Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

best 50mm bokeh lens suggestions please!
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
Okay, so what are the lens designs for the 50mm Summicron and Summilux?


Double-Gaussian.

You can read more here:

http://photo.imx.nl/leica/lenses/lenses/page57.html


PostPosted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 4:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:
Attila wrote:
AhamB wrote:
Bright rings and astigmatism (swirly bokeh); not my idea of "best bokeh". Rolling Eyes


Asian and European people have totally different taste about bokeh , Europeans like buttery smooth bokeh Asians like swirly, harsh, rings , busy etc .

I think many Asians like smooth bokeh but swirly/dount bokeh do make their photos different from those photos taken by AF lenses. Wink


Thank you for explanation! Surprised


PostPosted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
FluffPuppy wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
This thread really sucks... Quite Frankly!


Choosing a lens based solely or even primarily on the criterion of 'bokeh' is to me not the best way.


why is that?
for shallow dof photos it often makes for around 95% + of the frame


PostPosted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kuuan wrote:
FluffPuppy wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
This thread really sucks... Quite Frankly!


Choosing a lens based solely or even primarily on the criterion of 'bokeh' is to me not the best way.


why is that?
for shallow dof photos it often makes for around 95% + of the frame


Because the in-focus part matters more...


PostPosted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
That depends on the kind of photo.
For shallow dof photos I'd think that rather good lenses don't distinguish themselves all that much in sharpness of the in-focus area, not in a way that matters much to me as compared to the unsharp areas in which lenses differ so very decisively and which typically cover a much, much bigger area of the frame


PostPosted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 7:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
]Asian and European people have totally different taste about bokeh , Europeans like buttery smooth bokeh Asians like swirly, harsh, rings , busy etc .

That sounds like a very simplistic statement IMO. I have seen quite a large variation in preferences in bokeh type among Europeans/Westerners and plenty of Asians loving smooth bokeh too. Personally, I don't like ultra creamy bokeh like that of the Minolta/Sony STF 135, or Sigma 50/1.4, but I don't care for bright ring bokeh in general, although it can work for some types of shots.

Last edited by AhamB on Sun Dec 25, 2011 7:59 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 6:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would say that most triplets give pretty smooth bokeh.

I really like the Meritar especially:



That's about as harsh as you will get out of that lens. There is only the slightest bright lining, and otherwise is smooth as one could want. No double lining or odd "fuzzyness" like Gauss designs give, and less bright lining or "clumpiness" than tessars.



The thing to look out for on triplets is excessive CA wide open which gives a bizarre and unnatural "skewed" blur.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2011 11:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Guys, please keep topic, I did clean thread from off-topic, I won't do it again!


PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, shoot. I've always been partial to Cosina's 58/1.4. It's not particularly cheap or old, but it's got beautifully damped focusing action and is chipped for a Nikon body. This was at ƒ/3.2 on a crop body.



Optically the Sigma 50 looks pretty good too. If my Siggy 30 is any indication, everything else is likely pretty lousy in typical Sigma fashion.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
New Nikkor AF-S 50mm F/1.8G has a smooth boke IMO. And has fairly good IQ too.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
blarf wrote:
Well, shoot. I've always been partial to Cosina's 58/1.4. It's not particularly cheap or old, but it's got beautifully damped focusing action and is chipped for a Nikon body. This was at ƒ/3.2 on a crop body.



Optically the Sigma 50 looks pretty good too. If my Siggy 30 is any indication, everything else is likely pretty lousy in typical Sigma fashion.


Welcome to the forum, blarf!

Your first post can't contain images, it's an antispam measure. From now on your images will be OK.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:
Attila wrote:
AhamB wrote:
Bright rings and astigmatism (swirly bokeh); not my idea of "best bokeh". Rolling Eyes


Asian and European people have totally different taste about bokeh , Europeans like buttery smooth bokeh Asians like swirly, harsh, rings , busy etc .

I think many Asians like smooth bokeh but swirly/dount bokeh do make their photos different from those photos taken by AF lenses. Wink


Oh come'on... you guys can't be serious. I've lived half me life in the USA and half in Japan with many and frequent connections to European friends and acquaintances and such a national preference just doesn't exist in my experience.

Anyway, I also think the Takumar 50/1.4 has a pretty yummy bokeh... here's a thread with some images from me:
http://forum.mflenses.com/super-multi-coated-takumar-50mm-f-1-4-on-gh1-t45569.html

Additionally the Schneider-Kreuznach Xenar 50/2.8 is an often overlooked gem. I guess because it's only f/2.8. But I have to say that it has the smoothness of some f/1.4 or f/1.8 lenses - in feeling if not measurability. It's a fairly unique bokeh and can be called both "smooth" and "painterly" at the same time. The Takumar 58/1.8 is probably the most "painterly" bokeh lens I have - next to the Rokkor 55/1.8 but both of these lenses produce too much CA which either has to be painstakingly removed or put up with. The Xenar OTOH, has very little CA but can be a little soft in the corners if you're on a FF sensor or even an APS-H I guess. It's usually gone on APS-C or 4/3 & µ4/3 sensors tho and it's only a problem shot at the open end of the aperture of course.

