View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Nikon75-150E
Joined: 14 Aug 2011 Posts: 148 Location: Houston TX
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 3:07 am Post subject: Which 50 has the best bokeh? |
|
|
Nikon75-150E wrote:
I want to get a MF 50mm lens for it's bokeh. It can be a 1.4 or 1.8-but not 1.2. Can't afford one of those. I prefer Nikon or Pentax, but that's ok if it's another brand that I can use on my NEX-5n with adapter. I have the 2 Nikon 50 1.8's, the Series E and AF-D. Both have good image quality, but bokeh is not their strong points. _________________ Bill |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7555 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 3:20 am Post subject: Re: 50mm bokeh |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
poshfoto wrote: |
How much are you looking to spend?
Here are some pics I did with the new leica Noctilux http://poshfoto.com/category/leica-50mm-f0-95-noctilux/
but like you said you didnt want anything expensive so, I just bought one myself, a carl zeiss biotar T* 58mm for an exacta mount. can be mounted on other cameras with an adapter too. it has many aperture blades and creates an amazing bokeh. other than that you can get the pentax m42 mount 55mm f/1.8, Nikkor 55mm f/1.2, the S is cheap. Had one last year and got is for $160 but it was beat up, clean glass though. The pentax 55 being the cheapest one, yes its sharp and creates a gorgeous bokeh, but I find the biotar much more pleasing. |
Hi poshfoto. You need to post at least two post for the links to shows up. _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
poshfoto
Joined: 09 Oct 2012 Posts: 4
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 3:25 am Post subject: 50mm |
|
|
poshfoto wrote:
thanks calvin83, I was wondering why it doesnt work. _________________ Loads of Sexiness & Gear. http://poshfoto.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mos6502
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 Posts: 960 Location: Austin
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mos6502 wrote:
What do you consider "good" boke'? Because from what I've seen the Nikon 1.8/50 D gives pretty smooth OOF areas for a 50. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008 Posts: 6950 Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
Mos6502 wrote: |
What do you consider "good" boke'? Because from what I've seen the Nikon 1.8/50 D gives pretty smooth OOF areas for a 50. |
Yes, what to some is pleasant, to others can be horrid. It took me a long time to enjoy Helios, but I prefer this style of bokeh to any others. _________________ Casual attendance these days |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lena
Joined: 24 Apr 2012 Posts: 495 Location: Pl
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lena wrote:
I had a 50/1.8D and sold it after I started playing with MF lenses. I own a 50/2 Ai and like it overall, but bokeh-wise I find it inferior to say a Revuenon 55/1.4 or even Helioses. Still, it's a matter of taste. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tromboads
Joined: 29 May 2012 Posts: 1655 Location: Melbourne AU
Expire: 2015-10-01
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
tromboads wrote:
Girls Guys..... he's obviously just after a direct answer here. Ok here goes. Which 50mm gives the best Bookeh?
Mine. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hoanpham
Joined: 31 Jan 2011 Posts: 2575
Expire: 2015-01-18
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
hoanpham wrote:
tromboads wrote: |
Girls Guys..... he's obviously just after a direct answer here. Ok here goes. Which 50mm gives the best Bookeh?
Mine. |
No you might be wrong, but all mine are
Bokeh is a highly personal taste, and many factor in summary create a bokeh. Harsh or not, all can be used creatively.
Not much can go wrong with a 50. _________________ La migliore cura di LBA � imparare una nuova lingua. Le meilleur rem�de de LBA est d'apprendre une nouvelle langue. La mejor cura del LBA es aprender una nueva lengua. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011 Posts: 2187 Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
I like my super takumar 1.4/50 bokeh. It can get a bit "busy" depending on the background, but it often have a painterly feel that I enjoy.
In the same league, ebc fujinon 1.4/50 is also really good.
If you get to like it and use it properly, Helios 44 has a very distinctive way of rendering oof areas, with some little differences between versions, and it's very cheap and common (everyone should own a Helios 44, I think).
Also, in the cheapos, pentacon 1.8/50 is smooth and pleasant.
But, in the end, it all really gets to personal taste and kind of background (distance from subject, highlights and so on).
Search for lenses here or in Flickr and see what you like best. _________________ C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mos6502
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 Posts: 960 Location: Austin
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 10:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mos6502 wrote:
The Meyer 1.8/50 is ok. I much prefer it for color rendition with slide film than for any other qualities (although the close focus ability is also really great)
pens by berangberang, on Flickr
Untitled by Epicyclic Transmissions, on Flickr
I find the OOF areas sometimes give a "wooly" look and the tendency for slight bright-lining coupled with the sharp six blade aperture can sometimes produce undesirable effects in certain situations.
The Yashinon 2/50 is one of the forgotten lenses: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=48780&view=previous quite smooth OOF areas, and common and cheap, and pretty much always overlooked for the faster Yashinons.
