"Admirable" blur samples

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Image Upload
1 2 3 … 16

18 … 122 123 end

ovredal73
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #1 · "Admirable" blur samples

ulrikft wrote:
More nikon 50 1.2 AI-S

Ulrik, you take great, intimate portraits, be it faces -- or other body parts. Are you going to convert your Rokkor to Nikon mount or are you going to stick with this new Nikkor only?

Oct 30, 2008 at 12:08 PM

ulrikft
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #2 · "Admirable" blur samples

Thank you!

Glad you like it!

I'm not quite sure yet. I do like this 50 1.2 AI-S, but not 100% as much as I like the rokkor on the 30d, and the larger pixels and the larger sensors on the d700 should give the rokkor even more love. The firm I have been talking to wants about 200-400 USD somewhere to do a CAD-computer controlled mount-fabrication, infinity adjustment and shaving of aperture ring to make it work on a nikon camera. I have not yet decided if I want to do that (it is irreversible of course), but I'm really tempted. I have to use the 50 1.2 for some more time before I decide I think!

On a second note, I love manual focus with nikon, the arrow/ring thing makes it so much easier, just as th eviewfinder is great! I think I'm in love

I'll have a 180 2.8 lens in any day now (ai-s), looking forward to test that out too!

Oct 30, 2008 at 12:27 PM

cogitech
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.17 #3 · "Admirable" blur samples

Ulrik,

I am 99% certain that you could convert the mount to Nikon in exactly the same way it is converted to EOS.

I think all that is needed is to reduce the mount shim much more (or scrap it completely) and find a Nikon replacement mount that is very thin.

I see you already found this guy who figured it out: http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?id=11163

Oct 30, 2008 at 01:42 PM

Andi Dietrich
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.17 #4 · "Admirable" blur samples

ovredal73 wrote:
ulrikft wrote:
More nikon 50 1.2 AI-S

Ulrik, you take great, intimate portraits, be it faces -- or other body parts. Are you going to convert your Rokkor to Nikon mount or are you going to stick with this new Nikkor only?

I also thought about converting a Rokkor when I saw these images...

Oct 30, 2008 at 01:53 PM

ulrikft
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #5 · "Admirable" blur samples

cogitech wrote:
Ulrik,

I am 99% certain that you could convert the mount to Nikon in exactly the same way it is converted to EOS.

I think all that is needed is to reduce the mount shim much more (or scrap it completely) and find a Nikon replacement mount that is very thin.

I see you already found this guy who figured it out: http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?id=11163

Hmm, maybe I should try to do that. But finding a nikon replacement mount is hard enough :P Any tips on that? According to my calculations, I would have to remove the shim completely and screw the nikon mount directly on. But I have had a hard time finding an actual mount.

Oct 30, 2008 at 02:52 PM

cogitech
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.17 #6 · "Admirable" blur samples

There must be Nikon-to-? adapters around that could be used as a new mount, but if all else fails, buy some cheap "parts" lens off ebay (or local shop) and use it as a mount "donor".

Oct 30, 2008 at 02:55 PM

ulrikft
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #7 · "Admirable" blur samples

I actually found some stuff at rugift now, but I don't know if it is really usable, maybe I should get an old nikon lens and dismantle it instead.
The adapters go for like 89 USD ++, and i can get a battered nikon lens for far less.

Oct 30, 2008 at 03:03 PM

khidhir
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #8 · "Admirable" blur samples

cogitech wrote:
There must be Nikon-to-? adapters around that could be used as a new mount, but if all else fails, buy some cheap "parts" lens off ebay (or local shop) and use it as a mount "donor".

Does that mean that it can also be converted to an M42 mount? That would make the Rokkor more accessible to many more bodies?

KBZ

Oct 30, 2008 at 03:05 PM

cogitech
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.17 #9 · "Admirable" blur samples

khidhir wrote:
cogitech wrote:
There must be Nikon-to-? adapters around that could be used as a new mount, but if all else fails, buy some cheap "parts" lens off ebay (or local shop) and use it as a mount "donor".

Does that mean that it can also be converted to an M42 mount? That would make the Rokkor more accessible to many more bodies?