Here's some images for the two other lenses mentioned in the above paragraph:

http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/SMC_Takumar_55-1.8/
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/ROKKOR_55mm_1.8/

Some others worth mentioning are the Rokkor 58/1.2 and the Canon FL 58/1.2. The Canon has nearly identical bokeh to the Rokkor but is sharper at all apertures and also about 1/2 to 1/3 the price of the Rokkor. After a few short tests I sold my Rokkor and kept the Canon. Wink The Rokkor has a reputation as a "cream-machine" when shot wide open - but like I say the Canon is close to identical... it's just not as adaptable as the Rokkor is all and therefore not as often mentioned. Here's some samples of the FL 58/1.2:

http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/Canon_FL_58mm_F1.2/ and the recent thread here:
http://forum.mflenses.com/canon-fl-58mm-f-1-2-t40167.html

The Zeiss Tessar 45mm f/2.8 has a very pleasant bokeh IMO. It's cheap at around $180 and seems to be in abundance while also holding it's price value well. Again this is only an f/2.8 lens but used well can look nice and smooth like that of faster lenses. If you buy this lens I highly recommend tracking down a 7.5mm extension tube (ring) as it's MFD is something like 1.5m away - if memory serves. Some of the shots here used just such a ring while others were shot without:

http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/Zeiss_Tessar_45mm_f2.8_Pancake/

Another seldom mentioned gem is the m42 mount Yashica Yashinon 55mm f/1.8 weighing in at only $100 and often less. One of the few older normal primes with virtually no CA at all, tack-sharp wide open, and with what I consider to be a very pleasant bokeh! And it's silver too! Smile

http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/Yashinon_55mm_f1.8/





Earlier on someone (the puppy?) mentioned the Nikkor 50/1.4 (Ai-S) as being a nice lens and while some folks shot him down a little saying that Nikkor's recent prime lenses weren't really known for having a nice smooth bokeh, the lens actually can produce some very creamy results when used with that purpose in mind:

http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/Nikkor_50mm_1.4/



There seems to be a bit of a cult following around the OM Zuiko lenses so we should definitely include the Zuiko 50mm f/1.4 in the mix here! It's a nice lens, I like it. In high-contrast shots it displays a little too much CA which again either has to be painstakingly removed or put up with. It's probably the prettiest lens you'll ever look at. Most Zuiko glass reminds me of looking into a christmassy wonderland of reflections whenever I look into the lens. I dunno what their coating methods & procedures were back then but if part of the effort was to produce "pretty glass" they succeeded in spades! No others compare. Very Happy I guess this could be useful for holding a child's attention during close portraiture or something... hehhee it works on me anyway! Smile It's bokeh at any rate is what I call "painterly" for lack of a better term and one which I acquired in my days of 3D CG modeling and rendering.

http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/Olympus_50mm-f1.4/





I think biotars were mentioned already but the only Biotar lenses I've owned and were actually fond of were the Zeiss Jena lenses. The CZJ Biotar 50mm f/2.0 is a sweet lens and is both sharp enough and micro-contrasty enough to be placed on an auto-bellows and used at 2x magnifications without falling apart - an unusual feat in my experience. It's bokeh is pleasant and can produce that "Zeiss 3D Look" some people are so attracted to. (oh, and it's also silver!!! YAY for silver lenses! Smile

http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/Zeiss_Jena_Biotar_50mm_F2/



Speaking of Zeiss as I have already twice, I wouldn't disregard the Zeiss Planar 50mm F/1.7 which so many people claim has perhaps the worst bokeh of the Zeiss lenses (and therefor remains very inexpensive!!!). Like all lenses if used with that purpose in mind one can with very little effort, compose a shot with the conditions conducive to the generation of cream - or at least a nice complimenting bokeh!

http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/Zeiss_Planar_50mm_f1.7/




^^^ Hey! That's me in that thar mirror! Very Happy

And finally I'll leave you with perhaps the sharpest 50mm f/1.4 lens wide open ever made as is born out in tests done world-wide. Although the bokeh is not the creamiest, the Canon nFD 50mm F/1.4 is a marvel and a very useful lens. It's also very low in the CA department! One can never go wrong recommending it for wide open shooting IMO. This is NOT to be confused with the FD version (which is still fairly good) or the S.S.C. version (which is a CA whore wide open).





Peace!


PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
fuzzywuzzy wrote:
Your first post can't contain images, it's an antispam measure. From now on your images will be OK.


