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

Portraiture lens advice needed
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2021 7:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

D1N0 wrote:

The K is the same as the older Takumar version. I think the M 100/2.8 is better than the Takumar (Super, Super-Multi-Coated) Sharper, better micro contrast, better bokeh. It may even outperform the Pentax-m 85mm F2 (which also isn't too costly, usually near €200). But I don't have that one. I just usually find the samples I see of it a bit boring and the bokeh more sticky smooth than airy smooth.


Just as you noted - I see that the K has a much more nervous and busy bokeh, lower micro contrast and some SA. Also it is more expensive. Your advice regarding the M is really good and seems to match my needs exactly.

The K possibly is supposed to have a bit higher resolution as per Yoshikio Takinami: http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/pentax_tele.html but what I see from the photos seems the opposite. The M seems to have much better 3d Pop and acutance.


Last edited by Dusty-Lens on Sat Oct 16, 2021 8:01 pm; edited 3 times in total


PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2021 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

D1N0 wrote:
Totally forgot about my Pentax-m 100mm 1:2.8 Look at how well it deals with this situation:

Geranium Bokeh by The lens profile, on Flickr


Very nice image.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2021 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

D1N0 wrote:

The K is the same as the older Takumar version. I think the M 100/2.8 is better than the Takumar (Super, Super-Multi-Coated) Sharper, better micro contrast, better bokeh. It may even outperform the Pentax-m 85mm F2 (which also isn't too costly, usually near €200). But I don't have that one. I just usually find the samples I see of it a bit boring and the bokeh more sticky smooth than airy smooth.


I just checked - currently I can get a mint SMC Pentax M 100/2.8 with the shipping for the rice for which I can get a mint Contax G Sonnar T* 90/2.8 with the shipping - due to a cheaper shipping for the Sonnar. How would these two lenses compare in in terms of contrast and micro contrast if you have any experience with the Sonnar 90 (or the similar C/Y Sonnar 85)?

Thanks again for the excellent suggestion!


PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2021 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dusty-Lens wrote:
D1N0 wrote:

The K is the same as the older Takumar version. I think the M 100/2.8 is better than the Takumar (Super, Super-Multi-Coated) Sharper, better micro contrast, better bokeh. It may even outperform the Pentax-m 85mm F2 (which also isn't too costly, usually near €200). But I don't have that one. I just usually find the samples I see of it a bit boring and the bokeh more sticky smooth than airy smooth.


I just checked - currently I can get a mint SMC Pentax M 100/2.8 with the shipping for the rice for which I can get a mint Contax G Sonnar T* 90/2.8 with the shipping - due to a cheaper shipping for the Sonnar. How would these two lenses compare in in terms of contrast and micro contrast if you have any experience with the Sonnar 90 (or the similar C/Y Sonnar 85)?

Thanks again for the excellent suggestion!


I'm still shooting with a DSLR, so no experience with rangefinder stuff or anything I can't adapt to K-mount.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2021 11:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Minolta MD 100mm F2.5 or Olympus 100mm F2.8 perhaps? Canon FD 100mm F2.8 could also be a fine lens, though a bit less familiar to me. Nikkor 105mm AIS has already been mentioned. I don't know if you'd like Samyang 85mm F1.4 UMC version's rendering, it's definitely punchier (though not particularly sharp for a modern lens) than most vintage lenses and it can be had for just about 150. Truth to be told, things like contrast and colour can be changed in editing; but I know what you mean - it's nice having easier raw files to begin with. Sadly most 85mm lenses got overpriced. I wonder about that Kaleinar though, it's still a bit of unknown to me (except sharpness, I'm talking more about it's character and usability not just for portraits, but close ups and landscape too). I may give it a go anyway.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 4:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dusty-Lens wrote:
D1N0 wrote:

The K is the same as the older Takumar version. I think the M 100/2.8 is better than the Takumar (Super, Super-Multi-Coated) Sharper, better micro contrast, better bokeh. It may even outperform the Pentax-m 85mm F2 (which also isn't too costly, usually near €200). But I don't have that one. I just usually find the samples I see of it a bit boring and the bokeh more sticky smooth than airy smooth.


I just checked - currently I can get a mint SMC Pentax M 100/2.8 with the shipping for the price for which I can get a mint Contax G Sonnar T* 90/2.8 with the shipping - due to a cheaper shipping for the Sonnar. How would these two lenses compare in in terms of contrast and micro contrast if you have any experience with the Sonnar 90 (or the similar C/Y Sonnar 85)?

Thanks again for the excellent suggestion!


Are you shooting cat portraits or people portraits?


PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 7:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dejan wrote:
Minolta MD 100mm F2.5 or Olympus 100mm F2.8 perhaps? Canon FD 100mm F2.8 could also be a fine lens, though a bit less familiar to me. Nikkor 105mm AIS has already been mentioned. I don't know if you'd like Samyang 85mm F1.4 UMC version's rendering, it's definitely punchier (though not particularly sharp for a modern lens) than most vintage lenses and it can be had for just about 150. Truth to be told, things like contrast and colour can be changed in editing; but I know what you mean - it's nice having easier raw files to begin with. Sadly most 85mm lenses got overpriced. I wonder about that Kaleinar though, it's still a bit of unknown to me (except sharpness, I'm talking more about it's character and usability not just for portraits, but close ups and landscape too). I may give it a go anyway.


