Internationale Foren zum Thema Altglas?

[schlicksbier]

Apart from such exact and time consuming test as those by the creator of artapohot.ch , many comparisons and pictorial examples are unreliable. Cropping and treatment of curves plus sharpening says more about software and aesthetics than about the hardware . Texts may of course also mislead.

I am deeply aware of that problem. When I published my personal lens recommendations for the Fujifilm GFX camera (https://www.schlicksbier.com/altglas-u-a-fuer-die-fujifilm-gfx100-podcast), I even dedicated a chapter to that issue. I am also among the first to warn people about that Excel list floating around with an overview which lens would work on a GFX. And we all know that you might need the right circumstances for special bokehs (like the swirly ones) to appear. But nevertheless these example images - as flawed as they might be - are still the most important aspect for one that intends to use such lenses because he or she wants to achieve a certain look. And this is the part where the Facebook groups were so good at - it was the image first and information second (when one got interested by the look one saw).

It would indeed be the main thing where contribution by anyone who is willing to, would be highly appreciated. Because, as you've perhaps seen, it is possible to add your personal review of a lens via the "Reviews" tab each lens page features. Mark (the initiator of the site) has done so with quite a number of lenses.. and I'm sure he has asked again and again for people to add their thoughts and even images if they'd be willing to.
(...)
So, yeah... both Mark and I would be very thankful and really appreciate it if a couple of people would help filling that database and getting the whole endeavor closer to a more useful state by contributing anything really, even if it's just a small impression, anectote or a couple of sample images.

May I offer some suggestions for the page? Maybe you can pass them along if you find them good ...

I wasn't aware that he'd be looking for "image donations" since on the review-tab there is only the possibility to enter text and no images. Maybe he can bring this aspect more to the attention of the visitor. E.g. having the possibility for an image upload right there or an email address where one should send his or her WeTransfer link. Also maybe the possibility to upload a lens image if it's missing from the database.

It would also be great since he offers so much technical data, the diameter of projection lenses would be included so one could see if the lens would fit into his/her adapter.

While checking for one of the projection lenses I have, I noticed something else: He has a "Rathenower Optische Werke Diarectim 100" on his page (https://deltalenses.com/product/row-diarectim-100-2-8) but the lens I have is labeled as "Cinerectim" and not "Diarectim". I couldn't find a "Cinerectim" in his database though. I guess the lens must differ since on the page is written "Bokeh Character: Eccentric thin bubble. No swirl. Smooth." and my Cinerectim has clearly a very strong swirl (https://www.schlicksbier.com/wp-cont...cinerectim.jpg).

I could upload all the example pix for the lenses on https://www.schlicksbier.com/projekt...-fujifilm-gfx/ for that database if you guys are interested and I would knew a way on how to do that ...

[simple.joy]

...and this is the part where the Facebook groups were so good at - it was the image first and information second (when one got interested by the look one saw).

I fully agree. It's the same reason I love to look up lenses on flickr. It's own search function is hit-or-miss but with the help of google I've often been able to find sample shots and in many instances even full-res, which can be very helpful. I know facebook has (or had in some cases?) a lot of unique information on it as well.

May I offer some suggestions for the page? Maybe you can pass them along if you find them good ...

I wasn't aware that he'd be looking for "image donations" since on the review-tab there is only the possibility to enter text and no images. Maybe he can bring this aspect more to the attention of the visitor. E.g. having the possibility for an image upload right there or an email address where one should send his or her WeTransfer link. Also maybe the possibility to upload a lens image if it's missing from the database.

It would also be great since he offers so much technical data, the diameter of projection lenses would be included so one could see if the lens would fit into his/her adapter.

While checking for one of the projection lenses I have, I noticed something else: He has a "Rathenower Optische Werke Diarectim 100" on his page (https://deltalenses.com/product/row-diarectim-100-2-8) but the lens I have is labeled as "Cinerectim" and not "Diarectim". I couldn't find a "Cinerectim" in his database though. I guess the lens must differ since on the page is written "Bokeh Character: Eccentric thin bubble. No swirl. Smooth." and my Cinerectim has clearly a very strong swirl (https://www.schlicksbier.com/wp-cont...cinerectim.jpg).

