Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,048   Posts: 1,561,009   Online: 1039
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34
  1. #21
    fstop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    698
    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb View Post
    In that image, though, the appearance of the out of focus highlights in the background (the foreground is different) isn't only caused by the shape of the aperture. If it had a perfectly round aperture you might still find it distracting, since the out-of-focus highlights are brighter at the edges than they are at the center, though not extremely so I would say. I've seen worse cases. It's more important, I think, that the center of the highlight points be brighter than the edges, and then the shape won't matter as much, and that's an optical design issue.
    I bought a 200 f 4 Q auto that had bad blades. tore them out and shoot it wide open now in manual mode, no blades no shape.
    the other option is to avoid those conditions that light up undesirable effects in the lens... you learned that in your first day of class right?

  2. #22
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,379
    Images
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by fstop View Post
    the other option is to avoid those conditions that light up undesirable effects in the lens... you learned that in your first day of class right?
    ...unless of course you happen to be testing the lens for just those properties.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  3. #23
    fstop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    698
    ah, I don't mind the shape actually, I use it on purpose in some shots. Adobe liked it so much they included it in one of the filters in PS.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    848
    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb View Post
    The 58/2 M42-mount Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar in this group had lots of blades--maybe 17 or 18--lousy bokeh in my opinion:

    http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...&postcount=113
    Unfortunately, the smallish posted images does not lead me to any conclusions.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    848
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Kubach View Post
    I have an Canon 85 1.2L also which is excellent lenses. Jeff
    No doubt the Canon L optics are second to none but how many blades does it have and how does the highlighted OOF elements look like?

  6. #26
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,797
    I always loved the bokeh on the ancient Minolta 58/1.4--probably my fave short portrait lens. Sony NEX shooters seem to like them.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    848
    I have the Minolta MC 58mm f1.4 and it only has 6 blades. I suppose I will have to try it but won't hold my hopes up that it's formation will be circular.

  8. #28
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Les Sarile View Post
    I have the Minolta MC 58mm f1.4 and it only has 6 blades. I suppose I will have to try it but won't hold my hopes up that it's formation will be circular.
    There's more to life than round highlights. The old Minolta does creamy OOF backgrounds at large apertures better than almost any fast prime I've shot.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    848
    That is true but we will leave that for another thread

  10. #30
    tomalophicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Canberra, ACT.
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    1,562
    Images
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by mopar_guy View Post
    Les,
    I looked at the lenses which I own and counted the blades.

    The following Olympus OM Zuiko lenses have six blades: 18mm f3.5, 21mm f2, 35mm f2, 40mm f2, 50mm f1.8, and 50mm f2 Macro.

    The following Olympus OM Zuiko lenses have eight blades: 24mm f2, 50mm f1.4, 55mm f1.2, 85mm f2, 135mm f2.8, 180mm f2.8, 300mm f4.5, 400mm f6.3, and 600mm f6.5.

    The 100mm f2 ED Zuiko and 250mm EDIF Zuiko both have nine blades.
    To add to this, the 200 f/5 has 8 blades, the 100 f/2.8 has 8 blades, and the 50 f/3.5 has 6 blades.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin