Sparrow
Veteran
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Well Stewart , 'She' certainly makes a Carlsberg Tres EXCITING
Great Sexy Allure....
Tres more Sophisticated than most Beer 'Ads'...
Love it !
Great Sexy Allure....
Tres more Sophisticated than most Beer 'Ads'...
Love it !
Sparrow
Veteran
Well Stewart , 'She' certainly makes a Carlsberg Tres EXCITING
Great Sexy Allure....
Tres more Sophisticated than most Beer 'Ads'...
Love it !
Thanks Helen, like the avatar
sreed2006
Well-known
Okay, bokeh fans, we need empirical data.
Today, I took pictures with these lenses:
G.Zuiko 50/1.4 (Serial 667XXX)
Zuiko 50/1.8 made in Japan
Zuiko 50/2 Auto Macro
Zuiko 55/1.2
Zuiko 35-80/2.8 Zoom
Minolta 50/1.7 MD
Minolta 58/1.2 MC Rokkor
Minolta 58/1.4 MD
Vivitar 55/2.8 Macro (with Olympus OM mount)
Canon EF 24-105/4 L USM IS Zoom
Canon EF 50/1.4 USM
Canon EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 Zoom
For the Zuiko and Vivitar lenses, I took pictures with the lenses mounted on an OM-4Ti and on a Canon 5D Mark II (via an adapter).
The Canon EF-S was mounted on a Canon Rebel XSi.
For the Minolta lenses, I used a Minolta X-700 camera.
For film I used Fujicolor ISO 200, and the scanning was done by the CVS Pharmacy. They aren't the best scans, but they are good enough for these comparisons.
I tested the zooms at all the three focal lengths of the primes (50mm, 55mm, and 58mm). As with all zooms, the exact focal length achieved was an approximation based on what looked like the right number on the scale.
I stuck to whole f/stops from 4 and wider, up to the maximum aperture of each lens.
If you would like to see the results, they are in the gallery "Wide Apertures" at:
http://gallery.me.com/om1er
Flames, comments, and questions are welcome. Hopefully this can add some empirical data to the question of which lenses have the best Out Of Focus characteristics (bokeh).
I'll start off the discussion. I think the Zuiko 55/1.2 sucks at f/1.2 - it was the worst picture of the lot in my opinion. Further, the G.Zuiko 50/1.4 was my only lens for many years, I bought it in 1979, and it does mighty well against the competition.
Today, I took pictures with these lenses:
G.Zuiko 50/1.4 (Serial 667XXX)
Zuiko 50/1.8 made in Japan
Zuiko 50/2 Auto Macro
Zuiko 55/1.2
Zuiko 35-80/2.8 Zoom
Minolta 50/1.7 MD
Minolta 58/1.2 MC Rokkor
Minolta 58/1.4 MD
Vivitar 55/2.8 Macro (with Olympus OM mount)
Canon EF 24-105/4 L USM IS Zoom
Canon EF 50/1.4 USM
Canon EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 Zoom
For the Zuiko and Vivitar lenses, I took pictures with the lenses mounted on an OM-4Ti and on a Canon 5D Mark II (via an adapter).
The Canon EF-S was mounted on a Canon Rebel XSi.
For the Minolta lenses, I used a Minolta X-700 camera.
For film I used Fujicolor ISO 200, and the scanning was done by the CVS Pharmacy. They aren't the best scans, but they are good enough for these comparisons.
I tested the zooms at all the three focal lengths of the primes (50mm, 55mm, and 58mm). As with all zooms, the exact focal length achieved was an approximation based on what looked like the right number on the scale.
I stuck to whole f/stops from 4 and wider, up to the maximum aperture of each lens.
If you would like to see the results, they are in the gallery "Wide Apertures" at:
http://gallery.me.com/om1er
Flames, comments, and questions are welcome. Hopefully this can add some empirical data to the question of which lenses have the best Out Of Focus characteristics (bokeh).
