Renes wrote:
Thank you. I still can't decide which ones to buy... for short tele it will certainly be Sigma 65/2 (or Loxia 85/2.4) though for landscape I found that 70mm fl works the best for me. Regarding WA is 24/25mm. Sigma 24/3.5 has little distortion, huge viggneting and do not reach resolusion of Sigma 24/2 which unfortuanately has huge distortion. Sony 24/2.8G also has huge distortion.... is seems Loxia 25/2.4 is the best performer but the price... Sony 40/2.5 delivers great resolution in f/5.6-9 and little distortion, looks good... so I will look now and compare CV 40/1.2, Sony 40/2.5 (hope Fred made its review) and Sigma 45/2.8....Show more →
Renes wrote:
Thank you. I still can't decide which ones to buy... for short tele it will certainly be Sigma 65/2 (or Loxia 85/2.4) though for landscape I found that 70mm fl works the best for me. Regarding WA is 24/25mm. Sigma 24/3.5 has little distortion, huge viggneting and do not reach resolusion of Sigma 24/2 which unfortuanately has huge distortion. Sony 24/2.8G also has huge distortion.... is seems Loxia 25/2.4 is the best performer but the price... Sony 40/2.5 delivers great resolution in f/5.6-9 and little distortion, looks good... so I will look now and compare CV 40/1.2, Sony 40/2.5 (hope Fred made its review) and Sigma 45/2.8....Show more →
If you prefer 70mm for your landscape, consider the Voigtlander Nokton Classic 75mm f/1.5 M-mount with the Voigtlander VM-E Close Focus M to FE adapter. Mine is sharp corner to corner from f/4, and is razor sharp in the center from f/1.8. It’s also small and light, even with the adapter. It is a wonderful do-it-all portrait and landscape short tele, IMO.
Knut. wrote:
I have a very sharp setup with a Viltrox 16mm, Voigt. Apo 35mm, Voigt Apo 65 and Batis 135.
I would love a second three lens line with emphasis on rendering and bokeh.
I imagine the Sigma 45 would take middle place,
Sony 100mm as short tele and
xxx as wide angle: any suggestions?
in addition: Is there an alternative to the Sony 100mm that is lighter?
Im aiming at extremely smooth (gaussian) background blur …
You could do the Sigma 24/3.5, Sigma 45/2.8, and Sigma 90/2.8. Small and lighter than most, excellent rendering. But nothing else will give you the blur of the 100 STF lens except another STF lens.
Knut. wrote:
I have a very sharp setup with a Viltrox 16mm, Voigt. Apo 35mm, Voigt Apo 65 and Batis 135.
I would love a second three lens line with emphasis on rendering and bokeh.
I imagine the Sigma 45 would take middle place,
Sony 100mm as short tele and
xxx as wide angle: any suggestions?
in addition: Is there an alternative to the Sony 100mm that is lighter?
Im aiming at extremely smooth (gaussian) background blur …
The 100mm STF is at least slightly smaller and lighter than the old A-mount 135mm STF. The A-mount lens also extended to focus. I much prefer the FE GM version.
The Sigma 65 and 90 are not STF lenses, but they are pretty nice all-around. Their 35mm F2 is alright.
I have a number of Lensbaby lenses that have high Spherical Aberration (SA):
There is also a Velvet 28mm F2.5 that I haven't tried. These are all pretty extreme. The Samyang AF 85mm F1.4 already gives very smooth backgrounds. Samyang AF 35mm F1.4 is quite nice too, and their 24mm F1.8. Actually their tiny AF 24mm F2.8 and 35mm F2.8 also have pretty nice background rendering. The Tamron 20mm, 24mm, and 35mm F2.8s are also very good. The Sony FE 28mm F2 has pretty nice background rendering too.
These are nice, compact portrait AF primes:
Minolta AF 100mm F2
Canon EF 100mm F2 USM
I also tried the older Minolta MD 100mm F2.5. The AF lens is better.
These AF primes have variable SA:
Minolta AF 100mm F.28 Soft Focus
Canon EF 135mm F2.8 Softfocus
I also tried the Minolta MD 85mm F2.8 Varisoft which was not as nice optically as the AF lens.
Thank you for pointing me to the soft-focus lenses. These were available in several mounts, mostly they were made in the short telephoto range, e.g. 85 to 135mm.
Does anyone know how these classic soft focus lenses compare to the Sony 100mm STF?
Do they strongly differ in their bokeh from the Sigma 45mm?
My local store has an ancient Pentax 28mm soft focus lens. At f2,8 the blur is extreme. But I wasn‘t able to test it in detail (I‘m not aware of wide angle soft-focus lenses of other manufacturers: were there any?)
Knut. wrote:
My local store has an ancient Pentax 28mm soft focus lens. At f2,8 the blur is extreme. But I wasn‘t able to test it in detail (I‘m not aware of wide angle soft-focus lenses of other manufacturers: were there any?)
If you're curious about the lens and willing to read Japanese or auto translated text have a look at this optical analysis of the lens.
Bought it for BF for 240 Euros. Wonderful rendering, indeed! But now my "normal" range is quite crowded, I might need some help, at some point, to get them sorted: Nokton 40/1.2, Nokton 50/1.2, Batis 40, Sigma 45i and 50 APO in the post....OMG. Help! Plus 50G that's already listed for sale online...
catacore wrote:
Bought it for BF for 240 Euros. Wonderful rendering, indeed! But now my "normal" range is quite crowded, I might need some help, at some point, to get them sorted: Nokton 40/1.2, Nokton 50/1.2, Batis 40, Sigma 45i and 50 APO in the post....OMG. Help! Plus 50G that's already listed for sale online...
I am right there with you. I got mine for $250 US awhile back and it is bunched in with several 35's, the Voigtlander 40 and then of course some 50's. I am not lacking for choice that is for certain but at that price, it would just be wrong not to buy it, right?
