LChanyungco
Well-known
where are the noctilux examples ? 
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
You always make it a point to think that everybody has the same setup as your own.NB23 said:
foto_fool
Well-known
Technical note - following Dave's, Gabe's and Ned's comments (and suggested best practices for the forum) all the photos we post in-thread should be 800 px wide or less for readability. Also those of us with fast cable and DSL do tend to take it for granted, and forget that some folks are still on dial-up but that's a reality that's unlikely to change.
There are some really great images showing up here!
Rico - very cool rig, and great illustrative shots. The Aposonnar does seem to render near-field and far-field OOF differently (and nice Zeiss circles in the background highlights). Trivially this may be because the near field is shallow and the far field could go to infinity, but someone with real knowledge of optics may have a deeper explanation (surely including uncorrected spherical abberations, point sources and circles of confusion).
Gabriel - the the bokeh of 50mm Summilux shot with the digital p&s is pure cream. Love the irony as well. And again it looks to me that the background geometry in the healer and parking plot shots is smoothing what would be otherwise harsh bokeh.
Mauro & Chambrenoire - where have you guys been? Thanks for some really great contributions. Mauro I am challenged by the old lady in the church. The bokeh effect of the candelabras in the background is a little harsh, but not swirly - and really seems to push her toward the viewer's eye.
Roland, that's some scary Bokeh (Sonnar footballs?) in the Halloween shot. Maybe those are the shades of all our dead shots coming to haunt your jack-o-lantern.
Erik, that Canon 0.95 is such a bad lens it does not know how to put a circle around a background highlight. What's up with that? And that may be the smoothest background I have ever seen from the CV 50/1.5 - nice.
Wayne - that Summicron paints beautifully, except for the trees. So far from the shots in this thread it looks like it would be a good idea to avoid trees in the background when shooting any Summicron at wide apertures. Unless you like that sort of thing.
- John
There are some really great images showing up here!
Rico - very cool rig, and great illustrative shots. The Aposonnar does seem to render near-field and far-field OOF differently (and nice Zeiss circles in the background highlights). Trivially this may be because the near field is shallow and the far field could go to infinity, but someone with real knowledge of optics may have a deeper explanation (surely including uncorrected spherical abberations, point sources and circles of confusion).
Gabriel - the the bokeh of 50mm Summilux shot with the digital p&s is pure cream. Love the irony as well. And again it looks to me that the background geometry in the healer and parking plot shots is smoothing what would be otherwise harsh bokeh.
Mauro & Chambrenoire - where have you guys been? Thanks for some really great contributions. Mauro I am challenged by the old lady in the church. The bokeh effect of the candelabras in the background is a little harsh, but not swirly - and really seems to push her toward the viewer's eye.
Roland, that's some scary Bokeh (Sonnar footballs?) in the Halloween shot. Maybe those are the shades of all our dead shots coming to haunt your jack-o-lantern.
Erik, that Canon 0.95 is such a bad lens it does not know how to put a circle around a background highlight. What's up with that?
And that may be the smoothest background I have ever seen from the CV 50/1.5 - nice. Wayne - that Summicron paints beautifully, except for the trees. So far from the shots in this thread it looks like it would be a good idea to avoid trees in the background when shooting any Summicron at wide apertures. Unless you like that sort of thing.
- John
hans voralberg
Mentor
OM 50/1.4 @ 1.4
Nikkor 35/2 @ f2
Nikkor 35/2 @ f2
RdEoSg
Well-known
All taken with a Canon 85mm f1.2 shot at 1.2:
SteveM(PA)
Poser
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
ferider said:Halloween bokeh, kind of ugly if you ask me:
Canon 50/1.2, probably Superia 400.
Roland.
NO! You didn't carve a Leica pumpkin! The attention to detail is frightening. I think I see a soft release!!
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
hans voralberg said:OM 50/1.4 @ 1.4
I like the framing/crop!
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
Gabriel M.A. said:
OK I'll stop quoting images, too! But the image that would have been in the above quote is very nice!
.
migtex
Don't eXchange Freedom!
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
It's special bokeh.ferider said:
It's like mint chocolate: I can't stand it, but others love it. It's good if you love it, bad if you hate it.
I guess bokeh is like a box of chocolates... :bang:
hans voralberg
Mentor
Thanks it's original, no crop. It was a 1920s French villa in Vietnam :RayPA said:
@ Gabriel: I like the OOF of that summitar, alot. Shame about the highlight balls though, very weird and distracting
ferider
Mentor
Gabriel M.A. said:It's special bokeh.
It's like mint chocolate: I can't stand it, but others love it. It's good if you love it, bad if you hate it.
I guess bokeh is like a box of chocolates... :bang:
I have to look at it After Eight then ...
Marc-A.
I Shoot Film
After Master Todd , some about the Summitar:
, some about the Summitar:
Last edited:
ltketch
Established
Marc-A. said:After Master Tood
Thats a shocking case of Bokeh donuts!!!
ferider
Mentor
Great pics guys. I assume if you don't post a comment, it means you like
the lens' bokeh ? Please comment ...
I like all Sonnars and Canon 50/1.5 in particular !
the lens' bokeh ? Please comment ...
I like all Sonnars and Canon 50/1.5 in particular !
steverett
Anthopomorphized Camera
Wow nemo, those shots look great. I think the Noctilux has the most apparent 3D effect I've seen -- your subject seem to pop out of my screen. I also quite enjoyed raid's shot with the 35/1.5. I've seen more and more of this lens recently, and it's all been good.
raid
Dad Photographer
Luxon 50mm/2.0 LTM @2.0 (originally for braun paxette):
Canon 85mm/1.9 @1.9:
The Luxon is difficult to find on sale, and it is maybe the only copy out there in LTM. The swirling effect gets more pronounced as I open up the aperture.
The Canon 85mm/1.9 is an underappreciated lens, in my opinion. People praise its more expensive cousin, the Canon 85mm/1.8.
Canon 85mm/1.9 @1.9:
The Luxon is difficult to find on sale, and it is maybe the only copy out there in LTM. The swirling effect gets more pronounced as I open up the aperture.
The Canon 85mm/1.9 is an underappreciated lens, in my opinion. People praise its more expensive cousin, the Canon 85mm/1.8.
raid
Dad Photographer
The bokeh of the 85/1.9 is very creamy. Maybe I am just lucky.
Last edited:
David Goldfarb
Well-known
The good--
Voigtlander Bessa II (6x9), 105/4.5 Heliar around f:8 (the separation between sharp and unsharp here is the signature characteristic of classic Heliars)--
The bad--
Soligor 500/8 compact mirror lens--
And the ugly--
Carl Zeiss Jena 1950s 58/2 Biotar, probably around f:8--
Voigtlander Bessa II (6x9), 105/4.5 Heliar around f:8 (the separation between sharp and unsharp here is the signature characteristic of classic Heliars)--
The bad--
Soligor 500/8 compact mirror lens--
And the ugly--
Carl Zeiss Jena 1950s 58/2 Biotar, probably around f:8--