mm f1.4 lens. It's a fast focusing combo with great color. Today he brought along a Westcott Ice Light. The long, bright LED light you can see right across Hope's dark shirt. He uses the Ice Light to add just a bit of fill to images taken late in the day and early into the night. After watching him use the device for a few random portraits, and then reviewing the results with him, I thought I might snag one myself. Then I stopped. As good as the device is (and it IS good) it's David's style of shooting but not mine. Still, it's fun to see a really great portrait photographer in action. He's got a way of disarming strangers and making them comfortable with the process of being photographed on the spur of the moment. It's a rare talent and I consider every encounter with David, when he's got a camera in hand, as a master's workshop in rapport. 

Now stumbling towards the Thanksgiving Holiday. Ben is still in Tokyo. B. and I are planning to have dinner with her extended family. I'm already picking out a formal, holiday camera. Something nice that will go with my outfit. 

One thing all those forays into camera and lens research has taught me is how to patiently and thoroughly learn just about everything about anything. My latest challenge? Medicare. I originally signed  up for an Advantage Plan five years ago. The plan just got cancelled in our area. It's gone at the end of the year. We didn't see this as a downside, rather, all my experts (Ben spent two years with an AI company that specializes in providing data etc. about healthcare to the U.S. Government) had long ago advised us to go with the traditional Medicare and add a supplemental policy. We didn't listen. But since out Advantage plan was cancelled we had one more chance to go traditional while adding a supplement plan without having to undergo medical underwriting. Also, one more chance to get a plan D drug plan without penalties. We have now mastered the paperwork and have joined the ranks of traditionalists. 

Took some research and the deft guidance of a professional. At least we prevailed before the deadlines. 

All good here.