View Full Version : I know you all love a bit of bokeh
Robin Harrison
02-12-2006, 02:46
So here's a bokeh fest for you to feast your eyes on. I think I'll give you a few hours to have a guess at the optic! It was shot at or near wide open, and pretty near the close focus.
Personally I like the overall feel of the out-of-focus appearence. I think the rendering of the figure in the middleground is nice and subtle. As for the specular highlights, I think the brighter lightsources produce nice round white dots, where as the series of lightsources near the foreground figure's face are a little distracting.
teemu.laine
02-12-2006, 02:48
J-8?
Just a guess.
Frank Granovski
02-12-2006, 03:06
Very bokehful, though it would 've been nice to see the pretty young face. :)
I'm not qualified to guess which lens was used. :cool:
Flyfisher Tom
02-12-2006, 03:17
50 CV Nokton ?
Nice shot, by the way.
Robin Harrison
02-12-2006, 03:53
Good try guys, but I can tell you it's wider than a 50. And Frank: fear not, her face will make many appearances in my gallery as and when I get my scanning sorted! ;)
laptoprob
02-12-2006, 03:53
Some kind of Sonnar I guess...
Rob
Robin Harrison
02-12-2006, 04:04
Some kind of Sonnar I guess...
Rob
Interesting...any Sonnar qualities you see in particular? Wrong, by the way!
Another clue: it is an M-mount lens.
teemu.laine
02-12-2006, 04:07
Zeiss 35mm?
laptoprob
02-12-2006, 04:23
Sonnar qualities
Well, I wrote my bit before you revealed that the optics were wider than 50mm.
But Sonnar qualities, obviously, the smooth out of focus bits. Maybe a Sonnar makes the highlights even smoother, I haven't seen results from mine yet...
cheers, Rob.
I have to say second vote for the new zeiss 35.
I dont think its a sonnar design because the bokeh would be much rounder and smoother, there might also be less contrast.
I guess it's a 1955 35mm f/3.5 Summaron, serial number 128853...... shot wide-open, of course! :D
Seriously, the bokeh is very nice. I like the cropped version best.
Walker (With tongue in cheek)
This is a picture with some kind of out of the ordinary feel. There is a 3d feeling and calm quality. I've heard about some leica-lens 3d characeristics, maybe this is it?
I am also waiting for an m6+50mm to start up rangefinder photography. So I am Quite new in this forum, and very eager to get started an submitting some work..
I might also be influenced by a 1/3 of a bottle of red spanish wine for dinner, but anyway there is a special feeling in this picture, making me sad I was not there.
So: great picture, but I will not dare to guess the optics.
:-)
Hans J Rore
Jungle Jim
02-12-2006, 11:07
From counting the angles on the out of focus lights, it looks like the lens has ten aperture blades. Maybe Canon 35mm f/2 lens?
eskorpid
02-12-2006, 11:24
My guess is Zeiss Planar 35/2 . . .
It's very sharp and sweet
nondas
Todd.Hanz
02-12-2006, 11:45
VC 40mm uncoated?
Flyfisher Tom
02-12-2006, 11:46
Alright, since I was totally wrong the first time :-)
How about 40/cron or 40/rokkor ?
laptoprob
02-12-2006, 11:53
The 40 Rokkor has sharper edged blur circles, at least mine did.
Rob
I can only guess it's "goooooood one", the lens that is.
As to the location, i'm almost 100% sure this was shot at the Brasileira Café in Lisbon.
Am I right?
back alley
02-12-2006, 13:03
tell us soon...or i'm deleting this thread!!
;)
It is most likely a fast lens from the bokeh highlights. Am I right or wrong?
Robin Harrison
02-12-2006, 13:16
I can only guess it's "goooooood one", the lens that is.
As to the location, i'm almost 100% sure this was shot at the Brasileira Café in Lisbon.
Am I right?
CORRECT! That is exactly where it was!
Robin Harrison
02-12-2006, 13:19
35mm/1.4 Leitz lens
CORRECT! 35mm Summilux Pre-asph. I'm glad this provided some entertainment.
Good detective work Jungle Jim.
And good knowledge Raid.
