Voigtlander 10mm f5.6 - my first shots

[wingbatwu]

No post processing

 

 

[Golem]

Those pix show that the only function for the outermost

areas within the frame is to emphasize, or complement,

the more significant and more central main area.  

 

IOW you can't actually use the entire frame to picture a

wide view. You can use the area corresponding to the

approximate view of a 14 or 16mm lens and fill it with

whatever falls into that somewhat lesser angle of view,

and the only benefit offered by shooting it with a 10mm

is that you get to surround your 15mm view with these

"extensions" of the content seen in the 15mm view. No

useful extra content is included by the 10mm. 

  

This is essentially a pictorial effect, an interesting way

of insulating the "15mm content" from direct contact

with the "harsh reality" of the four straight lines known

as "The Edges of the Picture". And it's an effect I love !  

   

*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*    

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

I used to use a handheld 4x5 equipt with a 47mm lens.

It was a personal "photo toy", which had no commercial

application. This was more like a 12mm, so not as crazy

as a 10mm [10, 12, 15mm all referring to 24x36 sensor]

but the effect was the same. It looked like a 3x4 picture

is set into a 4x5 space and then the content of the outer

regions of that 3x4 picture get elastically stretched out to

populate the extra real estate in between the 3x4 image

and the margins of the actual 4x5 piece of film.  

  

It's cool. I love how it just about eliminates any need to

to fuss over how your subject's details interact with the

format's sharp edges which harshly declare " You can't

see nuthin' past these arbitrary straight lines out here ! " 

It feathers the boundaries of the area of interest, rather

than cutting it off abruptly. There's no impact of subject

matter in collision with the rectangle that's walling it in.

  

It's as if the picture is "self matting" and the matt is not

some bald, blank-looking neutral surround. Rather, this  

"matt" complements the content within it's boundaries,  

cuz this matt is colored by shapes and colors bled out  

onto it, spreading from the picture within its boundaries.

The image generates its own buffer zone between the  

subject area and the rest of the world outside it.

 

For a flat sensor [or film], rectilinear lenses shorter than

40% of the width of the format don't actually encompass

much extra subject field. They mainly just do the stretch

thing described above. Acoarst the 40% limit refers only

to "reasonable" rectangles. If the format is an elongated

panorama-like strip then it's a somewhat different game :-) 

  

It's a very useful effect, but don't be fooled into thinking

that a 10mm encompasses 50% more subject than a 15.

That would be true for 10 vs 15mm on ASP-C but not on

the 24x36mm [FF] format. On APS-C 10mm hits the 40%

limit, but doesn't go beyond.

 

Acoarst, there hasta be a touch of wiggle room allowed

concerning the numbers used above, but not very much !

[christer]

No post processing

PP would do a lot of good. ;-)

[jdiffner]

PP would do a lot of good. ;-)

 

I'd love to see your shots after you've tweaked them a bit.  

 

On a side note, I became completely enamored with the ultra wide look after picking up a Laowa 15mm (the angle was great, the files were sh#t due to a complete lack of sharpness at any setting) and actually stopped by B&H during my last trip to NYC to try out the Voigtlanders.  As none were available, I ended up buy the 85 GM......not the least bit unhappy with that purchase.  That being said, I'd love to see more of your work to see what the 10mm is capable of.

[wingbatwu]

A few more