tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36034830637314381662024-03-21T17:11:05.108-07:00de Zuvia ‧ 單狂殊途攝影作品、器材評論、異色緊縛的總和 Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10005469072023022730noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125truetag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3603483063731438166.post-59376399918003621692014-09-17T09:22:00.002-07:002014-09-17T09:25:55.020-07:00[觀戲] 甜星球劇團《慾望美人之奶油泡芙》
<style>
#sidebar-wrapper, #midsidebar-wrapper, .gapad2, .blog-pager, .post-header-line-1, .post-footer { display:none !important;} #main-wrapper { width:98%!important;} .post { width:98%!important; }
</style>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhthR4ScG2SLvdJ9uIThyjxWkwK-6yq2k5g2UmD5oDnRgyZZ6X1Ec53cECcXoZTq67iTVP-xcTQtqzpHQqjyHABHt5aWP3HTuZEHSZefAV4YdKz1BoojPKW81oWiNZx7ljW-icy1U83B4Sb/s1600/DSCF6265.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhthR4ScG2SLvdJ9uIThyjxWkwK-6yq2k5g2UmD5oDnRgyZZ6X1Ec53cECcXoZTq67iTVP-xcTQtqzpHQqjyHABHt5aWP3HTuZEHSZefAV4YdKz1BoojPKW81oWiNZx7ljW-icy1U83B4Sb/s1600/DSCF6265.jpg" height="426" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
要演一齣認真的戲不難,要演一齣鬧戲也不難。但是,要演一齣看起來像在胡鬧卻認真無比的戲,就是一項有點難度的挑戰了。<慾望美人>以無厘頭的「泡芙」作為貫串整場戲的核心概念,就這樣希哩嘩啦演了一齣看起來混亂無比吵鬧尖叫的戲碼,但我想所有的觀眾,都能在笑的東倒西外的同時,感受到其中另有值得玩味的深意。</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
因此總體而言,我認為<慾望美人>雖然在製作規模上十分陽春,其製作的野心與決心卻讓人十分震懾。導演在藝穗節提供的咖啡店地下室、用寥寥十數個演員和極其有限的道具與燈光,卻企圖做出一齣彷彿讓人身置中大型劇場、聲光亮麗的歌舞秀,並且還想要在除了娛樂觀眾之外,傳達更深邃的弦外之音,同時又要撩撥觀眾與演出之間的劃界,大膽的將主角的位置留白讓給觀眾置身其中。而或許,也正是因為看到了相對於所能運用的有限資源,卻狂妄的企圖在所有的製作面向上都大破大立狼子野心。因此在種種看似不可能的要求逐一成真的時候,<慾望美人>會讓人覺得如此淋漓盡致,同時也佩服導演設計與安排的巧思,使這些可能個別只有50分的元素加總後達到遠超過一百分的效果。</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
雖然實際演出的舞台看似單純,除了一展「慾望美人」的燈箱和咖啡店灰白的水泥地之外就再無其它,但豐富的燈光卻讓這個空白的空間變得極富變化性,有時是燈紅酒綠豔光四射的秀場,有時又是淒涼孤單彷彿荒漠。除此之外,<慾望美人>的巧思也展現在戲劇結構的安排之上。雖然以胡鬧作為外表,其中的設計卻精緻無比。若要用比喻的話,就像是馬戲團中走鋼索的小丑,看起來下一秒就要失重摔下,卻都是早就預先安排妥當的橋段。由觀眾擔任、全無準備的主角作為「對不起我不能愛你」的唯一台詞放置器,讓整齣戲看似充滿不確定性,卻又有明確的發展軌道,而觀眾主角面對各種捉弄所產生的尷尬反應,則又巧妙的作為周遭演員高亢氣氛的緩衝,同時也醞釀出全劇讓人噴飯的荒謬感。整齣戲中除了修女、瓊瑤男、小護士三個主要角色之外,其他的演員常常身兼多職四處奔波串場,既是舞群、黑衣人、龍套、聲光效果器、甚至是看戲觀眾的一員或主角內心世界的投射,烘托出整個慾望美人戀愛輪迴秀的「秀場」味。</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
秀場,大概是我對於這齣戲整體質地的總評,讓人不禁一直想到如台灣辦桌文化中必備的那個花車舞台,集華麗簡陋豐富與隨便於一身,搬弄各種天南地北的元素彷彿煞有其事。<慾望美人>有歌、有舞、還有卡拉OK,致敬了歌劇魅影、8bit電子音樂、流行情歌、電玩格鬥場景、台灣鄉土劇、瓊瑤戀愛劇;龍套們毫不介意的在舞台上邊掃紙屑、吃餅乾、遞威士忌,完全無視同時身邊正在上演的生離死別......這種亂哄哄的舞台是否很像是辦桌時,台上鄉長一邊在致詞、台下吃得火熱、一旁還有鋼管秀忙著立柱準備的景象?但要強調的是,這種仿擬並非直接放給台上恣意亂搞,仰賴的仍然是對於舞台不著痕跡的精緻安排。<慾望美人>在這點上真的深得我心。鬧的很流暢、亂的很精彩。</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