I'll start off the discussion. I think the Zuiko 55/1.2 sucks at f/1.2 - it was the worst picture of the lot in my opinion. Further, the G.Zuiko 50/1.4 was my only lens for many years, I bought it in 1979, and it does mighty well against the competition.
Armoured
Well-known
I haven't looked at these in detail, and I'm not a Bokeh nut, but from the pictures posted, the Zuiko 1.2 does look pretty harsh.
sreed2006
Well-known
The picture I felt was the least pleasant was the one with the Zuiko 55/1.2 at f/1.2 mounted on Canon 5D Mark II.
The picture taken on film instead is not as bad, but still not a pleasant picture.
The Zuiko's competition, the Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2 at f/1.2, renders the playground equipment quite a bit more pleasantly, I think. The Rokkor lens is widely known for its bokeh, and can be modified to fit on Canon EOS cameras, but I just haven't had the heart to do that to such a nice lens.
Note: If you have the disk space and time, the gallery can be downloaded and the pictures examined at full resolution.
The picture taken on film instead is not as bad, but still not a pleasant picture.
The Zuiko's competition, the Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2 at f/1.2, renders the playground equipment quite a bit more pleasantly, I think. The Rokkor lens is widely known for its bokeh, and can be modified to fit on Canon EOS cameras, but I just haven't had the heart to do that to such a nice lens.
Note: If you have the disk space and time, the gallery can be downloaded and the pictures examined at full resolution.
gavinlg
Veteran
My 55mm 1.2 zuiko was good in good conditions (clean background) with bokeh but very very strange when you had anything slightly difficult (dappled light/leaves etc). It became very disturbingly jumpy and harsh.
motion_runner
Established
50/1.2, wide open.
Frank
jesse1dog
Light Catcher
Prest_400
Multiformat
Get the 50mm 1.8 to a close focusing distance, and if it's in the mood, it will smooth everything. Like the dog and this woman. So creamy background!
It's quite curious. Sometimes at the minimum focusing distance it will render creamy background or harsh. I'm curious about what causes that variability.
It's quite curious. Sometimes at the minimum focusing distance it will render creamy background or harsh. I'm curious about what causes that variability.
Roscoe
Established
Subject...?
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Bokeh with any lens is affected by distance and the aperture you use. Some lenses are harsh at some f-stops and smooth at others. Some are smooth at some distances and harsh at others, all in one lens!
motion_runner
Established
Welcome
Welcome
Zuiko 50/1.2 at f 2.0
Welcome
Zuiko 50/1.2 at f 2.0
defconfunk
n00b
I've always liked the bokeh on my 50/1.8... I guess I'm not picky enough?
Cron
Well-known
I like my new to me Zuiko 1,4/50 on Sony 5n
maxwell1295
Well-known
I'm pretty happy with the bokeh of my 1.8. Happy enough that I don't feel the need to replace it with anything else.
Clothesline by alanabramsphotography, on Flickr
Birdhouse 2 by alanabramsphotography, on Flickr
Clothesline by alanabramsphotography, on Flickr
Birdhouse 2 by alanabramsphotography, on Flickr
raphaelaaron
Well-known
Zuiko 50mm f1.4
thereabouts
Established
Zuiko 1.4 silvernose at f1.4.
Sharpness isn't everything.
Sharpness isn't everything.
teddy
Jose Morales
I have always liked 50mm lenses at F4, including the Zuiko 50. The only issue for me is that SLR lenses limit the beauty of bokeh because of fewer aperture blades.
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Velvia 50
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Ektar 100
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Ektar 100
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Ektar 100
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Olympus e-520
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Velvia 100
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Acros 100
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Velvia 50
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Ektar 100
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Ektar 100
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Ektar 100
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Olympus e-520
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Velvia 100
OM Zuiko 50/1.8 (MiJ) @ F4 and Acros 100
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Lately I've been using my 50mm f1.2 on my M240 with an adapter. I'll never shell out the dosh for a Noctilux so this as near as I can get!