KBZ

Sure. It certainly could be. Just need to find one of those m42 male parts or grab one off a dead M42 lens. Then, it would be as simple as sanding the mount shim down more and fastening the male M42 mount to the lens.

Oct 30, 2008 at 03:10 PM

asbalyan
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #10 · "Admirable" blur samples

Anden wrote:
I think harsh to a certain degree is fine and sometimes useful but considering the close focussing distance in the above photos the result is very harch. The edges of the oof areas are very contrasty.

True... The highlights are not handled that great, esp for short distance. Oly 50/1.4 has better OOF blurs, but little bro is better in sharpness (although, I am using f1.4 more... but I am not happy with sharpness, which counts mostly for pixel peepers like us

)

This is (aperture) stepped down to around f5.6 (Oly 50mm f1.8), the lens is sharp and good OOF rendering (OK)... plus the lens is small enough to be used as camera cap..

Oct 30, 2008 at 07:08 PM

asbalyan
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #11 · "Admirable" blur samples

This week is festival week in India (and for most of Indians living outside)... had festival light few days back (Deepawali/Diwali)... captured the lights with Helios 85mm f1.5.
(what an over hyped crap

... During day times, My Tominion lens made for IBM photocopier lens creates the same impressions. The lens is good for show off and capturing low light shots. The lens diffuses the white light to the whole frame, and some people calls that haze... I am sure, this lens was not designed for Day photography).

But hell... if we can use photocopier lens or X-Ray machine lenses... why not this crappy one too,

[url=http://flickr.com/photos/asbalyan/2988746384/]

[/url]

Edited on Oct 31, 2008 at 06:48 AM · View previous versions

Oct 31, 2008 at 06:31 AM

Daniel Buck
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #12 · "Admirable" blur samples

I don't know why I didn't think to post these earlier, I took these last christmas, Aero Ektar 7 inch f2.5 lens on a Cambo SC-2 4x5

First shot shows almost the entire christmas tree, the 2nd shot was taken farther back, showing more of the area around the tree.

I think the lens was re-assembled incorrectly, it doesn't really focus properly, but I keep it because it gives some very strange results

Believe it or not, the close branches on the tree are actually in focus, but yet the bright highlights of the lights give a very strange bokeh/bloom around them as if they were not in focus. I think this is due to the misalignment of the lenses or something inside.

Oct 31, 2008 at 06:39 AM

ovredal73
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #13 · "Admirable" blur samples

Daniel, Asbalyan, that´s great!

Oct 31, 2008 at 07:17 AM

Anden
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.17 #14 · "Admirable" blur samples

Daniel! That is an awesome bokeh. Very useful in some applications.

A

Oct 31, 2008 at 08:16 AM

ulrikft
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #15 · "Admirable" blur samples

Really unreal and funky bokeh Daniel! Amazing

Oct 31, 2008 at 10:12 AM

Samuli Vahonen
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #16 · "Admirable" blur samples

Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 ZF @ f/2 & f/11 (and no; there is no focus shift, I was just too optimistic when I focused the f/11 shot

, Zeiss has pretty narrow depth of field even at f/11)

--
Samuli Vahonen
http://www.vahonen.com

Oct 31, 2008 at 07:06 PM

Silentlight
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #17 · "Admirable" blur samples

Beautiful bokeh on that 100/2 ZF at f2.

This is not mine, but I thought to share the knowledge. I am loving the rings in these pics. Lens is the Kilfitt 90/2.8 (the people who invented macro and zoom lenses).

http://www.flickr.com/photos/11069778@N08/2202014594/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/11069778@N08/2201223323/

(have to copy and paste the links)

Oct 31, 2008 at 11:20 PM

Daniel Buck
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #18 · "Admirable" blur samples

Samuli Vahonen wrote:Zeiss has pretty narrow depth of field even at f/11

lens brand has nothing to do with how shallow the DOF is, it's just focal length, aperture, focus distance and film size

Oct 31, 2008 at 11:26 PM

fourfa
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.17 #19 · "Admirable" blur samples

theoretically that may be true. but I've definitely observed two lenses side by side - same focal length, same nominal aperture, same exposure, and same histogram - producing visibly different perceived DOF. It's easy to see how bokeh and edge-drawing differences can yield different perceived DOF. I could post examples I shot when I was evaluating a Canon 16-35II vs my Canon 17-40.