Thank you! I have the Kaleinar-5H and 5-6 more 135mm, 100mm and 85mm lenses which I like. I am currently gathering a set of lenses with high input contrast and colors (sooc) for a certain project on lens rendering and coatings so adding output contrast and saturation in post is a bit off for this exact project.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 7:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Blazer0ne wrote:


Are you shooting cat portraits or people portraits?


It's more of a research project on coatings and lens rendering. As to the exact question I am making portraits of people. My cat is usually not a subject but rather an obstacle 😁


PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 8:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you want a portrait, such as the face; or a bust per say, head, shoulders and chest, then a 90mm f/2.5 will have everything in focus. If you move further away for face, chest and upper torso everything will still be in focus. In other words all you get by stopping down is more sharpness and less aberrations. I would suggest it isn't until you go 100mm f/2 mm or 85mm f/1.4, for example, or faster when you start to have issues with depth of field.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 8:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you want serious sharpness and contrast wide open, you could also consider the Tokina at-x 90mm f/2.5 macro. It’s not excactly a steal though, but usually cheaper than for instance the Takumar 85/1.8.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 9:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Blazer0ne wrote:
If you want a portrait, such as the face; or a bust per say, head, shoulders and chest, then a 90mm f/2.5 will have everything in focus. If you move further away for face, chest and upper torso everything will still be in focus. In other words all you get by stopping down is more sharpness and less aberrations. I would suggest it isn't until you go 100mm f/2 mm or 85mm f/1.4, for example, or faster when you start to have issues with depth of field.


I appreciate your general advice but as I replied to you before I will need a lens with an aperture.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 9:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

caspert79 wrote:
If you want serious sharpness and contrast wide open, you could also consider the Tokina at-x 90mm f/2.5 macro. It’s not excactly a steal though, but usually cheaper than for instance the Takumar 85/1.8.

Thanks! I have used it before and it is a very nice lens for sure great bokeh and sharpness, above average contrast too, though it usually sells above my current budget.
I must check its current prices and how it does in terms of sooc color saturation.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 9:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dusty-Lens wrote:
Blazer0ne wrote:
If you want a portrait, such as the face; or a bust per say, head, shoulders and chest, then a 90mm f/2.5 will have everything in focus. If you move further away for face, chest and upper torso everything will still be in focus. In other words all you get by stopping down is more sharpness and less aberrations. I would suggest it isn't until you go 100mm f/2 mm or 85mm f/1.4, for example, or faster when you start to have issues with depth of field.


I appreciate your general advice but as I replied to you before I will need a lens with an aperture.


Seems like a silly requirement for a portrait lens. Search eBays for Leica elmarit-r 90mm f2.8 is you want it with blades.

https://flic.kr/p/CAF3j4

https://www.flickr.com/photos/sebastianpier/42825593690/in/album-72157668499973497/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/stevench0928/16329382451/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/139717463@N07/36917740281/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/leonblurck/46433634841/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/0912319760/5196790055/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/pscafe/50705636461/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mike-mkvip/28868317245/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/134963580@N02/30872320701/


PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 11:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Blazer0ne wrote:

Seems like a silly requirement for a portrait lens. Search eBays for Leica elmarit-r 90mm f2.8 is you want it with blades.


Excuse my brutal honesty but I really don't need your opinion that my requirements are "silly" after decades of experience as a photographer, various awards and several of the travel portraits I made featured by Nat Geo at their "125 years National Geographic" exhibition.

Stick to the topic which concerns portraiture lenses with high contrast and rich colors sooc which I need for a certain project. The Elmarit-R 90mm f/2.8 is above the budget I stated in my question.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dusty-Lens wrote:
Blazer0ne wrote:

Seems like a silly requirement for a portrait lens. Search eBays for Leica elmarit-r 90mm f2.8 is you want it with blades.


Excuse my brutal honesty but I really don't need your opinion that my requirements are "silly" after decades of experience as a photographer, various awards and several of the travel portraits I made featured by Nat Geo at their "125 years National Geographic" exhibition.

Stick to the topic which concerns portraiture lenses with high contrast and rich colors sooc which I need for a certain project. The Elmarit-R 90mm f/2.8 is above the budget I stated in my question.


Which is why I suggested the Colorplan. It is well within your budget and meets the portrait requirement, has rich colors and contrast. All you need is a Raf Camera clamp and a macro helical. That should place it at around $150.

My dirt poor great grandmother was also featured in Nat Geo. Curing meat next to her self built homestead with dirt on her face and tattered clothing in a rural southeast town. Photo taken with some beater camera. I doubt Nat Geo gives a crap about the camera. But they care about the character.

Cheers!


PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 12:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Blazer0ne wrote:

Which is why I suggested the Colorplan. It is well within your budget and meets the portrait requirement, has rich colors and contrast. All you need is a Raf Camera clamp and a macro helical. That should place it at around $150.

My dirt poor great grandmother was also featured in Nat Geo. Curing meat next to her self built homestead with dirt on her face and tattered clothing in a rural southeast town. Photo taken with some beater camera. I doubt Nat Geo gives a crap about the camera. But they care about the character.

Cheers!


Thanks again for this really interesting hint. I will definitely get the Super-Colorplan P2 for myself but a bit later due to some budget concerns as now I have to get 3 lenses: 35, 50 and an 85-105mm for a certain project and knowing myself I will probably keep these as I have hard time parting with old glass.

Cheers!


PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you are really interested. I must pass the credit. I discovered the lens here on mflenses.com. It has been well documented by KDS315*. He is a very trustworthy source for lens advice. Just look around and a good deal on the Super will pop up. Occasionally they are sold as surplus for the projector. Also, any made in Portugal version will suffice. I understand newer versions have slightly better corners, though I only shoot APS-C. The Super is commented as APO level. You won't be disappointed.

Friends


#1


PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 9:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dusty-Lens wrote:
...portraiture lenses with high contrast and rich colors sooc which I need for a certain project. The Elmarit-R 90mm f/2.8 is above the budget I stated in my question.


I have another suggestion - one which I admit is above your stated budget. It might however be useful as a comparison, at least. The Zhong-Yi Mitakon 85mm Speedmaster f/1.2. It's not a very prestigious name, which is why you can sometimes find used ones at a nice price (though still above your budget). The lens itself is quite awesome.

The Nikon 100mm Series E (which I believe you asked about) is also extremely good for the price. What it lacks in Nikkor build quality, it makes up for by being very light weight and easy to use. It's optics are extremely good; it's probably the best Series E lens.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2021 8:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another one to consider: Minolta MD 100mm f/2.5. I just bought one myself. Quite affordable, and apparently a very good performer with very good bokeh, although I still have to test it myself.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2021 10:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would also mention the Konica Hexanon 85mm 1.8. Great colors and contrast as long as it is not wide open, only closing to 2.8 and onward. For my taste, better lens overall than the Zuiko 100mm 2.8 (which is wonderful too, very small and a please to handle, but a touch softer and "less colored" than the Hexanon).


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2021 11:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

KEO wrote:

I have another suggestion - one which I admit is above your stated budget. It might however be useful as a comparison, at least. The Zhong-Yi Mitakon 85mm Speedmaster f/1.2. It's not a very prestigious name, which is why you can sometimes find used ones at a nice price (though still above your budget). The lens itself is quite awesome.

The Nikon 100mm Series E (which I believe you asked about) is also extremely good for the price. What it lacks in Nikkor build quality, it makes up for by being very light weight and easy to use. It's optics are extremely good; it's probably the best Series E lens.


Thanks! The Mitakon is a wonderful lens indeed but as you noted over the budget unfortunately. I am monitoring the E series 100mm!


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2021 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

caspert79 wrote:
Another one to consider: Minolta MD 100mm f/2.5. I just bought one myself. Quite affordable, and apparently a very good performer with very good bokeh, although I still have to test it myself.


Thanks! Another option within my budget seems to be the later Minolta 100mm f/2.8 Macro - it seems to have excellent sharpness, contrast and colors. It is an AF lens but as a Macro lens it is easily operated with MF too.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2021 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zamo wrote:
I would also mention the Konica Hexanon 85mm 1.8. Great colors and contrast as long as it is not wide open, only closing to 2.8 and onward. For my taste, better lens overall than the Zuiko 100mm 2.8 (which is wonderful too, very small and a please to handle, but a touch softer and "less colored" than the Hexanon).


Thanks! I will monitor the offers for the Konica Hexanon 85mm f/1.8 if something is available within my budget. I have also read good feedback on the Minolta Rokkor MD 85mm f/1.7 - do you have an idea how do these two compare?


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2021 11:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dusty-Lens wrote:
Zamo wrote:
I would also mention the Konica Hexanon 85mm 1.8. Great colors and contrast as long as it is not wide open, only closing to 2.8 and onward. For my taste, better lens overall than the Zuiko 100mm 2.8 (which is wonderful too, very small and a please to handle, but a touch softer and "less colored" than the Hexanon).


Thanks! I will monitor the offers for the Konica Hexanon 85mm f/1.8 if something is available within my budget. I have also read good feedback on the Minolta Rokkor MD 85mm f/1.7 - do you have an idea how do these two compare?


To be honest, no idea about the Rokkor.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2021 12:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dusty-Lens wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
Another one to consider: Minolta MD 100mm f/2.5. I just bought one myself. Quite affordable, and apparently a very good performer with very good bokeh, although I still have to test it myself.


Thanks! Another option within my budget seems to be the later Minolta 100mm f/2.8 Macro - it seems to have excellent sharpness, contrast and colors. It is an AF lens but as a Macro lens it is easily operated with MF too.


Used that lens as well. Very good indeed.