I'm personally a fan of the Meritar's boke' prowess
But you're limited to f2.9, and it's perhaps unusably soft wider than 5.6
But it's I think as nice an example of classic triplet boke' as you can find in 50mm |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tromboads
Joined: 29 May 2012 Posts: 1655 Location: Melbourne AU
Expire: 2015-10-01
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 11:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
tromboads wrote:
you just reminded me, as far as out of focus areas concerned, i cleaned up a 50mm Tessar 2.8 naturally and at its shortest distance I was gladly reminded yet again by its short depth of field
Clicky
And yes that is a spider web you can see going from the tip of the blade in the center to the left.
1 Tessar. That's all you really need |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sonyrokkor
Joined: 24 Sep 2012 Posts: 222 Location: Perù, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
sonyrokkor wrote:
There are a lot of good bokeh normal lenses.
Old sonnar or biotar zeiss, leica summitar or summarit, old 8 elements super takumar 1,4, etc. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
50mm lenses are basically of three different types: Planar-type (double Gauss), Sonnar-type, Triotar/Tessar-type.
Characteristics vary not only because of the type, but also because of the manufacturer *and* the historical period.
It would however be too long to discuss in detail.
One thing that it's rather acceptable to say is that the more a lens is corrected for spherical aberrations (and thus sharper wide open), the edgier it's bokeh becomes.
Therefore, lenses that do show signs of spherical aberration (which elitists call "Leica glow" ), usually have smoother bokeh than lenses that don't.
Another thing that can be said rather safely, is that lenses with aspherical elements tend to have smoother bokeh than all-spherical lenses.
Aspherical elements were introduced end of the 60s, but became affordable and popular only in the last 20 years or so.
In general, keep in mind that all lenses show a better bokeh when they are stopped down. This means that lenses with a high number
of iris blades are preferable because they show round highlights even when they are stopped down.
Final advice: do not overestimate bokeh. I have a decent photographic culture and know quite a lot of famous photographs. None of them
has become important and remembered because of it's bokeh. _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fermy
Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 1974
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fermy wrote:
+1 to what Orio wrote.
If smoother rendering is desired, I'd get one of the older lenses: Canon FL, all metal Minolta MC, Meyer Oreston, Zeiss Sonnar or a Russian clone. _________________ Many lenses and some film bodies for sale here: http://forum.mflenses.com/canon-fd-minolta-md-c-mounts-m42-pentax-and-more-t50465.html
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/96060788@N06/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sonyrokkor
Joined: 24 Sep 2012 Posts: 222 Location: Perù, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 1:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sonyrokkor wrote:
Orio wrote: |
........Final advice: do not overestimate bokeh. I have a decent photographic culture and know quite a lot of famous photographs. None of them has become important and remembered because of it's bokeh. |
+1 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oreste
Joined: 08 Sep 2012 Posts: 451
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:00 pm Post subject: Re: Which 50 has the best bokeh? |
|
|
Oreste wrote:
Nikon75-150E wrote: |
I want to get a MF 50mm lens for it's bokeh. It can be a 1.4 or 1.8-but not 1.2. Can't afford one of those. I prefer Nikon or Pentax, but that's ok if it's another brand that I can use on my NEX-5n with adapter. I have the 2 Nikon 50 1.8's, the Series E and AF-D. Both have good image quality, but bokeh is not their strong points. |
Most 50mm lenses are made from very similar Gaussian-derived designs. The out-of-focus areas differ only subtly for that reason. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
plasticmotif
Joined: 17 Feb 2010 Posts: 55 Location: Tennessee
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
plasticmotif wrote:
Out of every 50 I've shot with three lenses stick out -
Minolta 58/1.2
Sigma 50/1.4
Canon 50L
Honorable mention to Zeiss 50/1.7 - lovely little lens!
The Rokkor is easily my favorite 50. The 50L has an amazing look to it. I really enjoy images made with this lens. _________________ -Mac |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3666 Location: Calgary
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
The Canon FL 55/1.2 & Olympus OM 55/1.2 are the most affordable 1.2's that I can think of.
The OM 50/1.8 MIJ & 50/1.4 are both good lenses.
The Canon FD 50/1.4, Minolta MD 50/1.4 are nice too.
The Topcor RE 58/1.8 is surgically sharp on my NEX-7. _________________ 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 |
|
|
JohnBar
Joined: 21 Jun 2012 Posts: 581 Location: Liverpool
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
JohnBar wrote:
Some say one man's meat is another man's poison
and it when it comes to Bokeh there is implicit a modern Japanese look versus the classic German look
anyway these are the 50's I hold in great esteem - more west than east
Agfa: Soligon
Angenieux: S-type
Astro: Kino, Tachar
Bausch & Lomb: Aminar, Baltar, Raytar
Boyer: Saphir
Dallmeyer: Super Six
Enna: Annaston
Isco: Westagon
Kinoptik: Apochromat, Fulgior
Kodak: Ektar, Aero Ektar
Leitz: Elcan, f/1.2 Noktilux,
Sumarrit, Summar, Summitar,
Summicron, Dygon
Meyer: Domiron
Rodenstock: Heligon
Ross: Xtralux
Schneider: f/1.9 Xenon, Xenogon
Steinheil: Quinon
Taylor-Hobson: Amotal, Ivotal,
Kinic, Opic Panchrotal, Speed
Panchro
Wollensak: Raptar
Wray: Copying Lens
Zeiss: Biotar, Flexon, Pancolar _________________ Rectilux 3FF Series single focus anamorphic attachments
http://www.transferconvert.co.uk/cinemania/rectilux-3ff.html
Regular News on https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rectilux/704770636267200 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
eno789
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 Posts: 159 Location: California
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
eno789 wrote:
Does 50-55mm macro lenses count? Because you can focus closer, the background blur is smoother.
