View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Nordentro
Joined: 24 Jun 2010 Posts: 4713 Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Expire: 2015-01-29
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2014 4:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nordentro wrote:
I was not really shooting bokeh shots, but you can see the potensial in the canon serenar 85mm here as well
_________________ Lars | Manuellfokus.no |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jesito
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 Posts: 5745 Location: Olivella, Catalonia, (Spain)
Expire: 2015-01-07
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2014 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jesito wrote:
Mos6502 wrote: |
Domiplan 2.8/50, CZJ Tessar 2.8/50, Fujinon 2.2/55.
When used wide open these lenses all produce "bubbles" from highlights. |
When I saw "Domiplan" I realized I could get something from this lens that has so bad reputation.
You were right, the Domiplan can take pictures with a similar bokeh.
On the Fuji XM-1, some test Domiplan test shots: (Not the best day to take pictures, anyway).
_________________ Jesito, Moderator
Jesito's backsack:
Zooms Sigma 70-300, Tamron 35-135 and 70-210 short, 70-210 long, 28-70 CF Macro, 35-70, 35-80, Vivitar 70-210 KA, Tamron 70-250.
Fixed Industar-50, , Tamron 24mm, Tamron 135mm, Sands Hunter 135mm, Pancolar 50mm, Volna-3, many Exakta lenses
DSLR SIGMA SD9 & SD14, EOS 5D, Sony A700 and NEXF3, Oly E-330, E-400, E-450, E-1
TLR/6x6/645 YashicaMat, Petri 6x45, Nettar, Franka Solida, Brilliant
SLR Minolta X300, Fuji STX II, Praktica VLC3, Pentax P30t, EXA500, EXA 1A, Spotmatic(2), Chinon CM-4S, Ricoh, Contax, Konica TC-X , Minolta 5000, 7000i, 3Sxi, EOS 500 and CX
Rangefinders Chinon 35EE, Konica C35 auto, Canonet 28, Yashica Lynx, FED-2, Yashica electro 35, Argus C3 & C4, Regula Cita III, Voigtlander Vitoret (many), Welta Welti-I, Kodak Signette 35, Zorki-4, Bessa-R & L, Minolta Weathermatic, olympus XA2
Compact Film Konica C35V, Voigtlander Vitorets, Canon Prima Super 105, Olympus XA2 and XA3
Compact Digital Olympus C-5050, Aiptek Slim 3000, Canon Powershot A540, Nikon 5200, SIGMA DP1s, Polaroid X530, IXUS55, Kodak 6490, Powershot G9 and G10
CSCCanon EOS-M, Samsung NX100 and NX210, Lumix G5, NEX-F3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Humulus
Joined: 23 Sep 2014 Posts: 130 Location: Poland
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2014 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Humulus wrote:
woodrim wrote: |
Humulus wrote: |
My Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 50mm f/2.8 gives nice and bubbly bokeh. It is an old, post-war alu version sold with Ihagee Exa cameras in the 50's. |
Can you give an example? |
Naturally:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
edri
Joined: 26 Oct 2014 Posts: 315 Location: walking in the air
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2014 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
edri wrote:
The Tessar price will raise now.
Nice bokeh.
Which are the first digits of the serial number for your Tessar? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Marek
Joined: 13 Apr 2014 Posts: 903 Location: In the heart of Europe
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2014 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Marek wrote:
It's not only about circles, Trioplan draws everything somehow nicely than majority of cheap supplements mentioned above. The very same level, I think, might be some Telemegors and Primotars, especially Primotar 135 that draws really in a similar way (I don't have that lens myself yet though)
I'd buy that Trioplan instead of "faking" it with cheap "kind of like Trioplan" lens, if I were you - at least if this is the case. Quality before quantity.
As regards pure circles, even Helios 44-2 or Pentacon 50 are capable of. _________________ Angry young man !
Flickr | Juzaphoto | Ebay sales
marekfiser [at] gmail [dot] com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2014 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
Am I mistaken or are the first two digits of the Tessar serial numbers the year of manufacture? What is yours? _________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Humulus
Joined: 23 Sep 2014 Posts: 130 Location: Poland
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2014 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Humulus wrote:
edri wrote: |
The Tessar price will raise now.
Nice bokeh.
Which are the first digits of the serial number for your Tessar? |
The serial number is: 6482739. It looks almost like the Trioplan 50mm f/2.9 but the focusing ring is a little bit thicker. It's also a bit sharper than the Trioplan. Here's a photo:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
edri
Joined: 26 Oct 2014 Posts: 315 Location: walking in the air
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2014 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
edri wrote:
woodrim wrote: |
Am I mistaken or are the first two digits of the Tessar serial numbers the year of manufacture? ... |
Here: http://forum.mflenses.com/carl-zeiss-jena-lenses-issue-date-by-serial-number-t6865.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6009 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2014 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
Soap bubble bokeh is a beautiful thing.
It can be used to augment an image and to add some "wow" to that image.
