[stevebrot]

The answer, of course, is the lens that is on the camera. I kid you not. I just did a quick inventory and don't believe there is a single lens on my shelf that I have NOT used for monochrome work. Of those, I can't think of any that is otherwise good that is poorly suited for B&W photography. Alternatively, I can't think of any that is better suited for B&W than for color, with the possible exception of the early '50s vintage 7.5cm f/3.5 Zuiko on my Mamiya Six and for that one, I don't know, solely for the lack of having run color film through the camera.

A few examples...

Fotostevia on Flickr | Monochrome


Steve

[Piotrek K]

I like contrasty black and white and found DA 40 XS/DA 40 Limited perfect for it.

[ffking]

B&W already takes a step back from literal reality, so what better than allowing lenses with real character to express themselves? -I'd say that all the FA Ltds fit this bill - with the added advantage of being very sharp, which helps when you remove one of the criteria (colour) for differentiating between areas of the image and when you have high contrast images which are common in B&W but can look a bit smudgey if the lens is a bit softer. Other than that, I use the 24-70 for a lot of B&W landscape simply because it's weather sealed and I've got a Lee adaptor to fit it

Incidentally, it might just be the time of year, but I'm leaning agian to B&W myself - there's something special about it, no two ways.

[Benz3ne]

I've found some of the results on legacy lenses to be perfect for black and white work. They seem to have that filmic quality that some are after with B&W shots. They can also be had cheaply (think SMC-A 50mm f/1.7, SMC-A 28mm f/2.8, SMC-M 135mm f/3.5, a range of Takumars etc...) so that makes trying them out a bit more worthwhile.

[pepperberry farm]

I tend to agree with Steve...

here's some samples:

EBC Fujinon 55/3.5 Macro




D FA 100/2.8 Macro




SMC A 70-210/4




and the rest

black & white | Flickr

[Sandy Hancock]

is it the lens or the processing that makes a difference in a black & white shot?

The latter. Or the sensor.

I don't know why we're discussing lenses.

[MrKodak]

I want to start exploring black and white photography again... on digital and possibly on film (cost is an issue). I find a lot of B&W pictures a bit boring honestly, especially some street photography that seems to have boring light and boring subjects... I'm talking about the current crop of artsy street photographers, not the fine people in this forum of course But on some pictures, if the light is right, the focus on luminosity makes it seem like you're almost in there in the picture, even though it doesn't really look like the scene. It can be quite engaging in that way.

Interestingly, I find that modern lenses don't look quite as interesting for B&W as film-era lenses, but that might be because I've had some great film-era lenses and have always have more budget-oriented digital-era lenses. Also, it seems like I get better results from some non-Pentax lenses. The 4 that have given me the best results in my short black and white photography journey are:

1. Tokina 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5 -this lens seems to show luminosity differently, it's very sharp but also delicate at the same time. It also seems to naturally give more detail into darker areas - that is probably because the contrast is not so high.


2. Vivitar (Cosina serial number starting with 9) f/2.8 - a very nice focal length for black and white photography and the lens seems to give a bit of a nice dramatic look to the pictures.


3. Rikenon P 50mm f/1.4 - also a favorite for color, there's really nothing this lens isn't good at. An old-school lens that has sharpness in spades without hard edges, and gives out details and nuances so well. This is at f/1.4.


4. Sigma 30mm f/1.4 Art - Now this is a modern lens with an old soul, for sure. It is super sharp but not overly corrected, which caused a lot of people to frown on it because it has CA wide open. To me it's basically a perfect lens optically, and B&W hides the CA that it has at f/1.4...


Pardon me for the boring shots...

I haven't experimented with filters, like the orange, red and yellow filters a lot of people use for B&W. I guess for digital those aren't needed.

So I'd like to know everyone's favorite lenses to shoot black and white, IF black and white is something you enjoy.

Interesting dive into a fascinating subject; I started on Ricoh cameras back in the 1980s and was pleasantly surprised how good they were and still is actually.

[johnha]

Coloured filters shouldn't be used on digital. They affect the RGB balance of the Bayer filter - e.g. use a red filter and you only get the red pixels (a quarter of those available).

I've found an example of using a red filter on digital: 645D, 6x7 35mm Fish-Eye with & without the built-in red filter (from two different shooting positions - note the inset 100% crops). IIRC it was photoptimist who explained the lack of IQ in the shot with the red filter in my original query (thanks):

[ChristianRock]

The latter. Or the sensor.

I don't know why we're discussing lenses.

Well. The lenses probably don't make a lot of difference in B&W for you, but for some of us they seem to be quite a big part of the equation - the difference of interpretations here is huge, more than I expected. And that's fine. Everyone's point of view is different. We go from people who only use black and white when they think the colors don't really work for the picture, to people who purposely want to use black and white to showcase the interaction between light, shadows and midtones, and to give emphasis on textures and transitions. There's people who love how different levels of luminance make subjejcts/objects look, and people who just love that contrasty look. So I guess this thread is for people who do think lenses do make a difference

[totsmuyco]

My favorites are:

100mm WR Macro


50mm Zeiss Makro-Planar




and Zeiss 28mm f/2 Distagon

Nice shots. I also have this lens. It's a great lens for black and white and of course it lives up to its name Macro.

[TwoUptons]

In K-mount, my favorite is my 24-35 zoom on the MX. It just has the right feel for film.

In M42, my favorites are the 28mm f3.5, 35mm f2.0, and 50mm F1.4 Takumars. I usually shoot those with a H1a.

I also have a M42 Takumar 135mm f2.5 that I should use more, as it’s great when I nail focus...

I’ll partially agree that processing is the key. I’ve found that I can get most of the way there with the right film and exposure with “standard” processing. But the really dramatic stuff does seem to beg for complete control of the process, from film choice and exposure to processing and final output.

-Eric

[stevebrot]

is it the lens or the processing that makes a difference in a black & white shot?

The latter. Or the sensor.

I don't know why we're discussing lenses.

We are probably discussing lenses because the OP suggested it.

The point regarding processing is a good one, particularly since there many different options. I have avoided film emulation products and have standardized on a hard-to-get set of Lightroom presets based on traditional film spectral response, optical filters, paper grades, and toners; yes, there is no grain emulation . The results are amazingly similar to what I aim for with darkroom prints.


Steve

[pbancr]

My favorites are:

100mm WR Macro

Your first image is spectacular!

[Fenwoodian]

.
I find that proper post processing techniques and software is at least as important as the choice of lens. Here's a link to a free YouTube video on B&W digital processing that helped me improve my B&W post processing workflow.

You Tube

You Tube

[totsmuyco]

Any lens is great for black and white photography. But, I personally would prefer fast lenses with apertures like 2.8. Black and white needs drama and your limited to black, white and shades of gray. Playing with depth of field would make your photo very dramatic.