D'oh. I've lurked so long it seems like I must've made a post at some point. It seems worth mentioning tho, the OP was asking about lenses suitable for use on a Nikon body... this would rule out most of the Canon lenses and potentially the M42s too, no?


PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Those are some amazing shots, Tesselator. I've never been a big fan of normal focal length lenses, but I guess I should get over that. And I guess I also need to add the New FD 50/1.4 to my Canon gear. I find that the old SSC usually sells for quite a bit more than the New FD version. I have a couple of the SSC 1.4s, and I haven't really found them to deliver excessive CA, even wide open. For example:

Canon XS (1000D), ISO 100, with FD/EOS adapter, correction element removed, FD 50/1.4 SSC wide open:


Depth of field is razor thin, I've found, when working with close-ups like the above. If you look very closely, you can see the traces of a spider web on the rose bud. That's what I was focusing on.

Also, you mentioned you enjoy the FL 58mm f/1.2. I have the later FL 55mm f/1.2, and I find it to be a very capable performer, even wide open. Now it does show some CA wide open, but not an objectionable amount. Same setup and settings as above:


And I realize that 85mm is beyond traditional "normal" focal lengths, but then the whole idea of a normal focal length is a flexible one. So, anyway I can't resist showing at least one photo taken with my Canon FD 85mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical wide open. My favorite lens. This photo is actually a duplicate of a slide. Canon F-1, shutter speed unrecorded, lens wide open, Kodak Elite Chrome 100 film.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote


Zenitar-M 50 1.7 - smoothest bokeh ever seen!


PostPosted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'll add one that hasn't been mentioned yet (I don't have it, but I've been impressed with the samples I've seen from it): the Volna-9 50mm f2.8 macro lens. Butter-smooth bokeh.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 6:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes volna 9 is nice but not that impressed from it! And the smoothness is only on 2.8, when you close it the bokeh gets star shape. And it is not that sharp actually. I have tried the volna predecessor the Industar 61LZ and my Pancolar 50 1.8 MC beat it. I have tried them on M42 tubes for macro(Industar 61 and volna are macro lenses).


PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
Those are some amazing shots, Tesselator. I've never been a big fan of normal focal length lenses, but I guess I should get over that.


Yeah, you really should. Some of the most interesting lenses and some of the best manufacturing and design efforts are to be found in the normal range - 45 - 58mm. I suppose as "the standard" length sold with (or suggested for) all cameras and by every maker, pretty much since the first mass produced SLRs, they really wanted to put their best foot and most interesting designs forward. For market share, name : IQ association, or whatever... Recently it's become a Super Zoom as standard I guess - and really we're starting to lose the idea of a standard altogether with every manufacturer now having different ideas and different crop factors.

My favorite MF designs are found in Normal, 85, and 135 lengths with exceptions here and there and for WA, UWA, or STP. STP in like 300/2.8 can be soooo nice! Smile Oooo, makes me wanna put on the parka and take out the 300L :p

Nice post and shots below!


Quote:
And I guess I also need to add the New FD 50/1.4 to my Canon gear. I find that the old SSC usually sells for quite a bit more than the New FD version. I have a couple of the SSC 1.4s, and I haven't really found them to deliver excessive CA, even wide open. For example:

Canon XS (1000D), ISO 100, with FD/EOS adapter, correction element removed, FD 50/1.4 SSC wide open:


Depth of field is razor thin, I've found, when working with close-ups like the above. If you look very closely, you can see the traces of a spider web on the rose bud. That's what I was focusing on.

Also, you mentioned you enjoy the FL 58mm f/1.2. I have the later FL 55mm f/1.2, and I find it to be a very capable performer, even wide open. Now it does show some CA wide open, but not an objectionable amount. Same setup and settings as above:


And I realize that 85mm is beyond traditional "normal" focal lengths, but then the whole idea of a normal focal length is a flexible one. So, anyway I can't resist showing at least one photo taken with my Canon FD 85mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical wide open. My favorite lens. This photo is actually a duplicate of a slide. Canon F-1, shutter speed unrecorded, lens wide open, Kodak Elite Chrome 100 film.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
showing my samples:

Russian Jupiter 50/1.5

Germany Schneider Kreuznach Xenar 50/2,8 dkl mount


Japanese Yashica ML 55/1,2


PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 6:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
It's all a matter of taste, object, distance and composition.

Minolta MD 50mm F2 has a good smooth bokeh I think and also very good colors, microcontrast, 3D-effect and sharpness (and I also think it's also the cheapest lens mentioned here in this thread)
Never used it much though
http://forum.mflenses.com/a-little-comparision-between-some-cheap-50mm-lenses-t45319,highlight,%2Bcheap+%2B50mm.html

Adaption to a DSLR might be challenge.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4