Note "perceived." There's some subjectivity here that's just not captured in a DOF chart, for whatever it's worth.

Nov 01, 2008 at 12:11 AM

Samuli Vahonen
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #20 · "Admirable" blur samples

Daniel Buck wrote:
Samuli Vahonen wrote:Zeiss has pretty narrow depth of field even at f/11

lens brand has nothing to do with how shallow the DOF is, it's just focal length, aperture, focus distance and film size

You are right, brand has nothing to do about it, but has a lot to do with lens design!!!! - Have you tested it yourself? I have shoot many times Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 ZF and Canon EF100mm f/2.8 USM (and other comparable pairs of lenses) from same position while I have been comparing the lenses and it seems quite obvious to me that Zeiss has narrower depth of field at same aperture.

Here is one thread which has some answers:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/666807/0

Also some other people seem to have found the same on other threads as well:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/684609/0#6157256
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/574990/0#5909507
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/517227/0#4468592

Also if you look at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field#Derivation_of_the_DOF_formulas
You will find out that the DOF formulas are made for single lens element symmetrical lenses, which are very far away from modern lens photographic lens designs. Also if you go to depths to this issue I would propose following document as well:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/articles/DoFinDepth.pdf

Also like fourfa says above there is difference between mathematical MTF DoF and apparent/perceived DoF. Which I'm referring, I have never tested my lenses with artificial targets, I prefer real outdoor shooting instead... Somehow Zeiss lens designs seems to concentrate the contrast to focal plane and has then less contrast on areas which are not in focal plane. Hard to define on my 2nd language this kind of things

--
Samuli Vahonen
http://www.vahonen.com

Nov 01, 2008 at 12:22 AM

thrice
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.17 #21 · "Admirable" blur samples

Silentlight wrote:
Beautiful bokeh on that 100/2 ZF at f2.

This is not mine, but I thought to share the knowledge. I am loving the rings in these pics. Lens is the Kilfitt 90/2.8 (the people who invented macro and zoom lenses).

http://www.flickr.com/photos/11069778@N08/2202014594/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/11069778@N08/2201223323/

(have to copy and paste the links)

Incredibly distracting but awesome to look at

I really like the look, it's nisen-bokeh taken to the extreme, as if one bright ring around OOFH wasn't enough this lens adds another one just for good measure

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Nov 01, 2008 at 02:46 AM

thrice
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.17 #22 · "Admirable" blur samples

I just noticed that if I don't mind taking 100% crops the bokeh from my lil pentax looks a lot better. Usually I get quite a bit of the bright-ring effect, but if I take a crop - like this one from the edge of an image - it looks more like my 135/2L bokeh.

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Nov 05, 2008 at 01:44 PM

ovredal73
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #23 · "Admirable" blur samples

Thrice, thats a 100 percent crop? Thats a amzing. What lens? At what aperture?

André

Nov 05, 2008 at 04:31 PM

thrice
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.17 #24 · "Admirable" blur samples

It's a 50% crop, sorry. It's the SMC Pentax-A 50/1.2 at f/2.0

This is 100%:

This image is copyrighted by the owner

This is the whole image (was testing bokeh):

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Nov 06, 2008 at 05:19 AM

asbalyan
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.17 #25 · "Admirable" blur samples

Samuli Vahonen wrote:
............but has a lot to do with lens design!!!! -......

.................it seems quite obvious to me that Zeiss has narrower depth of field at same aperture.
...........
--
Samuli Vahonen
http://www.vahonen.com

When I used CZ Planar 50mm f1.7 first, this was the first thing I noticed. Planar 50/1.7 had very narrow/shallow DoF compare to my other 50mm(s) esp Canon AF 50/1.8.

I am not sure about reason, and but sometimes I think, Planar focusing plane fall-off is more sharper than other design.
(Its discussed at Manual focus forum about a year back... but difficult to find the thread now)..

Nov 07, 2008 at 10:50 PM


FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Image Upload 1 2 3 … 16 17 18 … 122 123 end