稱讚了這麼多,最後是一些絕對瑕不掩瑜的小缺憾。作為重視聲音的歌舞秀,音響卻似乎出了點問題,過重的回音讓人很難聽清楚歌詞的內容。另外,或許是因為用了許多素人演員的關係,所以有時候會發生整體情緒過度高亢的情形,最後反而讓人有些被疲勞轟炸的感覺。更重要的是,或許也正因為導演是這麼一個心思縝密的人,整體而言,我會覺得舞台在視覺上太滿了些。同時有太多事情在發生,缺乏一點安靜空曠的時刻讓觀眾好好聚焦在主要演員的表現上。舉例來說,瓊瑤男最後一次出場時,旁邊的靈媒看起來似乎是做為瓊瑤男情緒的化身,修女唱歌時在旁邊搔首弄姿不時怪叫的兩隻寵物所扮演的似乎也是類似的功能。我猜測這樣的設計應該是為了撐高整個舞台的強度,但其實在主要演員本身強度已經足夠的時候,這些多餘的陪襯卻反而讓人覺得非常分散注意力、甚至有些惱人。換言之是有些over-design了。同樣的現象也發生在結尾,作為看過彩排的人,其實我更喜歡彩排時那個爽快的大群舞敬禮收場。正式演出時的結尾我已經不大記得細節,但只覺得實在有些畫蛇添足不夠俐落。</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
除了聲光效果以外,<慾望美人>其實在講一個很單純,但也很深邃的故事。在我的詮釋裡,「泡芙」或許是在隱喻那些愛情中投向愛人、糾結而千絲萬縷的黏膩情感,而當求愛的渴望無法得到所愛對象回應的時候,此種糾纏不清的正常性混亂,也就成了最難以超脫的地獄。戀愛輪迴秀或許荒謬,但就如開場歌所唱的:「愛得病懨懨」,想想生活中愛到卡慘死的各種身邊案例,其實這些耽溺於自身愛恨無法解脫的怪誕角色,也只不過是真實世界的寫照而已。<慾望美人>在這層意義上,或許也同時順便/正好致敬了<洛基恐怖秀>吧。</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;">
最後,修女的存在應該是整齣戲最值得玩味的一個。也是被拱上台的「主角」唯一有機會念出「對不起我不能愛你」之外句子的橋段。我不大確定他是自以為超脫卻仍然深陷泡芙地獄,還是真的是指出一條通往安樂土的路,但總之,<慾望美人>這場戀愛輪迴恐怖秀,鬧得夠痛快、亂的夠精采,突破了一些劇場框架、也說了一個好故事。雖然有一些小小的呈現瑕疵,但對我而言仍然是相當好的製作,也期待導演與演員群下一次的呈現。</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10005469072023022730noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3603483063731438166.post-5714145189569367892014-05-14T09:18:00.002-07:002014-05-14T23:02:44.379-07:00第一次的演出(2010年) First On Stage Performance <style>
#sidebar-wrapper, #midsidebar-wrapper, .gapad2, .blog-pager, .post-header-line-1, .post-footer { display:none !important;} #main-wrapper { width:98%!important;} .post { width:98%!important; }
</style>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a 1em="" :="" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxPb9MNR1Ebx0nfyHZFjyM2775MMZfL_Q_zGl1I_Mlsk6sxwnW5JAhIQlBEOgHZNaxXoGi30S0t9pZTp_QE6f7rp7agnQxhKCX3BPyJgceY_4r63I6iJ5GnHXjXyTOMUJPEyj13j7H_1pE/s1600/IMG_0615.jpg" imageanchor="1" margin-right:="" style="display: none;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxPb9MNR1Ebx0nfyHZFjyM2775MMZfL_Q_zGl1I_Mlsk6sxwnW5JAhIQlBEOgHZNaxXoGi30S0t9pZTp_QE6f7rp7agnQxhKCX3BPyJgceY_4r63I6iJ5GnHXjXyTOMUJPEyj13j7H_1pE/s1600/IMG_0615.jpg" height="163" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6s1DjZI5QHgPv3xKy0oOeavkeQp9h-4g5OWd64S4lJlfNCRCcSuE9O8zvWPhOl_daX5rK7V31lFHpLNwNzu9oQ2033EP0LjKX5PGxNGxsEuo8_wOQJhW0m6YLnsxQ5fi1suCQGLicGZ34/s1600/IMG_0615.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6s1DjZI5QHgPv3xKy0oOeavkeQp9h-4g5OWd64S4lJlfNCRCcSuE9O8zvWPhOl_daX5rK7V31lFHpLNwNzu9oQ2033EP0LjKX5PGxNGxsEuo8_wOQJhW0m6YLnsxQ5fi1suCQGLicGZ34/s1600/IMG_0615.jpg" height="320" width="213" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
2010年妮可主辦的舞動繩姬,在南京東路的攝影棚,22歲的我。<br />
The performance was put on at a studio in Taipei ,2010. (held by May Maya ). And I was 22 years old.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjO4Zst9mHOlqmH52rYxiDP2EmUo_dd5NItEcGPnvg09F6OM1TNtV7gHCd9V0kuxf-mXtTkcWRRQCwqRadE_Qub4WYl8bb-Dhws3FvdefUt-pqyn4l3-7rdhi7CMoDnV7s485N6qQocfKtt/s1600/IMG_0628.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjO4Zst9mHOlqmH52rYxiDP2EmUo_dd5NItEcGPnvg09F6OM1TNtV7gHCd9V0kuxf-mXtTkcWRRQCwqRadE_Qub4WYl8bb-Dhws3FvdefUt-pqyn4l3-7rdhi7CMoDnV7s485N6qQocfKtt/s1600/IMG_0628.jpg" height="320" width="213" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
