saph
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
Buddy and Ken, like this example from the 13.5cm may be?
 RJL_5419 by Maryland Photos, on Flickr
I also have some examples with a definitely smoother blur (in my mind at least):
 Tulip2 by Maryland Photos, on Flickr
 Tulip1 by Maryland Photos, on Flickr
I have really liked the 13.5cm f3.5 Q early version (tick mark and adjacent 9 blade versions). It gives a bit more focal length than the 105, for example at events, and if I don't want to carry the heft of the 135 f2 AI.
the solitaire wrote:
Since it refers to an Auto Nikkor, and the context suggests it was one of the first lenses in that range, my guess would be the 13,5cm f3,5 Auto NIKKOR-Q tick mark lens, which released in 1959 along with the Nikon F and was the longest consumer lens at the time. I used a slightly later version, using the same optical formula, and indeed, it produces a very distinct OoF rendering, much like the 85mm f1,8.
The reason to suspect this lens to be the culprit is the reference to a timeline where one lens in a lineup stirs up public opinion like that. It can only mean that at the time, there were not many lenses to compare with. The Auto Nikkors were released to work on the Nikon F, which means 1959. The lens lineup back then was fairly limited, with only the 2,1cm f4 Nikkor-O, the 2,8cm f3,5 Nikkor-H. 3,5cm Nikkor-S. 5,8cm Nikkor-S, 10,5cm f2,5 Nikkor-P and 13,5cm f3,5 Nikkor-Q.
From those, no one would have bothered obsessing about OoF rendering on the wide angle lenses, and we know from examples show here that the 5,8cm and the 10,5cm are excellent in their OoF rendering. Hence my suspicion that the 13,5 f3,5, an ideal length for portraits, would likely cause such a fuss with it's wild and characterful OoF rendering.
...Show more →
|
