At 12/17/2022 04:07 PM, Moose wrote:
>On 12/16/2022 8:05 AM, Wayne Shumaker wrote:
>
>>Thanks for posting the work. I'm still digesting what you posted. Still
>>wondering
>
>There's a surprising amount to notice and contemplate in these samples. I'm
>glad I did it, for myself, as it has broadened my own understanding.
>
>>My flower is outside and had snow on it, but re/un-covering. I will need to
>>try using a tripod to get comparison shots.
>
>I didn't use a tripod, in part as it started as a couple of casual samples.
>also because of the varied nominal and effective focal lengths. And then, I
>kept thinking I was done . . .
>
>I did use a tripod for a series with the Minolta and Canon Soft focus lenses;
>both 85/2.8, so matched mag, and with the need to make comparable photos at a
>series of softness settings. I haven't included them in this comparison, as
>they really don't fit. This is about central focus with softening away from
>center. These two soft lenses are about overall softening. They would be
>better compared to the LB and SIMA soft focus lenses and LB Velvet lenses.
>
>>Not sure what exactly I am looking for in the lens. Many of the lenses are a
>>bit soft at 1.2, some sharper than others. It is the character of the OOF
>>that interests me.
>
>My primary interest, as well. Perhaps the relation ship 'tween center and
>edges, as well
>
>>The LB Double Glass starts to get that character,
>
>Where center becomes sharper than the single element lenses.
>
>>as does the Sweet.
>
>The three contemporary Sweets, 35, 50 and 80 mm, are similar in some ways, but
>the bokeh is different. The 35 is much busier, edgier than the others. My
>guess is that, with different subject and background distances, they would be
>somewhat different.
Not a guess. Distance is quite relevant. What I am finding is that the near POF
blur character is particularly important. The Canon 50mm F1.2 @ 1.2 for
instance. The newer Voigtlander Nokton classic 35/1.4 @ 1.4 has it, as do
others. This becomes more apparent in CU shots.
>>Not sure how your Canon exactly compares, but would be nice to see.
>
>It's there, was last entry on the first line, now first on second line.
>
>>My Canon is the 50mm LTM version. My target is a pot of dead flowers that are
>>rounded in shape, so flowers curve out of POF. The LB I assume just get
>>softer away from center?
>
>Yes they do. I assume it's at least in part curvature of field. I'd have to
>try a flat target to see how much.
>
>>Some Toby Marshall images with the Canon 50mm 1.2 LTM
>>athttps://toby-marshall.com/galleries/bokeh-tales/canon-ltm-50mm-f1-2/
>
>Quite interesting, and obviously different than my 58/1.2. Both are 7 elements
>in 5 groups, but very optically different in OoF.
>
>>I have been getting lens adapters with helicoid to do C-U with them. Kipon
>>makes the best ones, but expensive. Fotodiox makes Stretch ones, but they are
>>not as nice and a bit heavy.
>
>Nice idea. But then, I have LOTS of adapters already. Most lenses have their
>own adapters. For this kind of slow work, extension tubes work fine.
I'm lazy though. And if I want to hike with it, the helicoid reduces the
fiddling, but the cost is 2-3X more.
>>Warning, some OM Zuiko content:
>
>EEEEeeeeK!
>
>>Here is OM Zuiko 50mm F1.4 (SN > 1,100,000) on a Kipon OM to E.
>>https://photos.app.goo.gl/BK6kmqkeDduywfyK8
>
>>Although not bokeh, the same lens at F8
>>https://photos.app.goo.gl/yhyNFxXLZqufaAaW7
>
>>and some more with that lens at the end
>>https://photos.app.goo.gl/TR5Ud27mgL5cvdoJ8
>
>Classic Double Gauss behavior with close subject and distant background, busy
>and edgy bokeh. My most egregious example - donuts!, was with an OMZ 50/1.8.
><http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Bokeh/5018bokeh.htm>
>
>I added a shot with OMZ 50/1.4 (SN > 1,100,000) to this series, next to the
>Canon 58/1.2, at the start of the second line.
><http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Lenses/Sweet%20Focus/LBsweets.htm>
Now I'll have to check out more of my OM Zs. Thanks to John I have back my 85mm
2 in terrific condition.
>>Not sure if the G. Zuiko 50mm 1.4 would be different character?
>
>As I recall, the Silver Schnozzed one said that early examples were very sharp
>in the center, and softer away. My lens inventory claims I have three of the
>"Gs", including one very early. I've since looked for that one, with no
>success. I may look for the net earliest one day, but not this weekend.
I can totally sympathize. Especially after having moved and acquired more stuff.
>Mixed Up Bokeh Moose
WayneS
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|