But it is not the image.
Too many soap bubble pictures are of soap bubbles only, with virtually nothing in the picture in focus at all.
The sharpest things in the image are the edges of the soap bubbles.
I think that the best of these lenses that give this effect, also allow the photographer to actually get something of the subject in focus.
OH |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2014 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
Thank you humulus and edri. Then the demonstrated lens is likely 1963 or 64. I have looked at a lens of #52 which looks to be 1958 or 59. I suppose it too will have the same characteristics. I will be interested to see if it is sharper than the Trioplan I have. Were they many bladed back then? Trioplan was. _________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2014 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
Oldhand wrote: |
Soap bubble bokeh is a beautiful thing.
It can be used to augment an image and to add some "wow" to that image.
But it is not the image.
Too many soap bubble pictures are of soap bubbles only, with virtually nothing in the picture in focus at all.
The sharpest things in the image are the edges of the soap bubbles.
I think that the best of these lenses that give this effect, also allow the photographer to actually get something of the subject in focus.
OH |
I agree with you, Oldhand. And I must admit I am guilty at times in finding a weak subject just to take advantage of the background conducive for bubbles. I don't think bokeh alone is a worth photo except in rare cases, but I do think that when using these art lenses the bokeh is one with the image (or subject), not just background, otherwise it would be a distraction. It may not be the best for a serious portrait, but maybe an outdoors one of less formality.
I was recently at a plantation swamp with some beautiful colors. I so much wanted to use it for a Cyclop background, but no worthy subjects. I admit the subject in this was an excuse for the photo, but nevertheless I do like it...
_________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6009 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2014 9:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
woodrim wrote: |
Thank you humulus and edri. Then the demonstrated lens is likely 1963 or 64. I have looked at a lens of #52 which looks to be 1958 or 59. I suppose it too will have the same characteristics. I will be interested to see if it is sharper than the Trioplan I have. Were they many bladed back then? Trioplan was. |
I have a '55-58 Tessar.
It has eight blades
OH |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6009 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2014 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
woodrim wrote: |
Oldhand wrote: |
Soap bubble bokeh is a beautiful thing.
It can be used to augment an image and to add some "wow" to that image.
But it is not the image.
Too many soap bubble pictures are of soap bubbles only, with virtually nothing in the picture in focus at all.
The sharpest things in the image are the edges of the soap bubbles.
I think that the best of these lenses that give this effect, also allow the photographer to actually get something of the subject in focus.
OH |
I agree with you, Oldhand. And I must admit I am guilty at times in finding a weak subject just to take advantage of the background conducive for bubbles. I don't think bokeh alone is a worth photo except in rare cases, but I do think that when using these art lenses the bokeh is one with the image (or subject), not just background, otherwise it would be a distraction. It may not be the best for a serious portrait, but maybe an outdoors one of less formality.
I was recently at a plantation swamp with some beautiful colors. I so much wanted to use it for a Cyclop background, but no worthy subjects. I admit the subject in this was an excuse for the photo, but nevertheless I do like it...
|
Almost an image from the French Impressionist school.
Very nicely done indeed
OH |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Humulus
Joined: 23 Sep 2014 Posts: 130 Location: Poland
|
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2014 5:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Humulus wrote:
Oldhand wrote: |
woodrim wrote: |
Thank you humulus and edri. Then the demonstrated lens is likely 1963 or 64. I have looked at a lens of #52 which looks to be 1958 or 59. I suppose it too will have the same characteristics. I will be interested to see if it is sharper than the Trioplan I have. Were they many bladed back then? Trioplan was. |
I have a '55-58 Tessar.
It has eight blades
OH |
Mine is also 8-bladed. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mos6502
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 Posts: 961 Location: Austin
|
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2014 7:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mos6502 wrote:
I think all the CZJ Tessar 2.8/50 lenses give the same effect wide open. I remember seeing a pic in the Exa group on flickr that had rather pronounced bubble boke' and when I asked about the lens I found it was a common zebra barrel tessar. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bernhardas
Joined: 01 Jan 2013 Posts: 1437
Expire: 2017-05-23
|
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2014 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
bernhardas wrote:
Edited
Last edited by bernhardas on Sun Jul 03, 2016 7:16 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6009 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2014 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
Mos6502 wrote: |
I think all the CZJ Tessar 2.8/50 lenses give the same effect wide open. I remember seeing a pic in the Exa group on flickr that had rather pronounced bubble boke' and when I asked about the lens I found it was a common zebra barrel tessar. |
Yep - common as dirt Tessar with and without bokeh circles (not quite soap bubbles here - however close)
OH
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
AlexWicks
Joined: 16 May 2012 Posts: 57 Location: Ipswich, UK
|
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2014 2:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AlexWicks wrote:
That's a lot of replies, thanks everyone!
Those projection lenses do look interesting, and I think I'll have to get a CZJ Tessar 50/2.8 if I see a good deal on one...
