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

Bokina awesomeness
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 3:12 pm    Post subject: Bokina awesomeness Reply with quote
The Tokina AT-X 90mm f/2.5. I used to own this lens, but sold it because I owned the excellent Sony 85mm f/1.8, which also solved the problem of not always nailing the focus. Finally sold the Sony, because I had more fun with using manual focus lenses. So I decided to buy the Bokina again. I almost forgot how awesome this lens is.....

Sorry, my son couldn't put a normal face :-p
But nice image wide open. Subject sharp and contrasty, bokeh soft and buttery.



This picture I took @ F/4:


Very good sharpness. 100% crop of 42+ mp image:


Don't use this lens on wrinkled faces Wink


PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 3:48 pm    Post subject: Re: Bokina awesomeness Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:

Sorry, my son couldn't put a normal face :-p


this is a normal boy's face, absolutely.

Like 1 Like 1 Like 1


PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 4:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, look how vivid are these pictures compared to the (dully, at my eyes) Nikkor 85/2...


PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 4:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ultrapix wrote:
Well, look how vivid are these pictures compared to the (dully, at my eyes) Nikkor 85/2...


I will compare them one of these days.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 4:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Really nice pics.

I have the tokina too.

All very good. The pìcs and the lens


PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 5:21 pm    Post subject: Re: Bokina awesomeness Reply with quote
Caspert

That is a great showcase for the lens . Superb photos


PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Taken with the Bokina lens, as a general use lens

#1




#2



#1


PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 5:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Cools pics! We are always seeking better lenses but forget the very best is already there...


PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
papasito wrote:
Taken with the Bokina lens, as a general use lens

#1




#2



#1


Yeah it’s an impressive lens.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yep, the scooters pop up


PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 8:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Tokina 90mm 2.5 vs. Elmarit 90mm 2.8...


PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
KEO wrote:
Tokina 90mm 2.5 vs. Elmarit 90mm 2.8...


In any case, they are very different lenses.
The second version of the Elmarit (not the Tele ones, nor the longer 9 cm), has the same or more sharpness than the Tokina (great for the two) and more contrast, better colours and more neutral skin tones. But not close focus like the bokina.

By the way, I have the Tokina and the Voigtlander Apo Lanthar 65/2, and the Cosina lens has much less CA and (a bit, for me) more sharpness.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 3:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Bokina needs a long hood, otherwise you will get a light image center during close-up.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
KEO wrote:
Tokina 90mm 2.5 vs. Elmarit 90mm 2.8...


Only thing I could find are MTF scores on photodo.com, and they’re 4.6 for both lenses.



Here the explanation how to read this: http://www.photodo.com/topic_136.html.
Of course, other factors like bokeh, skin colors etc. are not represented in the graph. So owners of each lens can still claim that theirs is better Wink


PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 6:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Please excuse me but I can clearly see a slight excess of red in the first picture of casper79 and it is not in the next picture. But all papasito pictures are distinguished by an enlarged red hue. A perfectly simple question for you guys - do you generally like color accuracy or do you think it will do? I think each of your photos deserves more attention.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 7:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
LLB! wrote:
Please excuse me but I can clearly see a slight excess of red in the first picture of casper79 and it is not in the next picture. But all papasito pictures are distinguished by an enlarged red hue. A perfectly simple question for you guys - do you generally like color accuracy or do you think it will do? I think each of your photos deserves more attention.


I see a huge difference between my different computers. On my Lenovo laptop colors look perfectly balanced straight out of the camera. On my ThinkPad not so much (a slight reddish cast). The sky for example, looks slightly reddish on my ThinkPad, but when I look at the histogram in PS, the sky is grey with a slightly blue tone (what is to be expected). So the Lenovo seems more accurate.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I find it imperative to use a colorimeter to calibrate my monitors. Some, like my 4K screen on a Dell Precision 5300, is quite accurate, but my last Dell M4800 was really pretty miserable in terms of color fidelity. I'm using a Spyder Pro X, and find it absolutely great and very necessary.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
LLB! wrote:
Please excuse me but I can clearly see a slight excess of red in the first picture of casper79 and it is not in the next picture. But all papasito pictures are distinguished by an enlarged red hue. A perfectly simple question for you guys - do you generally like color accuracy or do you think it will do? I think each of your photos deserves more attention.


I see a huge difference between my different computers. On my Lenovo laptop colors look perfectly balanced straight out of the camera. On my ThinkPad not so much (a slight reddish cast). The sky for example, looks slightly reddish on my ThinkPad, but when I look at the histogram in PS, the sky is grey with a slightly blue tone (what is to be expected). So the Lenovo seems more accurate.


It just hurts the eyes to place two pictures where the boy's hair color is DIFFERENT !