其實現在回顧起來實在實在很不好意思。非常生澀而簡單的繩縛演出,因為擔心出問題所以連繩子都有一半是在後台偷偷先綁好的。<br />
Still a little bit embarrassing to come out with such rough shibari performance. Even some rope works was prepared before on stage, just because I was too afraid to fail.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhautX9qONB-RyWgfPYZSyDdJGIqIAl25QpAkct_N4r71JLaHmh_6GjDgrnzuPWgbCVRwzWLlPY76LS8FQ2ps2JogdQTn_ePVVpBih5VmlhJUlcuo85Y4r6yWiZfbCTXuvMKjhSzDthcyQw/s1600/IMG_0662.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhautX9qONB-RyWgfPYZSyDdJGIqIAl25QpAkct_N4r71JLaHmh_6GjDgrnzuPWgbCVRwzWLlPY76LS8FQ2ps2JogdQTn_ePVVpBih5VmlhJUlcuo85Y4r6yWiZfbCTXuvMKjhSzDthcyQw/s1600/IMG_0662.jpg" height="320" width="213" /></a></div>
<br />
雖然已經是4年前的事情,但我還是很清楚的記得當時緊張的情緒,還有Model拆不下來的髮圈,畢竟是我的第一次在許多人面前把另外一個人用繩子綁縛、甚至懸吊起來。<br />
Though it has been 4 years since the performance, I still remember the nervous felling at that time. After all, it was the first time I tied someone up in front of somebody.<br />
<br />
(攝影:鬼才)<br />
(Photography: Wiz Wang)<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10005469072023022730noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3603483063731438166.post-54266808756441357452014-05-01T00:29:00.001-07:002014-05-01T21:53:24.254-07:00鏡頭比較 lenses comparsion: Zeiss Contax Planar 50mm F1.7 AEJ vs. Canon FD 55mm F1.2 S.S.C<style>
#sidebar-wrapper, #midsidebar-wrapper, .gapad2, .blog-pager, .post-header-line-1, .post-footer { display:none !important;} #main-wrapper { width:98%!important;} .post { width:98%!important; }
</style>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMdZoRYI7PI4gNO2MEY5jEypD0qAotRPi7vBE6tF37826H23UmqcqjGIKcvCidBWVqXTpCUrS5b3Dq_mzvmshIJ8JZI4KPIlLIB_YqctQdRzGLV5JKBU6es_L-Uw6jUalDIz4iiJR6OSMs/s1600/IMG_6074.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMdZoRYI7PI4gNO2MEY5jEypD0qAotRPi7vBE6tF37826H23UmqcqjGIKcvCidBWVqXTpCUrS5b3Dq_mzvmshIJ8JZI4KPIlLIB_YqctQdRzGLV5JKBU6es_L-Uw6jUalDIz4iiJR6OSMs/s1600/IMG_6074.JPG" height="400" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="text-align: start;">Zeiss Contax Planar 50mm F1.7 (left) </span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="text-align: start;">Canon FD 55mm F1.2 S.S.C (right) </span></div>
<b><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></b>
<b><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></b>
<b><span style="font-size: large;">導言 Introduction</span></b><br />
<br />
