My Photo

November 2015

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30          

Notes

  • GoogleWideScyscaperAds
  • Search
    Google

    WWW
    lifeslittleadventures.typepad.com
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2006

« The Who Revisited | Main | The Avedon Years, Part XVIII »

November 25, 2007

Comments

derek stanton

Hello.

I'm really enjoying reading this information. Avedon was my original photographic hero.

Regarding your comments on the Rolleiflex, i have a comment:

"The actual lens didn't matter as long as it was f/2.8 for easier focusing and 80mm for just the right perspective."

I believe all the VIEWING lenses for both 2.8 and 3.5 Rolleiflexes were 2.8, so there should be no difference (apples to apples) between focusing a 2.8 versus 3.5 camera. The 2.8, though, would give you a bit shallower DOF at the widest aperture. And, because lenses are usually better when stopped down a bit, a 2.8 should be sharper at f3.5 than a 3.5 camera at 3.5. But, as you seemed to prefer small apertures, that's probably not relevant.

Also, the 2.8 Rolleiflex didn't come into play until about 1949, so Avedon's earlier work must have been done with a 3.5, and likely a Tessar lens rather than a Planar or Xenotar.

I just saw the Avedon/Fashion exhibition at ICP, and took particular note of the imaging characteristics of the older (pre-1950s) street images. The Tessars are a bit different in the handling of out of focus areas.

The comments to this entry are closed.