There might be some JPEG artifacts in the dog's fur. I crammed that much resolution into a 400kb JPEG.
Oh, and I just realized that some of the web-sized JPEGs likely have some USM. My "Web JPEG" batch queue is setup to call ImageMagick and apply some USM after Bibble does the resize and output. I sometimes turn this off or on depending on what I'm doing. None of the 100% crops would have this though.
Just looked again, the one on page one of my daughter and dog definitely had the extra USM applied. I'd agree that it is too much, if that's what you are thinking. I just stuck an arbitrary value in the script. It works fine for most quick things, but once in a while it is just too much.
Paul, Leon. Wow. Paul, the dog shot is just amazing. We should start a 58 Rokkor fan club And the Rokkor (also in my own experience) does such nice renderings of ugly backgrounds like wired fences etc.
My only worry about this lens (metal copy) is the Thorium it probably contains. Donīt like the idea of having a cancer machine hanging at hip level all day
Leon, Paul - the copies you are using for these shots, are they newer, radiation-free versions with rubber grip or old metal ones like mine ?
I just went out into the backyard to see if I can find the ugliest background to test for out of focus highlights. To be fair to the other lenses, I stopped down to f1.2, rather than shoot wide open. In this shot there is a chainlink fence a bit over a foot behind the flowers. I focused on the pink flower. This is at the minimum focusing distance of the Noctilux. It was quite windy, so I just fired when the flower came into focus.
As "alternatives" are being considered, I think it is both appropriate and helpful to have "mainstream" samples presented for comparison...
>>Since they are Canon AF lenses in native EF mount, they don't really qualify as "Alternative", but I'm not opposed to seeing some shots.
The alternative forum was created for the brands other than Canon or Nikon, which have their own forums. It was initially created to host the DMR Bible thread, because the Canon guys were complaining about it being in their forum.
I use Minolta manual film bodies, but as a big fan of 1970īs to early 80īs glass, I follow the conversion threads with much interest.
The following close-ups use a Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 1.2/58mm, combined with Minolta No.1 and/or No.2 Achromatic Close-Up lenses, on Minolta XD-7 (aka. XD-11). Aperture settings between 2.8 and 5.6, 1/125 to 1/500 sec.
The shots use available light, handheld, AGFA CT precisa 100 film, scanned with a Nikon Super Coolscan 5000 ED @ 4000 ppi. The images are downsized to ca. 1200 x 1600 pixels. The IQ exp. the smoothness is severely affected by the scan compared to the original slide. (I have not yet figured out how to tackle that problem.)
Would be nice to see some DSLR macro shots with that combination.
This guy said FD 55/1.2 S.S.C. is better lens overall, and mentioned
about Noct Nikkor 58/1.2 which has a better at wide open for point source
but after f2.8 canon's are generally making good images.
michael49 wrote:
Love this one; incredibly sharpness at this aperature.
I agree. The only normal lenses that can compete at this level, at f1.2, are:
Contax 55/1.2 - $ several thousand, very rare and the bokeh is not as good as the Rokkor.
Noct-Nikkor 58/1.2 - $ several thousand, very rare and only the original, hand-polished versions are really worth the money. I've been told that it is identical in optical design and formula to the Rokkor.
SMC-Pentax 50/1.2 - more affordable but very rare and the bokeh suffers due to over-corrected spherical aberration (like the Contax).
The balance of wide-open sharpness, bokeh, availablility, and price of the Rokkor is unbeatable, IMO.
That is very good, but my Zuiko 50/1.2 resolves at least as much detail wide open. I also think the later MC's of the Zuiko give better , more balanced, color - with less ghosting.
I'm using an Oly 50/1.2 on an old Canon 300D, so don't forget to take into account the crop factor with the following shots. I hope they demonstrate it's potential for low-light street photography - please don't try to infer anything about it's sharpness.
This second shot in particular has camera blur as I only had a split second walking across the alley to see the silhouette shot, frame and expose. From a technicial standpoint it is not the best executed shot, but I really like the atmosphere - it sums up my time in Strasbourg very well.
Everything shot wide open at f/1.2 so as to avoid going above ISO400 on the 300D. All exposures made at 1/60th, which is a little slow given the crop factor
Ed Sawyer wrote:
Nice shots. I kinda wish I shot digital so I could post stuff from the EF 50 1.0L. Scanning from film just isn't worth the effort @ this point though.
Does the rokkor suffer focus shift like typical fast 50s? E.g. the Canon EF 50 1.2L?
-Ed
I have heard some people say it does, but I haven't noticed it. The thing is, the lens can easily be stop-down focused from f1.2 to f3.5 (with a 5D and Ee-S screen), so focus shift does not enter the equation, because shift is only a problem if the lens is focused wide open and then stopped down. If focused wide open and then stopped down to f5.6 or beyond, the extra DOF would tend to reduce the shift effect anyway.
So the answer is, maybe the lens does have focus shift if used as intended (on a Minolta body) but I don't use it that way so it effectively doesn't have the issue.
And the Rokkor (also in my own experience) does such nice renderings of ugly backgrounds like wired fences etc.
Jun 10, 2008 at 12:45 PM