本文將比較兩顆在自己的生產系列中皆屬「二線」的標準鏡頭:Zeiss Contax Planar 50mm F1.7 與 Canon FD 55mm F1.2 S.S.C 。其中前者相對於著名的 1.4 版本,無論在價格或現今的二手市場的普及度上都遜色不少,但仍然享有高銳利度的美譽;後者則相對於生產時售價高達14萬日圓的內含非球面鏡版本,是僅需4萬日圓的廉價選擇。<br />
<br />
In this article, I will compare 2 "secondary" lens: Zeiss Contax Planar 50mm F1.7 and Canon FD 55mm F1.2 S.S.C . The former is less famous at second-hand market when it comes to F1.4 version. And the later is the much cheaper choice (40000 Yen during 80's) compare to the FD 55 1.2 Aspherical (140000 Yen).<br />
<br />
雖然皆非頂尖,但此兩顆鏡頭仍然具有優異的品質。本文將綜合對銳利度、色彩、散景和我自己的日常使用經驗做出比較。<br />
<br />
Though not the tough one, both lenses are both very well-built and can provide good image quality. In this article I will compare them by sharpness, color performance, bokeh and my daily usage experience.<br />
<br />
(註:本文中的測試皆以Fujifilm X-E1 進行,因此焦段皆需x1.5。另外為了儘量標準化測試條件,鏡頭光圈為1.7 機身設定為:軟片模擬標準、iso自動、快門自動、色溫5300k )<br />
<br />
(Note: This lens comparison test is base on Fujifilm X-E1. Thus due the APSC crop sensor, all test images below is at 75mm (for Zeiss 50) / 77.5mm (for Canon 55) focal length. Besides, for the standardization of test outcome, aperture for both lens were at 1.7, camera setting was fixed at auto iso / auto shutter speed / 5300k color temperature .)<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;">1. 中央銳利度 Central Sharpness</span></b><br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></b>
意外的,以銳利見長的Zeiss Planar 50 鏡頭,在表現上卻顯著的不如Canon 55 FD。從下面兩組100%裁切的比較來看,無論是在無限遠或是中距,Zeiss Planar 50 在光圈全開的1.7端畫質皆明顯偏軟。當然1.7的光圈對於Canon 而言是略縮了一級,在這方面可能會有一些優勢。<br />
<br />
Suprisely, Zeiss Planar 50/1.7, a lens which was praised to be the sharpest lens at it's time, show significant rendering and soft image compare at full aperture (f1.7) to Canon FD 55/1.2 at a step down (f1.7) .<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizuc26Gg1ZdgwkYn8QZpwYULUZ7p1w_oS1Hm9rYy0pHKPEUuRO9js5wWCkzgcbXD-FA9SYkAC8iJ_ujAocZMpxf1fOzDx6Smh_x8y1C66Og9_UqWjGiBwHLceMEL8izC9rvIAxJIu6BORh/s1600/z5.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizuc26Gg1ZdgwkYn8QZpwYULUZ7p1w_oS1Hm9rYy0pHKPEUuRO9js5wWCkzgcbXD-FA9SYkAC8iJ_ujAocZMpxf1fOzDx6Smh_x8y1C66Og9_UqWjGiBwHLceMEL8izC9rvIAxJIu6BORh/s1600/z5.JPG" height="266" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Zeiss Contax Planar 50mm F1.7 (100% crop center)</span></div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibh7N4lmqJ-ctDQxGmq8wD0f8y5tih8TaQaNaI0PEYeUC8HSeUNHILayboX0gug5UCuJ_4S2fFO_Z56womsE9xNVl0Yz0SOGKjG_ph0iqJ7I5JF-q76zMJSFJYJgYXm2GLeTVEsX14YF9z/s1600/c5.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibh7N4lmqJ-ctDQxGmq8wD0f8y5tih8TaQaNaI0PEYeUC8HSeUNHILayboX0gug5UCuJ_4S2fFO_Z56womsE9xNVl0Yz0SOGKjG_ph0iqJ7I5JF-q76zMJSFJYJgYXm2GLeTVEsX14YF9z/s1600/c5.JPG" height="266" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"> Canon FD 55mm F1.2 S.S.C (100% crop center)</span></div>
