RF lens & bokeh blind test

M

minoltist7

pussy photographer
Local time
1:27 AM
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
380
I prefer the second, bottom one, but the light changed between the two sets so I’m not sure if I’m judging the lens or the light, sorry
 
Agree about the changing light conditions making comparisons a bit difficult. However, I prefer the first one. Bokeh is very subjective of course, but while both lenses exhibit some harsh, (and to my mind, distracting) double-image fish scale bokeh at f2, I think that at 2.8 and 4.0 the rendition was smoother on the first lens, while I was still picking up some double-image charcter on the second lens.
 
dexdog said:
Agree about the changing light conditions making comparisons a bit difficult. However, I prefer the first one. Bokeh is very subjective of course, but while both lenses exhibit some harsh, (and to my mind, distracting) double-image fish scale bokeh at f2, I think that at 2.8 and 4.0 the rendition was smoother on the first lens, while I was still picking up some double-image charcter on the second lens.
Click to expand...

Wow, a whole vocabulary for describing bokeh. Kind of like Eskimos with 18 words for "snow". :cool:

/T
 
hey, I only borrowed the "fish scale" part from ferider's description of the bokeh of the Canon 35/2, I can't take credit for it.:)
 
It looks like clouds moved in for the second series, considerably softening the background light. Given that, I prefer the background bokeh of the top series at the wider apertures. At f/4, the bottom lens seems to provide a touch more separation of subject vs. background, but I think I still prefer the drawing of the top lens.

The subject contrast may be better on the bottom lens, but I'm not too sure here -- that may just be an artifact of the light change? All in all, I lean a bit towards the top series due to the, IMO, more painterly background treatment wide-open.
 
In my opinion, the bottom lens has a softer bokeh and the top has more edge in the bokeh. My preference is for smoother and softer background, especially for portraits.

Mike
 
Bottom ones.

The first lens shows some coma in the top right hand corner. Your trusty Jupiter-8?
What's the second lens then?

Best regards,
Uwe
 
so,that's my opion
F/2 - second is a winner. I don't like "fish scale" pattern of the first lens (right top corner)
F/2.8 - same. fish scales are not so bad, 2nd lens is better
F/4 - I prefer 1st. Second has more sharp edges in the background (left door from the man)
1st is Jupiter-8
2nd is 'cron DR 50/2
 
The top one all the way.
The object of the post test was to look for bokeh, not change in lighting between change of lenses.

Bokeh that looks like floating ball bearings is always a NO.

The rest of the differences are either from a light meter reading taken only once for the bottom lens which was shot first (and subsequent change in light conditions for the second), or for the fact that f2 (or whatever) on one lens may not directly equal light transmission of light of f2 on another lens.
 
minoltist7 said:
so,that's my opion
F/2 - second is a winner. I don't like "fish scale" pattern of the first lens (right top corner)
F/2.8 - same. fish scales are not so bad, 2nd lens is better
F/4 - I prefer 1st. Second has more sharp edges in the background (left door from the man)
1st is Jupiter-8
2nd is 'cron DR 50/2
Click to expand...

Not too surprising that I would prefer the first lens- I am a big fan of Sonnars, and have never been particularly impressed with the look of most leica lenses.

Fun test, thanks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom