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

Guess: what lens it is made with?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 5:51 pm    Post subject: Guess: what lens it is made with? Reply with quote

Hi to all,

there are many wonderful and instructive samples showing the way that or this manual lens takes an image. And sometimes a reverse game is done which I find quite amusing. There is a picture, and you are to guess which lens it could be.

So, I propose such an image. At your point of view, to what lens this drawing matches the best?



I should say that I resized the original image, then applied some contrast and sharpening. A clue: it was f8 or f5.6.

The camera is NEX-5N.

Thanks

UPD: The original shot is uploaded here.


Last edited by alex ph on Sun May 19, 2013 11:53 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If it's really at f/5.6 or f/8 then it must be a fairly long focal length to get such shallow depth of field. Also the bokeh looks busy and swirly, which makes me suspect it's a slow lens with the maximum aperture not much greater than f/5.6, and perhaps a zoom. Based on your other posts you seem to have some 70-205mm zooms, perhaps one of those near the long end?


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Arkku wrote:
If it's really at f/5.6 or f/8 then it must be a fairly long focal length to get such shallow depth of field. Also the bokeh looks busy and swirly, which makes me suspect it's a slow lens with the maximum aperture not much greater than f/5.6, and perhaps a zoom. Based on your other posts you seem to have some 70-205mm zooms, perhaps one of those near the long end?


Are you a detective or some sort of investigator? I would never have put those clues together.


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, nice try! Since I had these heavy zooms, I got several other lenses.

This is not a zoom, it has a fixed focal distance.

Any ideas?


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 9:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Vivitar? Like Arkku also pointed out, this looks to be coming from some telephoto lens. An unprocessed example would have helped.

There is not much difference between lenses of similar specs/performance after you get through post processing. Sure, if you can examine samples side by side, you may see the difference, but figuring out the lens based on a sample is very tricky.


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The trick is that it is not at all a telephoto!

You are right saying an original could help. But the forum takes only 1600px at the long side. And the original is 4912px wide. Where may I put it? I have no flickr account.

I often saw expert photo-people saying in the forums: hm, the bokeh here looks like zeiss tessar, but the overall drawing is close to minolta standard. Mostly in cases where the lens name is already given in the title. I wonder, if looking at this image one may say something in this key? Or it is rather indifferentiable, as you note?


Last edited by alex ph on Sun May 19, 2013 10:04 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

some swirl and round aperture close down. Interesting. Should be some preset. Pentacon 3.5/30mm perhaps?


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 10:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had almost the same bokeh with my Pentacon 4/200 but the color of this photo is too warm, close to the rendering of a russian tele. What about a Tair or Jupiter lens?

Renato


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 10:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK, I found where to upload the original image. Here it is.

Does it give a better idea?


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pancolart, the focal lengh is almost that: it is 35mm. But the maximum aperture is larger. So, RSalles, it is not a tele. And, another hint, it is neither Russia, nor East Germany as production!


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Takumar 35/2.3 or 35/2


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Visualopsins, I see at the bottom line of your message that you use a set of Takumars. Nice choice! Does this really look like Takumar?

One strange thing is the bokeh: individual OOF spots are more or less round but that "more or less" gives a kind of large grid if you look at the blue (sky) spaces of the shot. I have Takumar 55mm 1.8, it gives a creamier bokeh. Does the 35mm gives the bokeh like on this shot?


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 11:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Alex,

Does the 35mm gives the bokeh like on this shot?

I had this lens and nver ever had a bokeh like this.
East X West, let me miss the hit again: Leica Summicron 2.8/35

I saw the full res image few moments ago, and it can't be a Summicron, not sharp enough to be.,,,

It's really a pleasure to miss completely the target, i NEVER could imagine a japanese/oriental lens to perform the unfocus part of image like this. Japanese lens tends to have a much more quiet bokeh, more contrast, neutral colors, and so on...



Laughing

Renato


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 11:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Renato, you are wrong and then you are right! Smile

This could not be Summicron, as Leica, as far as I saw in samples, gives you a kind of point to point sharpness and quite a plate image plane being stopped down.

What gives this lens is quite weird: you look at the sharp central flower (at, say, f5.6) and just the flower next to it, 4cm of distance, has already OOF or glowing edges. And then you look the full resolution at the left bottom of the shot, where another flower is barely seen and you note that it is slightly better focused, in spite of the distance, then the one just a bit out of the center. So, it's a kind of eccentric lens, I may say. Could it be German, East or West?


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 11:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When you start talking about glow, Meyer.

(Primagon 35mm f/4.5 for example.)


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like this game. Very interesting. Kinda like a manual lens quiz at a photography school.


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hm, you guys turn back to suspect the East Germany production, right? No, Fabian, it is not. And the maximum aperture is larger, what gives to the lens (I suppose, among other factors) that eccentric effect.


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nikonshooter wrote:
Arkku wrote:
If it's really at f/5.6 or f/8 then it must be a fairly long focal length to get such shallow depth of field. Also the bokeh looks busy and swirly, which makes me suspect it's a slow lens with the maximum aperture not much greater than f/5.6, and perhaps a zoom. Based on your other posts you seem to have some 70-205mm zooms, perhaps one of those near the long end?


Are you a detective or some sort of investigator? I would never have put those clues together.


Heh, well, seems like I was probably wrong on every count. Now I'm quite curious to know what lens can have such swirly bokeh and abundant glow at f/5.6f/8, usually these artefacts go away as the lens lens is stopped down.


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nikonshooter, I enjoy it too! So, I should not lay down my cards too fast, right?


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 11:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

alex ph wrote:
Hm, you guys turn back to suspect the East Germany production, right? No, Fabian, it is not. And the maximum aperture is larger, what gives to the lens (I suppose, among other factors) that eccentric effect.


So, West German 35mm with really weird bokeh? I'm tempted to guess Distagon 35mm f/1.4, but I'd expect to see the aperture shape stopped down to f/5.68. Are you sure about the aperture being that far stopped down, it just doesn't seem to match what I'm seeing in the picture

Whatever the lens, when this riddle is over can you please take a similar photo both wide open and at f/5.6. =)


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 11:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You are quite right, Arkku! I can't say this lens is rare, but neither very usual as MFL for digital photo.

I mean your previous comment. Not the one about about Distagon. Laughing


PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2013 12:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Faulty edit. :/ Meant to make a new post:


Enlarger lens would make more sense than projection at that focal length by the way, but movie lenses usually have clickless aperture so I guess that's the corner you're hinting at.

Some Isco maybe.


Last edited by Fabian on Mon May 20, 2013 12:09 am; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2013 12:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Arkku, at the end I will post another photo I made wide open and then stopped down. The character will be visible anyway.

For this shot I have only one, stopped down. This one was between f5.6 and f8. So, maybe closer to 5.6.


Last edited by alex ph on Mon May 20, 2013 12:06 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2013 12:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fabian, nice try! You come closer, if follow the eccentric idea and the aperture without fixed stops. But not a projection lens.


PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2013 12:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You are right, Fabian, congratulations, this is a C-mount TV-lens! Should I say the mark or, at least, the country of production? Or we may wait for some people who may guess it?