I could upload all the example pix for the lenses on https://www.schlicksbier.com/projekt...-fujifilm-gfx/ for that database if you guys are interested and I would knew a way on how to do that ...

Thank you very much for the great suggestions and the kind offer! I've already passed it along to Mark and made him aware of this interesting topic. I hope he reaches out to you soon or gets involved here directly (I think he might have an account here...).

Jedenfalls vielen Dank schon mal von mir - ich weiß das sehr zu schätzen! Die Samplebilder wären auf alle Fälle eine tolle Ergänzung. Finde überhaupt Deine fotografischen Arbeiten wirklich super! 👍

[DeltaLenses]

I planned Delta as a group initiative: not quite as contributeable as a Wiki, but also not just the work or opinion of a handful of people. I've always left the door wide open for contributors and collaborators, and appreciate input and suggestions.

Delta is the kind of project that will take years to get out of beta - in fact, it may never make it! Delta V1.0 would comprise a listing for every enlarger and projector lens made - certainly over 5,000 entries. Each entry would have a picture of the lens, a full complement of technical information and (crucially) at least one image made with that lens on a digital camera. As I've said before, the raison d'être of Delta is to demonstrate how these 'forgotten' lenses will forever be useful as capture optics.

Compilation of this information unexpectedly acquired urgency: source material, and first-hand knowledge, about these lenses is crumbling away before our eyes. Gathering it, preserving it, and making it available became a key driver for the existence of the website. I'm now very conscious of the importance of building a long-term archive, and have made provision in my will to finance and maintain the site after I die.

I would like to include a busy discussion forum, but am concerned that it's too niche to be viable. I would prefer the internet to be better at gathering rather then fragmenting information: there are some interesting Facebook groups and tiny pockets of Reddit - and, of course some fine information here. If all this interest was drawn to one focal point, it would be a valuable resource - but I'm being patient about realizing this dream!

If anyone would like to help expand and improve Delta, or chuck in ideas, or if you have a picture or serial number of a lens missing from the current database, please get in touch. If you have stills or video work shot with an 'alt-lens' that you'd like to see better publicized, I'm happy to help show what it and you can do.

[schlicksbier]

If anyone would like to help expand and improve Delta, or chuck in ideas, or if you have a picture or serial number of a lens missing from the current database, please get in touch. If you have stills or video work shot with an 'alt-lens' that you'd like to see better publicized, I'm happy to help show what it and you can do.

Send you a private message

[DeltaLenses]

While checking for one of the projection lenses I have, I noticed something else: He has a "Rathenower Optische Werke Diarectim 100" on his page but the lens I have is labeled as "Cinerectim" and not "Diarectim". I couldn't find a "Cinerectim" in his database though. I guess the lens must differ since on the page is written "Bokeh Character: Eccentric thin bubble. No swirl. Smooth." and my Cinerectim has clearly a very strong swirl.

This is a great example of how things should work. The projection lens section of Delta is in its infancy - having 'only' 1600 entries. I'm aware of many omissions, and unware of many more. For instance, this morning, Delta knew nothing about Cinerectim lenses. Thanks to the nudge above, fifteen Cinerectim lenses have been catalogued and will find their way into the database, along with example pictures where possible, in the next few days. This will shortly connect to cataloguing the full Diarectim range, and a series of rare Gauss Cineluxim lenses I'd not previously come across. Many thanks.

[Namenloser]

This is a great example of how things should work. The projection lens section of Delta is in its infancy - having 'only' 1600 entries. I'm aware of many omissions, and unware of many more. For instance, this morning, Delta knew nothing about Cinerectim lenses. Thanks to the nudge above, fifteen Cinerectim lenses have been catalogued and will find their way into the database, along with example pictures where possible, in the next few days. This will shortly connect to cataloguing the full Diarectim range, and a series of rare Gauss Cineluxim lenses I'd not previously come across. Many thanks.

Hi,
here I posted many pictures with the ROW Cinerectim 120mm f2.1, mostly Bokeh shots: https://www.digicamclub.de/showthrea...l=1#post329549
and here I showed portrait samples: https://www.digicamclub.de/showthrea...l=1#post329550

I also have a 90mm of the series and many more projection lenses.
Feel free to ask for samples, only write a personal message