<br />
值得注意的是,前述比較中主體是在無限遠對焦的位置合焦,但在近/中距的時候, Zeiss Planar 50畫質偏軟和柔化的狀況相對輕微許多,達到與Canon 55 FD差不多的程度。<br />
<br />
Another interesting thing is that, the test image above was focusing at infinity.But when focus point come to middle range subjects, Zeiss Planar 50/1.7 has better sharpness performance and less rendering. The result here is quite the same between both lens.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzB1vWEcCeoYM6oDMRr1AdQzhX4HCrKtMSAFT92CTC7XKnXS80kghxqfzLzNP5lcxNjX87nimCYgqIy6F_0SB3uwQ4PNAUfpj_KJyGdcBd6FbsxVbDGkT45XjfdLKgD-LAifmQfl6jGsHq/s1600/z7.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzB1vWEcCeoYM6oDMRr1AdQzhX4HCrKtMSAFT92CTC7XKnXS80kghxqfzLzNP5lcxNjX87nimCYgqIy6F_0SB3uwQ4PNAUfpj_KJyGdcBd6FbsxVbDGkT45XjfdLKgD-LAifmQfl6jGsHq/s1600/z7.JPG" height="266" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Zeiss Contax Planar 50mm F1.7 (100% crop)</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6WvoODi_qxOGH_FjdOcAo_XR6s_0QBDtA8tHUisurc8WwqN3bIMyeJhJKFS-YDBRpKgwZ5VsnQEC-zM4Nytv3psQkUMrg5qZbTfM7VBirMMfDSPsY9KCfPWV_5UDBueE3_5Ug0lF-USt6/s1600/c7.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6WvoODi_qxOGH_FjdOcAo_XR6s_0QBDtA8tHUisurc8WwqN3bIMyeJhJKFS-YDBRpKgwZ5VsnQEC-zM4Nytv3psQkUMrg5qZbTfM7VBirMMfDSPsY9KCfPWV_5UDBueE3_5Ug0lF-USt6/s1600/c7.JPG" height="266" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"> Canon FD 55mm F1.2 S.S.C (100% crop)</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<b><span style="font-size: large;">2. 色彩表現 Color Performace</span></b><br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></b>
明顯的,Zeiss Planar 50有更為優異的色彩表現,對於色彩細節的呈現遠較Canon 55 FD豐富之外,並且沒有Canon 55 FD 整體色調略為偏黃的問題。<br />
<br />
Obviously, Zeiss Planar 50 has better color performance, showing more color detail. Otherwise, Canon 55 FD looks more flat in color and has a overall yellow / warm tendecy <br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></b>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMyONdub5LPYCBeYhknSUJYDvldfuZwoSxXO8p_NHOM9uQsxskq6f_5pGerpXpjCmVC09qcM81fWIkV7Pd6p8bR8MWAkvA1K-2h1xiIYXb07-A0NA2p7bzeg25-dDZyC7vdiAxNsVT1ATD/s1600/z.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMyONdub5LPYCBeYhknSUJYDvldfuZwoSxXO8p_NHOM9uQsxskq6f_5pGerpXpjCmVC09qcM81fWIkV7Pd6p8bR8MWAkvA1K-2h1xiIYXb07-A0NA2p7bzeg25-dDZyC7vdiAxNsVT1ATD/s1600/z.JPG" height="425" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Zeiss Contax Planar 50mm F1.7 (cropped)</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0U6fuzdmKvIDkykiEn6q6XCB435Zidr4hmXkrdch6bux1cTM1uQXMIdja49BSR1_kHW6lrpMWmRXay3IfPBOMKa9Ov0gIWlfAuopE1ef31k9H_NovrZNw5EuE9ZnnnGFSHfpXqD_pHmYo/s1600/c.