View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
wolan
Joined: 30 Jun 2015 Posts: 577 Location: Zurich
|
Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2015 9:48 pm Post subject: Looking for a bokeh monster below the 200$ mark |
|
|
wolan wrote:
...well say 250 dollars if it is worth it |
|
Back to top |
|
|
StillSanj
Joined: 21 Apr 2015 Posts: 412 Location: United States
|
Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2015 10:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
StillSanj wrote:
By bokeh monster do you mean lots of aperture blades and crazy bokeh?
If so, Helios 44-2 is always good cheap start that everyone should have. Tair-11, Helios-40, pentacon 2.8/135 are all considered bokeh monsters and can be had for under 250.
I think you need to be more concise with your need so people can be more helpful. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2015 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
StillSanj wrote: |
I think you need to be more concise with your need so people can be more helpful. |
+1
You may also watch this thread for further inspiration: http://forum.mflenses.com/bokeh-only-t69142.html
Many of the used lenses there would be available for your budget. _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
invisible
Joined: 06 Jun 2013 Posts: 344
|
Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2015 10:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
invisible wrote:
I'm partial to the Nikon 105/2.5 Ai. Beautiful, creamy bokeh, plus sharpness wide open, solid build... Can be found on ebay for $150-$250. Well worth the price tag and more. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2015 10:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
I have lenses that are considered "bokeh monsters" and others that are considered anything but. But even with the non-monsters, I can still get great bokeh. And with the "bokeh monsters" there are times the bokeh are not at all pleasing.
It all comes down to one thing, I've found -- the distance from the background to the point of focus. Even with a very fast lens, I've had situations where my subject was, say, 10 feet away or so, and the background was maybe 5 feet behind them. The background will not be sufficiently blown out, even when shooting with a very fast lens, like an f/1.2.
Here are some examples. The first four photos were taken with my Canon FD 85mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical. The final photo was taken with my Canon nFD 200mm f/4.
Great bokeh:
Here's one with more bokeh definition -- the above one has almost no bokeh detail it was blown out so far.
Also nice bokeh:
The above photo had a very busy background, complete with a parkbench that had some powerful horizontal lines showing. Yet the Canon 85/1.2 was able to blow out the bokeh to the point where I don't see them as a distraction -- rather an absctraction.
And here's an example of lousy bokeh, taken with the same lens:
The other day, I was out taking photos of some flowers and stuff with my cheapo Canon nFD 200mm f/4. You'd think that a lens with an f/4 maximum aperture wouldn't be capable of much, wouldn't you? Wrong:
So to put it succintly, the closer you are to your subject and the farther away the background is, the better chance you'll have of producing "likable" bokeh. Even with a regular old 50mm f/1.8. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2015 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
cooltouch wrote: |
... the closer you are to your subject and the farther away the background is, the better chance you'll have of producing "likable" bokeh. Even with a regular old 50mm f/1.8. |
Absolutely! _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
wolan
Joined: 30 Jun 2015 Posts: 577 Location: Zurich
|
Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2015 11:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
wolan wrote:
Bokeh monster=what ever you consider very beautiful and pleasant bokeh
That difficult to guess?
StillSanj wrote: |
By bokeh monster do you mean lots of aperture blades and crazy bokeh?
If so, Helios 44-2 is always good cheap start that everyone should have. Tair-11, Helios-40, pentacon 2.8/135 are all considered bokeh monsters and can be had for under 250.
I think you need to be more concise with your need so people can be more helpful. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Marek
Joined: 13 Apr 2014 Posts: 903 Location: In the heart of Europe
|
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2015 12:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Marek wrote:
I'm selling this 18 blades monster on Ebay now. http://www.ebay.com/itm/151801344270?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649 _________________ Angry young man !
Flickr | Juzaphoto | Ebay sales
marekfiser [at] gmail [dot] com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
araucaria
Joined: 16 Jan 2014 Posts: 63
|
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2015 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
araucaria wrote:
nikkor ai-s 180 2.8 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
StillSanj
Joined: 21 Apr 2015 Posts: 412 Location: United States
|
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2015 12:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
StillSanj wrote:
No need to get defensive-was just trying to help.
