Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Want to see an impressive bokeh?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:10 pm    Post subject: Want to see an impressive bokeh? Reply with quote

Check out the Leica Summilux-R 50 samples on this page:

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/leica_50_14_canon/index.htm

scroll down to the examples. Look at the flowers picture. Amazing eh? But you'll say "there is no difficult highlights". So look at the first picture, the bronze horse. That is some nasty highlights in the background. Look at how they're rendered.

I need to get hold of that lens one day or another.
Put on the 400D, where it becomes a portrait lens, it will be unbeatable.
I think it does not clear the mirror on the 5D, but sincerely, who cares - I would use it only for portraits.

"Small" problem: the last version of this lens (the one tested) is never found on Ebay below 500 Eur Sad


PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That is very impressive - the lights behind the horse's left ear would be rendered very distractingly in may lenses. Do you agree with his overall finding - that it really is not worth the extra effort/shortcoming/cost versus the Canon?
BTW I am a huge fan of those top of the line lenses including Leica, Hassie, Zeiss - just cant come up with the dinero.

patrickh


PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am not a big fan of the purple and green CA on the ears,


PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

patrickh wrote:
That is very impressive - the lights behind the horse's left ear would be rendered very distractingly in may lenses. Do you agree with his overall finding - that it really is not worth the extra effort/shortcoming/cost versus the Canon?


I think it's subjective. Every lens has a "feel" and it must coincide with the feelings of the owner. It's not much different than mating with a woman. There can be beautiful woman with whom you don't have that special feeling, and ordinary looking woman with whom you have that special complicity that makes it so much more worth the while. When I look at that rose picture, I feel that special "vibration" that makes me understand this is a lens I will love. Another person may not care at all about it.
If it's only a matter of taking great quality pictures, I think any 50 dollars 50mm lens can do it as brilliantly, or even better. So speaking from a strictly logical, utilitarian point of view, I agree, there is no difference in objective quality that justifies such a higher price compared to more commonly available 50mm lenses.
But then, there is the fact that photography is little about actual performance, and much about sensations. So when there is a lens that gives you the right vibrations, I think that it is worth whatever price you can afford to pay for it.

Ok I realized I wrote a lot, just to say nothing really useful. Sorry Sad


PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hacksawbob wrote:
I am not a big fan of the purple and green CA on the ears,


Me neither, now that I notice it.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The new Distagon 2/35 for Nikon does not bad at all with the highlight bokeh either - actually it perhaps does even better (although it's difficult to compare because the pictures have obviously been taken in two different days).

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/zeiss_zf_35_2/index.htm

look here too at the horse picture.

Actually the chromatic aberrations here are much better than with the Leica lens. And on second view, I like the bokeh of the Distagon better more and more, in the horse pictures.

I slowly begin to form myself an opinion on the Leitz vs. Zeiss lenses. I think that Leica lenses very often win for sharpness and resolution. But when the other aspects of a lens are considered, like:

- vignetting
- distortions
- chromatic aberrations

I find the Zeiss lenses to be more balanced lenses, I find them better in that they are more complete, more high quality under all respects, instead of being super sharp one one side, but on the other side with dubious CA, dubious vignetting etc.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was forgetting: man, that Distagon on the Nikon 200 looks impressively good. I think that Zeiss has really a hit in their hands with the design of these new lenses, because they are looking good like vintage lenses, but shiny new.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Like everyone else here I think, I have a lot of 50mm lenses, but I use only very few.

I like a lot to use the Helios-44, because it has beautiful colours and it is fun to use with the preset ring.
But if I want to go for top quality performance, I use one of the following four lenses:

- Planar 1.7/50
- Planar 1.4/50
- Nikkor AIS 1.4/50
- Summicron 2/50

I recently added the Pancolar 50mm, which is an excellent performer, but all considered is a step below the 4 aforementioned models.

I think that the best buy in the bunch is the Planar 1.7/50, that you can buy with less than 100 Euros and delivers a performance that is almost as good as the other three lenses, which are more expensive (in the case of Summicron, much more expensive).

Here's a picture I took yesterday with the Planar 1.7/50, first a resized version for this forum:



And then the original size, to evaluate the quality:

http://www.orio.ws/temp/meli_p1750.htm

Note the quality centre to corner, the definition of the image in the corners (real corners, of the 5D), in spite of the high ISO (I think it was 800)

I think many photographers look down at the Planar 1.7/50 considering it a "lesser brother", it's a mistake, it's a little cheap lens that performs every inch in true Zeiss quality.
_


Last edited by Orio on Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:18 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't forget Olympus OM 50mm f1.8 it has top performance and low price like Helios-44.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attila wrote:
Don't forget Olympus OM 50mm f1.8 it has top performance and low price like Helios-44.


Attila, I can only speak for the lenses I own, of course.
_


PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You will get one soon I see the future Smile


PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laughing


PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attila wrote:
Don't forget Olympus OM 50mm f1.8 it has top performance and low price like Helios-44.


I have never seen this Oly lens at such a low price! Shocked

Just like most of you, I own many 50ish lenses but only use some:

I regularly use:
1. Nikkor-S.C 1.2/55 - in my eyes an almost perfect lens!!!
2. Pentax-M SMC 1.7/50 - also an excellent lens!

I often use:
3. Auto Revuenon 1.4/55 (Tomioka) - Very good, much better than you would expect from a "Revuenon" (no-name lens).
4. Mamiya Auto Sekor 1.8/55 - Really good and very pleasant to use!
5. Canon EF 1.8/50 II (AF! Oops...) - "Plastic Fantastic"!

I sometimes use:
6. Auto Rikenon 1.7/50 - Much nicer to use than the results it produces, optically only "good" but it handles so well.

I only occasionally use:
7. Helios-44M-6 2/58 MC - A really good lens, I still don't use it often. I don't know why, to be honest!
8. Yashica Auto Yashinon 2.0/50 - Pretty nice pictures, but not in the best condition.
9. Helios-44-2 2/58 - This lens has a special character that I sometimes love but not always.
10. Industar-50-2 3.5/50 - Much better than you might expect, but it is pretty slow.

I rarely use, because these are EXA-mount lenses and I do not shoot with my EXA I often:
11. Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 2.8/50
12. Meyer Optik Domiplan 2.8/50 1Q

I gave to my father (because I wanted him to have a decent 50mm lens):
- Pentacon auto 1.8/50 - A very good lens but not my favourite. My father likes it a lot, that's why I gave it to him. (So I don't use it any more.)

I've sold again, since I did not use them at all:
- Auto Reflecta 1.7/55 : pictures were OK, but not spectacular.
- Petri Auto C.C. 1.7/50 : pictures were not bad, but I always was afraid to break this lens, because it is so ramshackly.

These two are not really bad lenses, but they did not amaze me and I only like to use lenses that in one way or the other can fascinate me!


PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Carsten find on Ebay, they as usual going around 15 GBP or less.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2007 4:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lucis
Ref your #5 - the Nikkor 50/1.8AF sells new for under $100 and is one of the sharpest lenses on the market. It is also "plastic"

Very Happy Very Happy

patrickh


PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 3:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

LucisPictor wrote:


I have never seen this Oly lens at such a low price! Shocked



I've got two copy of this Oly lens, the first is in mint condition $20, the second is in good condition $13.

It's really cheap, I'm finding another version of this lens called "Silver Nose".