Last edited by LLB! on Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:22 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
LLB! wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
LLB! wrote:
Please excuse me but I can clearly see a slight excess of red in the first picture of casper79 and it is not in the next picture. But all papasito pictures are distinguished by an enlarged red hue. A perfectly simple question for you guys - do you generally like color accuracy or do you think it will do? I think each of your photos deserves more attention.


I see a huge difference between my different computers. On my Lenovo laptop colors look perfectly balanced straight out of the camera. On my ThinkPad not so much (a slight reddish cast). The sky for example, looks slightly reddish on my ThinkPad, but when I look at the histogram in PS, the sky is grey with a slightly blue tone (what is to be expected). So the Lenovo seems more accurate.


It just hurts the eyes to place two pictures where the boy's hair color is DIFFERENT !


I'm sorry about your eyes mate!


PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
LLB! wrote:
It just hurts the eyes to place two pictures where the boy's hair color is DIFFERENT !


Now I checked the two photos and one the hair is in the hood, shadow the other it is free, unshaded.

I for one expect some difference in the hair colour.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Slalom wrote:
LLB! wrote:
It just hurts the eyes to place two pictures where the boy's hair color is DIFFERENT !


Now I checked the two photos and one the hair is in the hood, shadow the other it is free, unshaded.

I for one expect some difference in the hair colour.


The photo of a small child is lively and dynamic and I want to share the joy of the father who provided it to us. The picture confirms the excellent quality of the lens.
The front of the child's hair is not covered by a hood. Why did your hair change color ? Your explanation is difficult to accept. Even if the sun has gone behind a cloud, the hair can not change so much. I tried to combine the hair colors in both pictures and I did not work out the color changes everywhere.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
LLB! wrote:
Please excuse me but I can clearly see a slight excess of red in the first picture of casper79 and it is not in the next picture. But all papasito pictures are distinguished by an enlarged red hue. A perfectly simple question for you guys - do you generally like color accuracy or do you think it will do? I think each of your photos deserves more attention.


I don't make any post production change, never.

It's is so boring to me.

And watch if the pic is reddish or greenes or xxxish? Don't matter to me.

I post them like are exported from the camera. With my 4 notebooks I see them different in each one.

In Casper79's pics I can see the potential of the lens. No more is needed for me.

The colour of the hair is different in any pic, and? What is the importance of that?

The things don't have a colour by themselves, it's only the quality of the light who give the colours of them.

So the casts, colours diferences, etc, don't be important when we watch for resolution power and acutance of the lenses.

The rest are only wedding photos questions


PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think it can be explained by A. shadow vs direct light (in fact light, although diffuse, is coming from behind the subject in picture 1) + B. Probably most important, a difference in exposure between the two pictures. C. There is about 1 hour difference between the two pictures. So, changing weather circumstances could also play a role.
I wouldn’t underestimate the influence of light; it can change the whole picture. I don’t see the color cast you’re talking about.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
papasito wrote:
LLB! wrote:
Please excuse me but I can clearly see a slight excess of red in the first picture of casper79 and it is not in the next picture. But all papasito pictures are distinguished by an enlarged red hue. A perfectly simple question for you guys - do you generally like color accuracy or do you think it will do? I think each of your photos deserves more attention.


I don't make any post production change, never.

It's is so boring to me.

And watch if the pic is reddish or greenes or xxxish? Don't matter to me.

I post them like are exported from the camera. With my 4 notebooks I see them different in each one.

In Casper79's pics I can see the potential of the lens. No more is needed for me.

The colour of the hair is different in any pic, and? What is the importance of that?

The things don't have a colour by themselves, it's only the quality of the light who give the colours of them.

So the casts, colours diferences, etc, don't be important when we watch for resolution power and acutance of the lenses.

The rest are only wedding photos questions


Thanks for your reply !

I highly appreciated your point of view. With great respect and best wishes for success in your creative development !


PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
LLB! wrote:
papasito wrote:
LLB! wrote:
Please excuse me but I can clearly see a slight excess of red in the first picture of casper79 and it is not in the next picture. But all papasito pictures are distinguished by an enlarged red hue. A perfectly simple question for you guys - do you generally like color accuracy or do you think it will do? I think each of your photos deserves more attention.


I don't make any post production change, never.

It's is so boring to me.

And watch if the pic is reddish or greenes or xxxish? Don't matter to me.

I post them like are exported from the camera. With my 4 notebooks I see them different in each one.

In Casper79's pics I can see the potential of the lens. No more is needed for me.

The colour of the hair is different in any pic, and? What is the importance of that?

The things don't have a colour by themselves, it's only the quality of the light who give the colours of them.

So the casts, colours diferences, etc, don't be important when we watch for resolution power and acutance of the lenses.

The rest are only wedding photos questions


Thanks for your reply !

I highly appreciated your point of view. With great respect and best wishes for success in your creative development !


Thank you, very much!!!
But creative development? You make me smile.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2