Any of these are good:
* Canon FD Macro 50mm f/3.5
* Konica Hexanon 55mm f/3.5
* Minolta MD Macro 50mm f/3.5
* Nikon Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 or f/3.5
* Vivitar Macro 55mm f/2.8
Of the normal lenses, I like Minolta MC 55mm f/1.7 and SMC Takumar 55mm f/1.8. Below are taken with Minolta MC 55mm f/1.7.
Last edited by eno789 on Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:46 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Zeiss C Sonnar 1.5/50
It is the modern version of the classic 1.5/50 Sonnar.
A couple of examples of photos with evident bokeh:
Sonnar type lenses in 50mm focal lenght are quite uncommon compared to double Gauss (Planar) lenses and 4-elements (Tessar) lenses. _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
I love them all, to me no best ones, I am happy many of them a bit different. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Misha_M
Joined: 08 Oct 2012 Posts: 178
|
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Misha_M wrote:
You should give the Helios 77M a go... _________________ Tair 11 133 f/2.8 1958
Jupiter 9 85 f/2 1959
Helios 44M 58 f/2 1978
Helios 44-2 58 f/2 1977
Helios 44 (13 blades) 1959
Helios 77M4 50 f/1.8
Zenitar-M 50 f/1.7 1986
Industar-61 L\Z 50 f/2.8
Helios 40-2, 85 f/1.5 1974 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nixland
Joined: 30 Jan 2011 Posts: 577
Expire: 2012-07-29
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
nixland wrote:
Nikon 50/1.4 Ai or Ais is worth to try too. I got the Ais in excellent condition for $100.
I also got the Pentax K 50/1.2 for about $220 It has the smoothest bokeh among my 50-55 f/1.2 lens so far. I had sold it to my MF lens friend though _________________ Carl Zeiss Jena: Biotar 58/2 1Q, DDR Pancolar 80/1.8 MC, Biotar 75/1.5, Biotar 10cm/2, DDR Sonnar 135/3.5 MC
Carl Zeiss C/Y: Planar 50/1.4 T*, Planar 85/1.4 T*, Planar 100/2 T*, Sonnar 135/2.8 T*
Leica: Summicron-R 35/2 v1, Summicron-R 50/2, Summilux-R 80/1.4, Summicron-R 90/2
Pentax: A 50/1.2
Minolta: Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Rokkor MC 85/1.7, Rokkor MC 100/2, MD 200/2.8
Olympus: Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2, Zuiko 50/1.2, Zuiko MC Auto-T 85/2, Zuiko Auto-T 100/2
Nikon: Nikkor 28/2.8 Ais, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikkor 105/1.8, 300/2.8 ED (Ais)
Canon: FD 50/1.2 L, FD 85/1.2 L
Sony: 135/2.8 STF
Jupiter: 85/2 Alu
Cyclop: 85/1.5
Meyer-Optic: Trioplan 100/2.8, Orestor 100/2.8, Primotar 135/3.5
Samyang: 8/3.5 FE, 14/2.8, 85/1.4, 85/1.4 UMC
FOR SALE
Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 10cm/2 || Carl Zeiss ZE Distagon 28/2 || Minolta Rokkor MD 35/1.8 || Rokkor-X MC 85/1.7 || Rokkor MD 85/1.7 || Olympus Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2 || Olympus 100/2 || Nikon Nikkor 35/1.4 || Canon: FD 55/1.2 || Vivitar 90/2.5 Series 1 VMC || Tamron: 90/2.5 SP
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
bruzzo
Joined: 05 Jul 2012 Posts: 153
|
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
bruzzo wrote:
I don't have a lot of 50mm lenses so can't compare much. But I agree to Attila, I like all of them. I think they are a good focal length to work with and different brands and versions of the lens have different characteristics bokeh wise and just overall image. And different lenses in the same situation can bring different tones or textures. Hence, sometimes I bring two cameras with two different 50mm lenses just to get two different takes in the same situation. For example, I have a Rokkor-X 50mm 1.4 got from my father's old dry cabinet and a Nikon 50mm 1.4 AI, and I think they are both very sharp in my standard. But the Nikon to me is very business-like sharp and true to the original object. The Rokkor in the other hand sometimes has a tiny soft glow on the object that gives a different texture to the image.
Just two different lenses with two different characters. I guess there are more extreme examples.
And I agree to Orio too, we often like to discuss which is the sharpest, and which has the best bokeh, the bokeh monster, etc, but in reality, bokeh is often not a big factor as to determine whether a photo is important or to be remembered. Maybe not even a factor. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|