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0U6fuzdmKvIDkykiEn6q6XCB435Zidr4hmXkrdch6bux1cTM1uQXMIdja49BSR1_kHW6lrpMWmRXay3IfPBOMKa9Ov0gIWlfAuopE1ef31k9H_NovrZNw5EuE9ZnnnGFSHfpXqD_pHmYo/s1600/c.JPG" height="425" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"> Canon FD 55mm F1.2 S.S.C </span><span style="font-size: x-small;">(cropped)</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>3. 散景 Bokeh</b></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><br /></b></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
兩顆鏡頭的散景十分接近但有可察覺的差異存在。Zeiss Planar 50 的散景有Zeiss一貫的油潤風格,性格較為強烈。<span style="font-size: x-small; text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">相對的, </span><span style="text-align: center;">Canon FD 55的散景較為柔和,虛化的更為徹底些。兩者皆十分良好,而我個人比較偏好</span>Zeiss Planar 50 一些。</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Both lenses has similar but distinguishable bokeh. Zeiss Planar 50 has typical old Zeiss lens' creamy look. Otherwise, <span style="text-align: center;">Canon FD 5</span><span style="text-align: center;">5 has a more soften and smooth, comfortable bokeh. In my personal view, i prefer </span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Zeiss Planar 50's bokeh because of the creamy feel.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhF5cAbT1ScP8CgeQC4_5v2gDD4nz7ipZ7RYkb7MnfpkSoCqiph8wGbc4n9kmjQ6mrGM_FCPcn6olxDyNO7yPXr9ztbU4C91JSERAfI02CGWGX4QMj7YwbsGwyrWFoK3wPhISelAFX7-NTs/s1600/z8.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhF5cAbT1ScP8CgeQC4_5v2gDD4nz7ipZ7RYkb7MnfpkSoCqiph8wGbc4n9kmjQ6mrGM_FCPcn6olxDyNO7yPXr9ztbU4C91JSERAfI02CGWGX4QMj7YwbsGwyrWFoK3wPhISelAFX7-NTs/s1600/z8.JPG" height="426" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Zeiss Contax Planar 50mm F1.7</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSO_ouJBp8krlwTofaOzY2md205IbswrdWdWx8xJZEl1A3cTpiif3YiiqmUkbGSVsEVoXbcWslNDUgL0gsHGFLvWz4xRK_1n6LYVf_CZDg2rBDUcseMex_hm8KrKYQfowuhZML-_34MT6S/s1600/c8.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSO_ouJBp8krlwTofaOzY2md205IbswrdWdWx8xJZEl1A3cTpiif3YiiqmUkbGSVsEVoXbcWslNDUgL0gsHGFLvWz4xRK_1n6LYVf_CZDg2rBDUcseMex_hm8KrKYQfowuhZML-_34MT6S/s1600/c8.JPG" height="426" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"> Canon FD 55mm F1.2 S.S.C</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">4. 日常使用經驗 Daily Usage Experience</span></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
