On 12/16/2021 6:22 AM, Wayne Shumaker wrote:
At 12/14/2021 04:24 PM, Soft Fingered Moose wrote: > >>> The 85mm f2.8 soft focus images look interesting, does the second >>> shot have silhouetted tree branches or
similar in front of the >>> lights ? >> >> My fingers in front of the lens. 😠>> >> Fingers vertical.
<https://photos.app.goo.gl/qfw1K5HdqLFkAS1MA> > > Interesting. Have you tried other subjects besides the lights?
Not yet. It's Christmas season, there are fairy lights around. Hard to resist.
Also, I've been playing with several of my Alt lenses, looking at bokeh from small light sources. No true "soap bubbles"
as yet.
Minolta also dabbled in adjustable soft focus, Both this Canon lens >> and the Minolta Varisoft work by changing the distance between >> front and rear lens groups to introduce spherical
aberrations. >> >> Canon is still in this game. Their new RF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM >> has an SA (spherical
aberration) control, going both positive and >> negative. >>
<https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/its-here-canon-rf-100mm-f28l-macro-has-14x-magnification-and-bokeh-control> > >
>> Interesting lens, the Canon RF 100mm macro with SA control. Some samples at this other link.
>
https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/reviews/canon-rf-100mm-f28l-macro-is-usm-review
Can't say I'm in love.
For macro:
a. For some of the examples, I would use an achromatic C-U lens on a normal lens. Both PLeicas I use regularly, 12-60
and 100-400, do beautifully that way. Fabulous working distance with the long one. The Oly 100-400 may be good, too, but
I don't have enough data yet.
b. I have the Oly 60/2.8 macro, an excellent lens, roughly FoV eq. of 100 mm on
FF. Way cool hood, too.
c. Haven't kept up. Does the Canon R have in-camera focus bracketing? Super shallow DoF is one common problem with
macro. µ4/3 largely fixes it. Over shoot for depth, then select which frames to stack.
d. For the really close examples, I have all the OM bellows lenses, bellows, macro copy stand, lighting, etc. Wanna see
an M&Ms "M" fill the frame? I'd have to buy some candy . . .
Beyond macro, all that impressed me were the bustier, lacy, minimal bra and its contents — and those have nothing to do
with the lens. The differences in bokeh in the nails examples didn't impress me as uniquely useful. Wouldn't just
changing aperture do something similar?
One would have to invest in Canon R to use the lens, unfortunately.
Fortunately, I don't need one. 😁
The Canon 100mm macro, also impressive, has well controlled focus breathing.
One thing to remember about these internal focusing lenses, including the Oly 60/2.8 macro, is that they focus closer by
shortening the FL. They don't have the same working distances for macro as older lenses. Not a deal breaker, but useful
to keep in mind. Appropriate choice of C-U lenses maintain working distance.
I don't have a macro lens that does not focus breath at macro > distances quite a
bit. Although Helicon Focus does not seem to have a > problem with it.
PS focus stacking also compensates. So when is a problem not a problem?
I have looked at getting some vintage lenses for their character but > I'm not
as patient dealing with aperture, adapters, etc as you are.
Well, you won't see me out in nature fussing with all that stuff. It's strictly
around home photography with them for me.
Yes, it can be confusing. Just yesterday, I was playing with several, and where in the ____ is the Canon EF to Sony E
adapter? Eventually found it.
Record keeping can also be a pain. A combination of exiftools, bat files and the Windoze Explorer "Send To" function
puts the lens data in EXIF pretty painlessly. Crucial for finding shots with particular lenses, filters, etc. Without
that and LR's search functions, it would be hopeless.
The only character lens I have now is the CV 35mm/1.4 classic, which > has
interesting effect when shot at 1.4. > https://photos.app.goo.gl/BAKhm4BegFuPqozHA
Nothing that impressive.
I dunno, I find the first one compelling. The other two are nice, but not gut
grabbing.
> It seems all such lenses are highly subject dependent in whether the effect
has interest.
Absolutely. And once one goes even partway down the rabbit hole, serendipity starts to outweigh planning and intent. I
had no idea what would happen when I spread my fingers in front of the Canon Soft Focus, until I did it.
Another test, of the Spiratone Y/S 85/1.8, didn't impress me with bokeh on the lights.
<https://photos.app.goo.gl/NsM4UQ2A7ZCMia5d9>
But wait a sec., what it did to the beads and the multi-faceted mirror ball is prettyinteresting.
<https://photos.app.goo.gl/YLQiUMAZmw7YLpgAA>
And the foliage outside is also interesting.
<https://photos.app.goo.gl/w7v5oiZigSVA2eG28>
If I do something more with this lens, it's serendipity that led me there.
Further down the rabbit hole, pair a doublet soft focus lens with a flexible mount, where one focuses and aims with
fingers, and who knows what may happen? <https://photos.app.goo.gl/NQaxGd1ypxZQf7d18>
Loose Grasp Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|