Cartier-Bresson lenses used?

[Tim Hale]

I've been reading a lot lately about Henri Cartier-Bresson, and I'm impressed by the
consistency in his photographs through his life. It seems he used just a couple of different
focal lengths. Does anyone know what he preferred to use?

Thanks,
Tim
--
---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---

More than any time in history, mankind now faces a
crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter
hopelessness, the other to total extinction. Let us
pray that we have the wisdom to choose correctly.
-- Woody Allen

---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---

[Max Wang]

Mostly 50mm f/2 and sometime a 90mm (don't know the lens aperture, may
be f/2.8).

Max

[Jeff M9]

Having just double checked a large collection of his in a some books, I've
got to think he's also used a 35 extensively.

[Poasune]

Cartier-Bresson used Leica's exclusively, and most of the time a 50mm
lense. Given that he started his career before WW2, that would mean that
he shot a lot of pictures with 50mm f-3.5 and f2.8 Elmars. Not fast
lenses by today's standards. As for the 90mm lenses he may have used that
would likely be one of the Hector models, which Leitz no longer makes.
Primitive and difficult to use equipment by our standards, but in his
hands they caught the decisive moment.
Regards,
John Bateson

[Michael Gudzinowicz]

Actually, he had a 50 mm f/1.5 Sonnar adapted to a Leica body to get
around the lens speed problems, not that it matters much, though it is
mentioned frequently.

[obl...@whatever.net]

On Tue, 07 Jan 1997 21:40:38 GMT, mw...@stern.nyu.edu (Max Wang)
wrote:

|Mostly 50mm f/2 and sometime a 90mm (don't know the lens aperture, may
|be f/2.8).
|
|Max
|
|Tim Hale <tim...@bham.mindspring.com> wrote:
|
|>I've been reading a lot lately about Henri Cartier-Bresson, and I'm impressed by the
|>consistency in his photographs through his life. It seems he used just a couple of different
|>focal lengths. Does anyone know what he preferred to use?

The reply startled me because I associate C-B with 35mm lenses. I
read long ago that that focal length was his "standard," though the
statement may have applied to a specific period in his career.

Looking through _The People of Moscow_ (the only book of his I have on
hand), it's evident that many of the photographs were not taken with a
35mm lens. A good many look like a 90mm, indeed, and a
few--particularly shots made at an event in a large stadium--seem to
have been taken with a much longer lens. A good many do look as
though they were taken with a 35mm, however. And many are hard to
tell; a 50mm might well have been used for many of these.

What do I mean by "looks like it was taken with a 35mm"? Well, the
perspective is just what I would expect with a 35mm. (I use a 28mm as
my wide-angle, so I can't claim an intimate familiarity with the
longer focal length.) The famous picture of the family picknicing on
the riverbank (the Marne?) looks like a 35mm picture to me, for
instance. However _Popular Photography_ once published the picture
with the information that it was taken with a 50mm lens. Perhaps I'm
wrong, therefore, but I don't think so. Anybody know for *sure*?

__
E-mail to: bob...@taconic.net
(The header may be altered
to foil autospam software.)

[Allen Ruffin]

poa...@aol.com (Poasune) wrote:

>Cartier-Bresson used Leica's exclusively, and most of the time a 50mm
>lense. Given that he started his career before WW2, that would mean that
>he shot a lot of pictures with 50mm f-3.5 and f2.8 Elmars. Not fast
>lenses by today's standards. As for the 90mm lenses he may have used that
>would likely be one of the Hector models, which Leitz no longer makes.
>Primitive and difficult to use equipment by our standards, but in his
>hands they caught the decisive moment.

My memory may be faulty on this, but I seem to recall in an old
article on C-B and "The Decisive Moment", he was said to use a 35 mm.
wide angle pre-set for focal depth within the limit of the slow films
of the day and faster shutter speeds needed to avoid shake with grab
shots.

That would have been an Elmar. I had one, and it made a nice compact
unit with a IIIC. Unless one needed the add-on finder.

Editor, Writer, | Ruf...@fred.net
Author of Geezer's Guide to
Bicycling the Chesapeake and Ohio Conal
Towpath (in progress). Access, parking, telephones,
toilets, water, food; photos of interesting historical
aspects; development of a comfortable bicycle for older
riders; lists of MTB manufacturers, area bicycle shops, area
clubs, with Internet addresses and useful sites
Please E-mail any useful club or dealer info you might wish
to see in the book

[Antoine]

Yes, definitely a 35mm, a collapsible 50mm and a 90mm...

[die...@cygnusx1.belgium.hp.com]

If I am not mistaken, a 35 mm lens.

DD
--
==========================================================================
Dominique Dierick "Have a Quasar for Breakfast !"
HP Professional Services Consultant HPUX, WNT, Internet
ddie...@hpubrua.belgium.hp.com
URL: www.ping.be/~ping0053/index.html
==========================================================================

[Cesar Perez Fernandez]

Tim Hale <tim...@bham.mindspring.com> wrote:

>I've been reading a lot lately about Henri Cartier-Bresson, and I'm impressed by the
>consistency in his photographs through his life. It seems he used just a couple of different
>focal lengths. Does anyone know what he preferred to use?

50 m.m

[Poasune]

Cariter-Bresson, the master of the decisive moment, used the basic 50mm
lens most of the time,occasionally a 90mm. He used Leicas, and was among
the first to blacken the chrome with tape to make the camera, and hence
himself less conspicuous. He was a master at using a limited palette, but
using it to perfection.

[Kathleen Lytle]

Poasune (poa...@aol.com) wrote:
: Cariter-Bresson, the master of the decisive moment, used the basic 50mm

What do you mean by "limited palette"? Are you talking about the
film(black&white) he used? Or is it because he wasn't an equipment
junkie like most of us on this newsgroup? He took pictures all over the
world so you can't mean his location "palette". And his career spanned
about fifty years, so you wouldn't be calling that limited.

[Garry Lee]

I've seen books of his stuff. Not a bad photographer but a bit of the
Emperor's new clothes. Many other photographers are much better in my
book.

Famous for being famous.

[Kathleen Lytle]

Garry Lee (gl...@iol.ie) wrote:
: I've seen books of his stuff. Not a bad photographer but a bit of the

: Emperor's new clothes. Many other photographers are much better in my
: book.
:
: Famous for being famous.

Tell us the names of these "many other photographers" who are
much better. Famous for being famous? You're talking about Donald Trump
and his wives not Henri Cartier-Bresson. I've seen books of his stuff.
I've seen walls of his stuff. I can think of few photographers who are as
deserving of their reputations as he is.

[Garry Lee]

Ernst Hahn,
Karsh,
Stieglitz,
Beaton,
Ansel Adams,
Newton,
Tom Lawlor,
Victor Blackman,
etc. etc.

[bho...@frii.com]

I suppose that you mean Ernst Haas? HCB has, over his life, been one of
the most productive photographers ever. Yeah, there are stock guys who
bang out 10,000+ images per year but, few of them have the style and
feeling that Bresson has. To say that he is famous for being famous is
just ignorant. Take another look. To compare him to Ansel Adams is
another sign of your ignorance. Adams was first and foremost a
technician. The work of the two could not be farther apart in style or
content.

To say that you don't like his work is your right. To dismiss him as
simply a persona celebre' is disrespectful.

ben holmes