My Nikkor-S.C. 55/1.2 & Nikkor-H.C 85/1.8 seem to give that 3D look from time to time when shot around f/2.8. Especially the 55/1.2. These are all scanned on a Nikon V ED using Negative Lab Pro for the processing. Mostly Portra 400.
Hi Stefan,
I see strong 3D effect in your images.
Do you use FE version and not Planar T* 50 мм F1.4 ZA SSM? Am I right?
I consider acquiring FE version or ZE 50 1.4 Planar via MC-11 adapter. Does FE lens have any focus shift?
Any wishes to try out 50/1.2 GM lens?
AlexDROP_2.0 wrote:
Hi Stefan,
I see strong 3D effect in your images.
Do you use FE version and not Planar T* 50 мм F1.4 ZA SSM? Am I right?
I consider acquiring FE version or ZE 50 1.4 Planar via MC-11 adapter. Does FE lens have any focus shift?
Any wishes to try out 50/1.2 GM lens?
Hello,
i use the FE version. I've been using the Planar for many years and haven't noticed a focus shift. The 50 / 1.2 GM is definitely a great lens. But I am very satisfied with the Planar. I like the colors, 3d-pop and the gentle sharpness gradient. F1.4 is enough for me, so I'm not going to test the GM.
I think Contax 28mm F2.8 MMJ and Contax 35-70mm F3.4 MMJ are showing strong and nice micro-contrast images
from my experience. Especially 28-35 mm range show better 3D pop. It is quite different from Bokeh from F1.2 in 50mm and 85mm.
All the CY lenses I have are great for 3D because - I speculate controversially - they have excellent colour tone discrimination. This quality is core to 3D, like colour itself is; BW is more an attractive artifice, depending on form and representation. I have to modify my take on the much-maligned 55/1.8 for this quality - if the light is reasonable and you spend some more time in post, it can do very well. Here is an example to show it, hopefully. 3D is very much a debated topic, depth perception is highly variable as reflected in the many opinions on it.
I’ve accidentally made 3D images with a wide range of focal lengths on an APSC sensor, and those lenses having a wide range in sharpness and bokeh characteristics. What stands out the most to me was color contrast of the subject relative to its background. The next thing is lighting contrast - I have one image of my daughter with a wide angle lens and a flash; she was relatively close to the flash and the light faded smoothly as the rest of the image transitioned to a dark background. There was some bokeh in these images, but not a lot. Also, I can see the 3D effect more on printed copies compared to looking at an screen - no idea why, so maybe I’m fooling myself.
Justin9999 wrote:
Also, I can see the 3D effect more on printed copies compared to looking at an screen - no idea why, so maybe I’m fooling myself.
While I don't print, I must say it was a huge upgrade when I went from a standard resolution monitor to a 5K monitor. Suddenly "everything" looks 3D, if it's reasonably sharp.
The only drawback is that resized images on the web look less sharp, because they are interpolated up instead of shown as native pixels on the screen.
Maybe my eyes no good or my monitor sux but I am not seeing any 3d is most of the shots. And lot of people post small size shots in this age which to me doesn't do any justice even if the original shot is great.
bobby350z wrote:
Maybe my eyes no good or my monitor sux but I am not seeing any 3d is most of the shots.
Although I wish things were otherwise, this is largely my experience as well (and this despite using lenses that are frequently credited with capturing / creating this effect, too!)
Which isn't to suggest it doesn't exist or never happens, only that in my experience, it's not very often that it does, including with my photos.
But on those rare occasions when it does ... wow! 8^0
And lot of people post small size shots in this age which to me doesn't do any justice even if the original shot is great.
Sadly, this is also true, but understandable given the image theft that occurs regularly these days. <sigh>
bobby350z wrote:
Maybe my eyes no good or my monitor sux but I am not seeing any 3d is most of the shots. And lot of people post small size shots in this age which to me doesn't do any justice even if the original shot is great.
Correct.
I would describe a number of these shots as having nice (or very nice) separation but nothing that comes close to "3D Pop".
