MF Adapted Lens Image Samples - Post Your Best!

gkarris wrote in post #9030953
Good time to ask this question...

My 1.7's bokeh doesn't look like that - is that because I use it at f4?

Does bokeh change with different f-stops?

Thanks...

For many lenses, bokeh definitely changes with aperture. And with focus distance. And it may be (and usually will be) different in front of and behind the focus plane. And it differs by distance from the focus plane.

Double-gauss normals like all of the 50mm lenses being discussed here are designed to be highly corrected, not to have beautiful bokeh. Some do, some don't, and most do well enough if you use a wide enough aperture and have enough distance to the background.

There is no one number that defines bokeh, even without getting into the unresolvable question of what constitutes good bokeh. The best one can do is try a lens out, and keep the ones that make beautiful images for that photographer. The value in playing with these manual-focus lenses is that many are so cheap that trying them out imposes little cost.

Rick "wondering how people can evaluate sharpness from an 800-pixel-wide image" Denney

rdenney wrote in post #9038256
For many lenses, bokeh definitely changes with aperture. And with focus distance. And it may be (and usually will be) different in front of and behind the focus plane. And it differs by distance from the focus plane.

Double-gauss normals like all of the 50mm lenses being discussed here are designed to be highly corrected, not to have beautiful bokeh. Some do, some don't, and most do well enough if you use a wide enough aperture and have enough distance to the background.

There is no one number that defines bokeh, even without getting into the unresolvable question of what constitutes good bokeh. The best one can do is try a lens out, and keep the ones that make beautiful images for that photographer. The value in playing with these manual-focus lenses is that many are so cheap that trying them out imposes little cost.

Rick "wondering how people can evaluate sharpness from an 800-pixel-wide image" Denney

Well said.
I have seen images with disturbing bokeh resolve itself into great looking bokeh with just a change in aperture. If you care about this, then test with multiple exposures with different apertures on the same subject to determine which produces the most pleasing bokeh for a specific lens at a specific distance.
Remember, distance will always change everything.

maxblack wrote in post #9038900
Well said.
I have seen images with disturbing bokeh resolve itself into great looking bokeh with just a change in aperture. If you care about this, then test with multiple exposures with different apertures on the same subject to determine which produces the most pleasing bokeh for a specific lens at a specific distance.
Remember, distance will always change everything.

Funny, I was just doing the above with my Sigma 75-300 DL (F-mount)...

Manual focus only lens noob here, certainly not 'my best' so I hope the original poster forgives me ...
---

Took some snapshots to test out the Super Takumar 28mm f/3.5. These were at f/3.5, picture style: Standard.

Click to enlarge.

IMAGE LINK: http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com …16176368_c372b7​3aed_b.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com …16176780_c85658​55a8_b.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com …16177270_94acca​1d8a_b.jpg

carlomontoya wrote in post #9039199
Blurry, yes? It will take me some time to focus properly with this lens but as they say no pain, no gain. Should I get a focusing grid? Or should I learn to train my eye?

First, try Av instead of one of the picture modes. That will give you more control over other aspects, such as ISO, and so on. Time to take control of that camera if you are going to focus it manually.

And you'll get the hang of focusing with your eyes. The grid screen won't help. My trick is that I rock the focus control inside and outside of focus, narrowing it as much as possible visually, and then splitting the difference on the focus ring. If your camera has Live View (mine does not) then you can use that, too.

If you are going to manually focus a really fast lens wide open, you'll need some practice. You can always focus at maximum aperture, and then stop down to f/8 or f/11 and that will cover slight focus errors.

Rick "who uses a grid screen for adjusting camera alignment with tilt/shift lenses" Denney

rdenney wrote in post #9039576
First, try Av instead of one of the picture modes.

I think the OP meant Picture style, Which has to do with how the camera handles sharpness, saturation, contrast, etc. They may have been in Av mode.

LisaRae82 wrote in post #9039625
I think the OP meant Picture style, Which has to do with how the camera handles sharpness, saturation, contrast, etc. They may have been in Av mode.

Yes, that came to me later. I set mine once and have forgotten it.

Rick "who shoots in raw and deals with these issues image-by-image" Denney

(off topic) Thank you rdenney. I did try the LiveView feature last night and magnified the view and it helped me take sharper photos. This is only useful for still life subjects though in my opinion. I've actually tried the method you mentioned And oh, I always shoot in Manual mode regardless of the subject.

I know using the lens at 5.6 and above is best (hyperfocal distance thingie).

I also tried the 135mm 3.5 and it's a very tricky lens to use. I'll learn how to use it after I get the hang of the 28mm 3.5

zuiko 50/1.4

carlomontoya wrote in post #9041439
I also tried the 135mm 3.5 and it's a very tricky lens to use. I'll learn how to use it after I get the hang of the 28mm 3.5

You'll get the hang of it. Just remember that the 28 and the 135 were the standard cheapie accessory lenses during the first SLR boom, when zoom lenses were mediocre and expensive. Everyone had a "kit" with a 50, a 28 and a 135. Their advantage was that they had a split-image focusing aid. Ours is that we have chipped adapters and LiveVIew.

Rick "who spent an hour last Saturday focusing one photo on the 4x5 camera, but that did require both tilts and shifts to get it focused" Denney

quickster wrote in post #9041829
zuiko 50/1.4

A few of those seem hazy?

My dogy.. 7D + Helios 44M 58/2 @2.8

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Mike Deep wrote in post #9037992
Vivitar Series 1 90mm f2.5

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 300mm f2.8 LD IF

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Kenko 0.16x 180° Fisheye (Yashinon 55/1.2 Primary; ~8mm effective)

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Wonderful, talented shots. Shows that you don't need an L lens...

Zuiko 24/2.8 on 5Dii

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Taking a while to learn this lens. Not as easy to get great results compared to when I rented the Nikon 80-400 ED VR, but then again, it's like 1/16th the price...

Canon 20D, Sigma 75-300 DL at about 200mm (320mm equiv.), F5.6, 1/3200, ISO100, Fotodiox Nikon-F to EOS adapter