由於此二鏡頭皆會個別有詳細的介紹,因此在此僅概要性的比較兩者在使用經驗的差異。整體而言,<span style="text-align: center;">Canon FD 55 </span><span style="text-align: center;">帶來在F1.7即十分令人滿意的清晰成像(如果你有需要,它還能再提供更大的光圈),並且在光線充足時有鮮豔且清爽的色彩表現。在我的使用經驗裡,</span><span style="text-align: center;">Canon FD 55 在充足的自然光下有十分令人印象深刻的表現。相對的,</span>Zeiss Planar 50 則以較高對比形成的強烈氛圍見長,我個人尤其喜歡Zeiss Planar 50在弱光的環境下對細節的刻畫,但亮度充分的時候Zeiss Planar 50就略顯清淡了些。總而言之,我會認為<span style="text-align: center;">Canon FD 55是一支討喜的鏡頭,</span>Zeiss Planar 50則因為光源的強弱而有不同的個性。</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Both lenses will have independent article for comprehensive review. So in this section I will only do a brief comparison according to my daily usage experience. In general, <span style="text-align: center;">Canon FD 50 brings good sharpness when at F1.7, and even can provide a step up (directly to F1.2) if needed. When with sufficient light, it will show you very vivid and bright image. On the other hand, </span>Zeiss Planar 50 is a little too mild for me under sufficient daylight. but when it comes to low light environment, Zeiss Planar 50 will give you fantastic high contrast photos, which is quite different to it's performance under day light. In sum, I think <span style="text-align: center;">Canon FD 55</span> is a pleasant lens, and Zeiss Planar 50 has more characteristic.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
但若就轉接使用最主要以無反光鏡的輕便相機來看,重達572g的canon FD 55 顯著的影響了使用的流暢度與機身重量平衡。但其實1.2全開端由於畫質軟的讓人無法接受,所以除非特別是為了營造柔焦效果的人像,否則1.2端在日常使用上幾乎是完全不必要的。相對而言,192g的Zeiss Planar 50 顯然是個較為合理的選擇。</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
But if consider most of the FD and C/Y mount lens are adapt to MILC cameras, the weight of canon FD 55 (572g) is significantly an issue when it comes to body-lens balancing and long-time holding. Though it offer F1.2 at wide open, which may be attractive to some ultra-fast lens addicts. But in fact canon FD 55 is too soft and have serious rending at F1.2 to the extent that you won't use it elsewhere aside from soft focus portrait. In other hand, Zeiss Planar 50's 192g weight is much more reasonable.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">結論 Conclusion</span></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
整體來說,兩隻鏡頭的表現十分接近,所以重量就成為最主要的考量因素,Zeiss Planar 50 在這個部分獲得了大量的優勢。另外在二手市場上,Zeiss Planar 50的價格也略為便宜了些,色彩演繹也更為精確細緻,所以我個人覺得總體而言Zeiss Planar 50勝出。但它在高光環境下確實會有略為清淡和畫質過軟的情形,這是在使用上要較為注意的地方。</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
In general, both lenses perform quite well. Thus weight become a critical factor and Zeiss Planar 50 wins a lot here. Besides, Zeiss Planar 50 also a little bit cheaper in second-hand market and has better color details. So in sum, Zeiss wins, though it's mainly because of it's weight not it's performance. But it is true that Zeiss Planar 50 is not that impressive when it comes to high light environment. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<b><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></b>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10005469072023022730noreply@blogger.com