Bokeh monster usually refers to number of blades- but that doesn't mean that's what you're looking for.
We're you looking for telephoto? Portrait? Crazy or smooth bokeh? You'll figure it out.
Anyway- best of luck. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2015 12:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
wolan wrote: |
Bokeh monster=what ever you consider very beautiful and pleasant bokeh
That difficult to guess? |
That's indeed very difficult as something what you might consider as very beautiful and pleasant might be ugly and bad for somebody else.
The discussion about bokeh is purely a matter of personal taste and preferences.
Nearly every lens is able to produce bokeh, i.e. out of focus rendering, depending on specific photographic situation and construction of the lens (e.g. shape and number of blades), maximum aperture, focus length and size of the sensor.
Your question is similar precise like you would ask for a "good music". _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CuriousOne
Joined: 31 Dec 2013 Posts: 669 Location: Home
|
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2015 5:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
CuriousOne wrote:
From my personal opinion, experience and taste, I can say that in most cases, say 100mm F2 has better background separation, then say 50mm F1.2 _________________ I have nothing to compensate with lens |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3666 Location: Calgary
|
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2015 6:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
Every image that has an OOF background has Bokeh, just like every surface you touch has texture, saying its good or bad tells us nothing about it's properties, ie. smooth or harsh, soft or funky, the Helios 40 is called a bokeh monster, but it's rather funky with lots of swirliness, the FDn 85/1.2L is also called that, but it's bokeh is smooth and soft, both are pleasing to some and not so much to others, too funky or too boring I guess you could say.
Helios 40 which is based off the Zeiss 75/1.5 Biotar, The Cyclop 85 is a clone of the Helios, then there is the Meopta Meostigmat 70/1.4 Projector lens which has the same formula, http://forum.mflenses.com/meopta-meostigmat-1-4-70-on-ff-and-nex-via-vnex-t55218.html
Though buying it through hinnerker with the helicoid for E mount won't be cheap, it does work quite well, you could buy the lens and adapt it yourself and possibly save some money.
The Takumar 85's have nice bokeh.
Generally any lens that has much better than average bokeh will be expensive, or it's listed wrong, or the lens is relatively unknown, and those don't stay that way very long. _________________ A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
wolan
Joined: 30 Jun 2015 Posts: 577 Location: Zurich
|
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2015 7:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
wolan wrote:
No problem. Thanks for the great lens tips.
StillSanj wrote: |
No need to get defensive-was just trying to help.
Bokeh monster usually refers to number of blades- but that doesn't mean that's what you're looking for.
We're you looking for telephoto? Portrait? Crazy or smooth bokeh? You'll figure it out.
Anyway- best of luck. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
imagedit
Joined: 17 May 2014 Posts: 92 Location: London, england
|
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2015 11:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
imagedit wrote:
StillSanj wrote: |
I think you need to be more concise with your need so people can be more helpful. |
Yep +1
And what range do you prefer to shoot in?
I have many tele "bokeh monsters" but i mainly shoot in the 50's. _________________ My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CuriousOne
Joined: 31 Dec 2013 Posts: 669 Location: Home
|
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2015 12:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CuriousOne wrote:
Older Soligor/Juplen/Fujita made 135mm F3.5 also has very pleasing bokeh. _________________ I have nothing to compensate with lens |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kei
Joined: 08 Jan 2015 Posts: 142 Location: S. Wales UK
|
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2015 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kei wrote:
Depends if you are after nice bokeh that is characteristically smooth or if you seek something that emphasises the circles of confusion or some other aberrations like swirl. I don't much like over zealous in your face bokeh effects, I prefer the inoffensive creamy style.
Mamiya m645 150mm f2.8 A has wonderfully creamy smooth bokeh, amost no CA, no vignetting and is super sharp right from wide open. The dinky 80mm f2.8 is also good but having a 6 bladed diaphragm makes hexagonal bokeh when stopped down.