As for using a projection lens, the Diaplan or the Pentacon AV discussed earlier for example, how would I go about mounting one of these to a DSLR? I assume the flange focal distance of my EOS DSLR will stop me reaching infinity? _________________ Cameras: Sony a7s | EOS 400D | Praktica MTL3, LTL3, LLC | FED 5B
Lenses: Helios 44-2 & 44-3 | Indulstar 61 LZ | Pentacon 35mm f2.8 | Pentacon 28mm f2.8 | Minolta 28mm f2.8 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2014 2:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
AlexWicks: Tessars are plentiful and cheap. Trioplan 2.9/50 not quite as plentiful, but still not expensive. I chose the Altix version which may be a better version (hearsay) and in my opinion, gives a better ring bokeh. However, I too will be trying a Tessar just for fun. Maybe a Meritar too.
Most if not all lenses provide circles in the bokeh when shot wide open, but only the king Trioplan does it best. You'll notice the others have varying amounts of the desired ring look. Oldhand's most recent example shows rather ordinary circles in comparison. _________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2014 2:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
bernhardas wrote: |
@woodrim Frankly I can imagine the picture without the twig large on a wall! |
Thank you, bernhardas, but I struggle to show just the bokeh without something reasonably sharp in the photo as a justification for the rest. _________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ZoneV
Joined: 09 Nov 2009 Posts: 1633 Location: Germany
Expire: 2011-12-02
|
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2014 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ZoneV wrote:
AlexWicks wrote: |
That's a lot of replies, thanks everyone!
Those projection lenses do look interesting, and I think I'll have to get a CZJ Tessar 50/2.8 if I see a good deal on one...
As for using a projection lens, the Diaplan or the Pentacon AV discussed earlier for example, how would I go about mounting one of these to a DSLR? I assume the flange focal distance of my EOS DSLR will stop me reaching infinity? |
Infinity is no problem with the 100mm projection lenses - should even work on Nikon!
Best is to have the lens with the outer housing from the projector. THis way you have inner and outer helicoid, and only need some conversion at right distance to a mount ring.
My Pentacon AV/Diaplan 80mm was easy to adapt with a bit of hot-glue _________________ Camera modification, repair and DIY - some links to look through: http://www.4photos.de/camera-diy/index-en.html
I AM A LENS NERD!
Epis, Elmaron, Emerald, Ernostar, Helioplan and Heidosmat.
Epiotar, Kameraobjektiv, Anastigmat, Epis, Meganast, Magnagon, Quinar, Culmigon, Novotrinast, Novflexar, Colorplan, Sekor, Kinon, Talon, Telemegor, Xenon, Xenar, Ultra, Ultra Star. Tessar, Janar, Visionar, Kiptar, Kipronar and Rotelar.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
AlexWicks
Joined: 16 May 2012 Posts: 57 Location: Ipswich, UK
|
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2014 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AlexWicks wrote:
Thanks for the advice
After a quick look on ebay, all I can find is projectors with 80mm lenses... any idea where I could find one with an 100mm lens? _________________ Cameras: Sony a7s | EOS 400D | Praktica MTL3, LTL3, LLC | FED 5B
Lenses: Helios 44-2 & 44-3 | Indulstar 61 LZ | Pentacon 35mm f2.8 | Pentacon 28mm f2.8 | Minolta 28mm f2.8 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
edri
Joined: 26 Oct 2014 Posts: 315 Location: walking in the air
|
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2014 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
edri wrote:
woodrim wrote: |
I was recently at a plantation swamp with some beautiful colors. I so much wanted to use it for a Cyclop background, but no worthy subjects. I admit the subject in this was an excuse for the photo, but nevertheless I do like it...
|
Nice one. I love this style of painting. It is also one of the reasons why I buy old lenses. Modern lenses do not get such a photo.
I also noticed that Primotar is able to achieve such pictures. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
edri
Joined: 26 Oct 2014 Posts: 315 Location: walking in the air
|
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2014 4:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
edri wrote:
Following discussions on this topic I ordered a Tessar. Unfortunately version that I wanted (preset) is double price compared to other "newer" variants of Tessar. I hope its worth the money spent.
There is any lens with focal less than 50mm capable of this type of bokeh |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mos6502
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 Posts: 961 Location: Austin
|
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2014 6:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mos6502 wrote:
edri wrote: |
Following discussions on this topic I ordered a Tessar. Unfortunately version that I wanted (preset) is double price compared to other "newer" variants of Tessar. I hope its worth the money spent.
There is any lens with focal less than 50mm capable of this type of bokeh |
The problem with anything shorter than 50mm is the increased depth of field makes it harder to throw anything more than a few feet away out of focus enough to get the sparkling/bubbly boke' effect. The other thing is, the shorter or slower the lens, the smaller the "bubbles" are rendered. The longer and faster a lens is, the larger the bubbles are made (well distance to camera also changes the size - the farther away the highlight the larger the bubble seems to become).
Here's some examples from my Fujinon 2.2/55
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|