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

Best 3d effect lenses...suggestion?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 5:10 pm    Post subject: Best 3d effect lenses...suggestion? Reply with quote

Which are best 3d effect lenses? Any suggestions?
Thank a lot!


PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Carl Zeiss T*


PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry...what's the meaning of Carl Zeiss T*?Smile
Which lenses and focals in particular?


PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Carl Zeiss Contax lenses, all of them have an element of 3D for me!


PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To say something different before this thread mutated to a Zeiss hype

Leica Vario-Elmar-R 3.5/35-70mm
Leica Elmarit-R 4/180mm
.....

or

Nikkor 1.8/105mm
Nikkor 4.5/300mm IFED
.....

Twisted Evil


PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rolf wrote:
Twisted Evil

poilu wrote:
T*


PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 7:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

poilu wrote:
Rolf wrote:
Twisted Evil

poilu wrote:
T*


Laughing Laughing Laughing


PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 7:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well there was a debate about "what is the 3D effect " and IMHO most people accept "what pops out of the picture" if in depth it's more of a wow. Amongst the less expensive lenses, I've found my nikkor 50mm f1.8 AIs is very good at times for 3D effect in depth.


PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 8:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Also a cheaper alternative to CZ T* is the S-M-C Takumar 50 1.4 that is very good at this, I usually use f/4 for best 3D rendering.

An even cheaper alternative is the Helsios 44-3 MC that also has some 3D quality stepped down.

Two other lenses that I sometimes get 3D shots with are Leitz Elmarit-R 60 2.8 and CZJ Flektogon 35 2.4 MC

All of the above can give "real" Zeiss T* 3D pop, and not only shallow DOF.

/T


PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 8:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I find that my Pentacon 50 f1.8 surprises me sometimes, especially when there's bold colours involved. Then I can see a very nice 3D effect.


PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 8:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would like to suggest to become a better photographer first, and learn how a 3D-like picture can be done with what you already have. Just take the time to learn your lenses.


PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 8:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Spotmatic wrote:
I would like to suggest to become a better photographer first, and learn how a 3D-like picture can be done with what you already have. Just take the time to learn your lenses.

+1

I must say the expression 3D as a praising description for a lens seems pretty awkward to me. Meaning nothing.


PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

+1. It's like asking: "I want my food to taste like Paul Bocuse's. Please suggest me the right pots, pans and spoons so that I can become him". Laughing


PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 3:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pancolart wrote:
Spotmatic wrote:
I would like to suggest to become a better photographer first, and learn how a 3D-like picture can be done with what you already have. Just take the time to learn your lenses.

+1

I must say the expression 3D as a praising description for a lens seems pretty awkward to me. Meaning nothing.


Meh. People can say the same about the "dreamy bokeh" or about the micro-contrast or tonal gradation of the lens. It's a tool and you have to wield it properly to accentuate it's characteristics and make a good picture. Exceptional bokeh, sharpness, contrast, 3d are meaningless if the picture is poorly composed.


PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 5:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ersatz wrote:

""Exceptional bokeh, sharpness, contrast, 3d are meaningless if the picture is poorly composed.""


+1
semso


PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 7:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

semso wrote:
ersatz wrote:

""Exceptional bokeh, sharpness, contrast, 3d are meaningless if the picture is poorly composed.""


+1
semso


My sentiments also, the best equipment will not turn you into the best photographer until you learn how to use their unique characteristics.


PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 7:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I always thought most of the "3D effect" of a photograph is based on its composition. Namely, objects fading in and out of the plane of focus around the main subject of interest.


PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ersatz wrote:
Pancolart wrote:
Spotmatic wrote:
I would like to suggest to become a better photographer first, and learn how a 3D-like picture can be done with what you already have. Just take the time to learn your lenses.

+1

I must say the expression 3D as a praising description for a lens seems pretty awkward to me. Meaning nothing.


Meh. People can say the same about the "dreamy bokeh" or about the micro-contrast or tonal gradation of the lens. It's a tool and you have to wield it properly to accentuate it's characteristics and make a good picture. Exceptional bokeh, sharpness, contrast, 3d are meaningless if the picture is poorly composed.


erm well we all can't be top photographers so if a person wants 3d effect even on crap shots, and has the money to buy decent lenses..that's his hobby and no one else's business. So whether sinner79 is a pro, amateur or newbie, members should give him answers to what lenses are more likely to give 3d.


PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great answer! I'm asking about 3d effect lens, not about photographic technique:-P


PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 10:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sinner79 wrote:
Great answer! I'm asking about 3d effect lens

what is 3d effect, sinner79?
please explain what you know about it
have you seen some pics with 3D effect, can you show them to us

do you own a 3D TV?
personally I have a 60" 3D TV so I can speak about 3D Wink


PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Short DOF, great bokeh, subject that comes from background like a "3d effect"Smile


PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pancolart wrote:
Spotmatic wrote:
I would like to suggest to become a better photographer first, and learn how a 3D-like picture can be done with what you already have. Just take the time to learn your lenses.


Exceptional bokeh, sharpness, contrast, 3d are meaningless if the picture is poorly composed.


I don't see why a poorly composed picture can't have a 3D effect...

What sinner79 is saying above doesn't have much to do with 3D IMO though. That's just subject isolation, which can make the subject look flat, but separated from the background.


PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are principles defining lens speed and focal length correlation and resulting background blur. There is no need to add new meaning to 3D notion which is already becoming valueless (empty) due to commercialization of 3D TV and cinema.


PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 2:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Right after i wrote above i remembered ZOOM lenses that have separate macro (close focus) ring which works independently from focusing and zoom. With them sometimes one can achieve nice background blur even at F3.5 or more. Maybe such zooms deserve separate thread.


PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

edit: screwed up the original post by editing wrong message Sad

I wrote that I think 3D is more "dimensionality", a capability to produce "touchable" and "natural" look in images. I don't find shallow depth of field to equal 3D, especially not if bokeh is swirly.

I also recommended Distagon 21/2.8 for dimensionality even at f/8 and almost infinite depth of field, as well as Nikkor 35/1.4G AF-S, Planar 85/1.4 ZF and Nikkor 50/1.4 Ai-S for fingerprint that gives very dimensional/3D look in images.


Last edited by Esox lucius on Tue May 17, 2011 4:08 pm; edited 5 times in total