150mm f2.8 A
Tulips by Kyle, on Flickr
80mm f2.8 C
Daylily by Kyle, on Flickr _________________ Contax Zeiss Distagon 35mm f1.4, Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Zeiss Vario-sonnar 35-70mm f3.4
Mamiya RB/RZ67 RZ67 Pro II, 65mm f4 L-A, 75mm f4.5 Shift, 127mm f3.5 K/L
Mamiya m645 645 1000S, 645J, 645AFD M 35mm f3.5 C, 55mm f2.8 AF, 80mm f1.9 N, 80mm f2.8 C, 120mm f4 macro, 150mm f2.8 A, 210mm f4 ULD, 210mm f4 C
Tamron Primes 17mm f3.5, 24mm f2.5, 90mm f2.8, 135mm f2.5, 180mm f2.5, 300mm f5.6
Tamron Zooms 24-48mm f3.5-3.8, 28-80 f3.5-4.2, 35-80 f2.8-3.8, 70-210mm f3.5, 75-250mm f3.5-5.6
Olympus OM Zuiko 24mm f2.8, Zuiko 28mm f2.8, Zuiko 50mm f1.8, Sigma 600mm f8
Nikon MF 24mm f2.8 N.C, 28mm f2 AI-s, 35mm f1.4 AI-s, 50mm f1.2 AI-s, 50mm f1.8 AI-s, 135mm f2.8 AI, 300mm f2.8 AI-s
Nikon AF F5, D810 16mm f2.8 AF-D, 20mm f1.8 AF-S, 55mm f2.8 AF micro, Tokina 100mm f2.8 macro, 80-200mm f2.8 AF-D
Canon FD T90, T50, AT-1, 50mm f1.8, 135mm f3.5
Last edited by Kei on Sat Sep 05, 2015 7:52 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
480sparky
Joined: 16 Apr 2013 Posts: 355 Location: Iowa
|
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2015 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
480sparky wrote:
Tair 135/2.8 11A:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2015 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
1.8/50 Oreston
1.9/58 Primoplan
2.8/50 Trioplan
2.8/133 or 135 Tair
2.8/135 Orestor
Cyclop
3.5/200 Komura _________________ Regards,
Woodrim
Last edited by woodrim on Sun Sep 06, 2015 12:36 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Minolfan
Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 3438 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2015 12:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Minolfan wrote:
woodrim wrote: |
2.8/15 Orestor |
Isn't that a Typo?
I think you mean 2.8 135mm Orestor (or Pentacon)? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2015 12:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
Minolfan wrote: |
woodrim wrote: |
2.8/15 Orestor |
Isn't that a Typo?
I think you mean 2.8 135mm Orestor (or Pentacon)? |
Yes, fixed it. Thanks. _________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Badr12
Joined: 06 Apr 2014 Posts: 84
|
Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2015 1:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Badr12 wrote:
Your budget will buy you 10 monsters ☺
I think this term is now mostly used /abused by sellers
Facts as mentioned above:
Choose a longer FL
Be close to your subject with a relatively distant background
Wider aperture (number of blades is obviously irrelevant when shooting wide open)
and do a good job in pp. as other lens characteristics like contrast, colour rendering etc might affect our judgement. You will find that most lenses with give you a (nice) background defocus.
This image was shot using a cheap 135mm lens with no name written on it:
DSC03770.jpg by drbadr12, on Flickr
having said that there are ones that have nice 3d feeling.
l like the Tair 11a above and also Meyer /pentacon 135mm (preset) :
M42 MEYER OPTIK ORESTOR 135 F/2.8 by drbadr12, on Flickr
And the dirt cheap Pentacon 50mm 1.8
DSCF1090 by drbadr12, on Flickr
So.. some lenses are more equal than the others☺ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BeardsAreBest
Joined: 09 May 2014 Posts: 286 Location: Australia
|
Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2015 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
BeardsAreBest wrote:
480sparky wrote: |
Tair 135/2.8 11A:
|
+1 for this beauty |
|
Back to top |
|
|
y
Joined: 11 Aug 2013 Posts: 306 Location: EU
|
Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2015 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
y wrote:
It's like nearly every 135+mm should do the job. The ones having a many-bladed aperture should be the most safe-bets.
On budget:
any version of Jupiter-37 135/3.5
any version of Jupiter-11 135/4
Not on budget:
any version of Tair-11
MOG Orestor 135/2.8
early version of Pentacon 135/2.8 (equipped with 15 blades) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2015 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
wolan: Where are you located? _________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|