Thanks guys, ya, sorry about the not-so-alternative lenses, they're all I have at the moment.
I'm in the process of replacing most of my lenses at the moment though, thinking of going the Alt route, and this thread is a big help with that.
Also, I totally agree about the Nokton. The bokeh is pretty bad most of the time, aside from that though it's a really great lens, very sharp.
Kamik,
I appreciate the not-so-alternate lenses. It helps me get perspective on the strengths and weaknesses of the alt lenses relative to the no-so-alts. Otherwise it would be speculation. Especially since bokeh and blur are not usually part of standard lens comparisons and reviews. Though, it is isn't my thread, it's Jonas'.
Wow, the Olympus 250mm f/2 looks really great, thanks for the samples burningheart!
To break the standards here are few photos which I shoot for one Finnish forum to question asked how Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/28mm works with extension tubes. I got interested so I made test, also documenting the test setting resulted one bokeh photo (#3). Had to even buy probs (cactuses) to make this photo since I didn't have any macro subjects at home
1. Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/28 C/Y with 12mm extension tube. See aperture series from f/2.8 to f/16 in at my site - this photo at f/11:
EDIT: Now seeing Distagon and Leica images at same page I realize that I forgot the white balance of 1DmkIII images, that's why they look so yellow. Have to fix all the images...
EDIT2: Images re-processed with correct white balance
--
Samuli Vahonen http://www.vahonen.com
It's either alternate or not. That means a camera body that's not covered by the other forums, or non-standard glass. What is "not-so alternative"? Could that be the many posts in this forum that use Canon AF lenses on Canon DSLR's? If I want to see them I can go to the Canon forum. Now if someone was actually comparing some Canon glass to an alternative lens, that would be great here. Just like seeing the old Nikon manual focus lenses on Nikon, Canon, or whatever bodies.
ewadler wrote:
Kamik,
I appreciate the not-so-alternate lenses. It helps me get perspective on the strengths and weaknesses of the alt lenses relative to the no-so-alts. Otherwise it would be speculation. Especially since bokeh and blur are not usually part of standard lens comparisons and reviews. Though, it is isn't my thread, it's Jonas'.
pdmphoto wrote:
It's either alternate or not. That means a camera body that's not covered by the other forums, or non-standard glass. What is "not-so alternative"? Could that be the many posts in this forum that use Canon AF lenses on Canon DSLR's? If I want to see them I can go to the Canon forum. Now if someone was actually comparing some Canon glass to an alternative lens, that would be great here. Just like seeing the old Nikon manual focus lenses on Nikon, Canon, or whatever bodies.
Sorry to irritate you, I find that the "not-so-alt" shots (in this thread in particular) are comparisons to the alts even if the poster didn't post comparison shots. This thread addresses a subject that is not specific to alts or not alts. It is convenient to not have to scour the web (or other parts of the forum) for "not-so-alt" bokeh examples after seeing an alt bokeh example and want to compare it to its "not-so-alt" analogue. However, I would rather not hijack this thread to split hairs, this subject has been addressed elsewhere on this forum. I think Brainiac has weighed in on this with a pretty good perspective (that I share).
At any rate, by alt, I was inferring the definition of alternative found in Merriam-Websters as follows: "something which can be chosen instead." And to me, the EF lineup is what you would choose an alternative to. If you want to choose a different definition, go ahead. I think my statement was well suited to my understanding of "alt." I am aware that there are many interpretations/definitions, to each there own. I stated my own.
I wish I had a head on shot of my cat - You would be even more convinced Mine has a little more light color on the nose but other than that they are pretty much alike!
Great shot, btw!
)!