And sorry to tease, Joe! I did mean to post earlier with the answer!
back alley
02-12-2006, 13:23
i can rest now...:)
I once posted a comment on PN in response to a posting of a photo taken with this lens, and I mentioned that I did not like the doughnut bokeh. Severel PN users of such a lens came back and told me that "it is nice bokeh", whether I liked it or not. I guess, once you spend a large sum of money on an exotic lens, you defend it to the death. That's why I knew which lens it was (most likely). No offence ....
Don't get mad at me, Robin. I really don't me to be offensive in any way. Maybe I am unable to see the nice bokeh.
Robin Harrison
02-12-2006, 13:53
Don't get mad at me, Robin. I really don't me to be offensive in any way. Maybe I am unable to see the nice bokeh.
Absolutely no offense taken! Because:
a) I didn't pay a fortune for this lens
b) even if this lens's bokeh was the worst in the world, its strengths are speed and size
c) I think we all know what a personal and subjective thing bokeh appreciation is
d) I can easily see how some of the specular highlight rendition of this lens could be seen as unattractive
e) dude....it's the internet
Haven't yet made my mind up completely with this lens, but for now I'm just playing! Out of interest, could you post an example of your 'good bokeh'?
Absolutely no offense taken! Because:
a) I didn't pay a fortune for this lens
b) even if this lens's bokeh was the worst in the world, its strengths are speed and size
c) I think we all know what a personal and subjective thing bokeh appreciation is
d) I can easily see how some of the specular highlight rendition of this lens could be seen as unattractive
e) dude....it's the internet
Haven't yet made my mind up completely with this lens, but for now I'm just playing! Out of interest, could you post an example of your 'good bokeh'?
Robin: You are assuming that I have a lens with good bokeh. I agree with you on parts (c), (d) and (e) above, and of course (b), since I wish I had such a lens.
Robin Harrison
02-12-2006, 14:03
Robin: You are assuming that I have a lens with good bokeh. I agree with you on parts (c), (d) and (e) above, and of course (b), since I wish I had such a lens.
:)
I don't assume anything about what you may posess. Since you know your mind when it comes to bokeh (a sure sign of a seasoned optic user), I thought you may be able to point me to an example (taken by you or not) of bokeh you find attractive. I thought it might be interesting to compare the two.
xayraa33
02-12-2006, 14:13
I think this lens has very pleasant Bokeh IMHO. It also gives the pic a certain 3-D quality that is seems to be only made by a few lenses, one example that comes to mind are the fine photos Todd Hanz makes with his Summitar. One can really luck out if a lens like that comes their way. Your 35mm Summilux produces a very pleasing image Robin, from that example anyway. I would hold on to that perticular lens,and use it to make some fine images with, it looks to be a"sweet" lens.
Robin: I really don't even define Bokeh, and I would not be an expert on this field. However, maybe someone like Brian Sweeney who owns many lenses can provide us with more insight. I have read here in this forum that the Nikon 50/2 has a better looking bokeh than the Nikon 50/1.4 lens. It seems that speed has a cost. I will try to post a photo that I think (for my personal taste) has nice bokeh, but it is not something I would defend to the death.
Is this good bokeh or a well chosen depth of field or ...
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4093579
This is another photo.
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2901131
As mentioned above, your lens is an outstanding lens and does need my endorsement or anybody else's. As stated by me above, it is simlply my way of seeing "bokeh" and maybe it is not what I am supposed to look at/for.
Robin Harrison
02-13-2006, 00:59
I think it is the in-focus/out-of-focus transitions from near to far that generate the 3D look some people talk about. While the two photos Raid links to show a very smooth and velvety ('nice' bokeh) appearence, there is no transition from in-focus to out-of-focus. I do like that first shot, though!
Brian Sweeney
02-13-2006, 01:38
My guess is a J-12.
Then, after reading the thread I would be wrong. I got some good pictures from the re-set J-12 before trading it off.
I think it is the in-focus/out-of-focus transitions from near to far that generate the 3D look some people talk about. While the two photos Raid links to show a very smooth and velvety ('nice' bokeh) appearence, there is no transition from in-focus to out-of-focus. I do like that first shot, though!
Robin: I was not trying to even bring up the "glow" that people aim at. I'm glad you like the first shot.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.