The Photography and Camera Thread

Member
Joined 2010
Paid Member
A study of Bokeh of various lenses.

I got some interesting historical lenses from a friend today and he said these have particularly good bokeh. I set up a quick test with some point light sources in the background in order to study the way a point source that is out of focus gets imaged.

The lenses will be compared to a Lumix 20mm F/1.7 Aspheric (standard large aperture lens on M43) and the Kamlan 50mm F/1.1 manual focus which I recently bought. I also have a Nikkor 50mm F/1.2 AIS from my Nikon system and will be using a Nikon F-mount to M43 adapter for the other historical lenses: a Zeiss Jena Biotar 58mm F/2.0 and a Pentax Takumar 35mm F/2.3.

These were all handheld shots at ISO 1600 with shutter speeds in the 1/400 to 1/800 sec to ensure sharpness despite being handheld, lens apertures were wide open and I was about 6 ft away from the fireground subject (Phalaenopses orchids),

Baseline Lumix 20mm F/1.7:
View attachment 1287409

Kamlan 50mm F/1.1:
View attachment 1287436

Nikkor 50mm F/1.2:
View attachment 1287411

Biotar 58mm F/2.0:
View attachment 1287412

Takumar 35mm F/2.3:
View attachment 1287414

I can see why people say the Biotar has interesting bokeh - it looks like bubbles. I think I saw a modern "bubble lens" on Aliexpress. The Takumar is also similar and has an asymmetric bokeh the farther away from the center of the image you go. The modern Kamlan by contrast, has a uniform bokeh spot that will result in creamy and smooth out of focus background blur, but not very interesting. The Nikkor 50mm F/1.2 is an older formula from 1981 before full blown computer lens design software was available, and it has a slight enhanced bubble edge on the bokeh spots from a point light source - a bit more interesting. The 50mm F/1.2 has the distinction of being the sharpest 50mm Nikon makes at F/2.0 - even sharper than the modern 50mm F/1.4D (according to Ken Rockwell). The modern Lumix 20mm M43 lens, has more depth of field due to its shorted FL but overall, can be seen to be extremely sharp.
While interesting, entertaining, and sometimes correct, Rockwell also has to be often taken with a grain of salt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Founder of XSA-Labs
Joined 2012
Paid Member
First time they cordoned off Pennsylvania Ave between 7th and 3rd streets in Washington DC, blocks from the Capitol, for a F1 exhibition by Red Bull. The RB7 was here in its full glory and oh, the sound it made was amazing (Renault 2.4L naturally aspirated V8 with 18,000 rpm redline). The RB Rally car (also amazing sounding) was also there along with an enduro motorcycle demo. I hope the F1 organizers will make DC the home of a standard F1 tour in the future. There are some great streets here for a challenging and picturesque circuit. Shot taken with GX1 and Lumix 14mm F/2.5 lens at F/3.5, 1/3000th sec, ISO200.
RedBull-RB7-Penn-Ave-01.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Founder of XSA-Labs
Joined 2012
Paid Member
Has anyone cannibalized a cheap digital camera and adapted it to make a digital back on an old film SLR? If that works - a dedicated Kickstarter for a FF development might be warranted. I have heard of other attempts in earlier years. But that was before the maker revolution with 3D printers and Arduino etc.

I think an aftermarket back on the Nikon FE/FM body would be a great way to have film camera feel and use all our old F mount lenses.
 
Founder of XSA-Labs
Joined 2012
Paid Member
What do you guys think of the Olympus OM-5? It lets me stay in M43 and has a ton of nice features like in body stabilization, waterproofing, and compact!

Also considering going to Nikon Zf but that’s twice the price and a lot bulkier. Lets me use my Nikon lenses.

I have Nikon and M43 lenses so could go either way. Nikon also has mirror less APS-C.
 
Member
Joined 2021
Paid Member
I only had the E-M5, E-M1 and E-M1 MkII, and they are great cams (altough the E-M1 had some high ISO issues). Olympus/PM Systems has a very wide range of gorgeous lenses and there are also very good ones from Panasonic and Leica too. So I think it's a good decision to stick with M43.
But... APS-C and FF are not really expensive today and technically there is no reason to stick with M43, unless you need long focal lengths. I also had the Nikon Z6 and the image quality was superior.
So, it's a hard decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Founder of XSA-Labs
Joined 2012
Paid Member
I only had the E-M5, E-M1 and E-M1 MkII, and they are great cams (altough the E-M1 had some high ISO issues). Olympus/PM Systems has a very wide range of gorgeous lenses and there are also very good ones from Panasonic and Leica too. So I think it's a good decision to stick with M43.
But... APS-C and FF are not really expensive today and technically there is no reason to stick with M43, unless you need long focal lengths. I also had the Nikon Z6 and the image quality was superior.
So, it's a hard decision.
Thanks for the guidance. Wow, you are quite the camera gear nut! The Z6 is actually quite a new camera and you say “had” one… assume you are currently on Sony Alpha’s?

My pro photog friend is recommending I switch to a Nikon Z FF.

Compactness and easy to carry around when going with family is one consideration of M43.

Of course, Fuji is also in the mix but means completely different system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Member
Joined 2021
Paid Member
I had the Z6 six years ago, really new is the Z6II and soon the Z6III. Yes, I use the Sony system now, because I think it's easier to adapt vintage and manual focus lenses, and the Sony lenses are more affordable.
Nikon Z is great however, so it's a good recommendation too.
Compactness is of course a real argument against full frame, but the Sony A7C is as compact as a Leica M, so the choice is there.
 
Founder of XSA-Labs
Joined 2012
Paid Member
I ran across a review for a Pentax K1 digital camera today. They are built like a tank and have unique features. They are big and bulky but have a nice feel in the hand. They seem to be really well priced for a full frame camera - I saw a mark I for about $800 used. Hardly ever see anyone use a Pentax Digital (made by Ricoh). I wonder why?

It’s a DSLR so optical through the lens viewfinder - which I still like if image is bright.

 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
www.hifisonix.com
Joined 2003
Paid Member
I love my Pentax. Built like the proverbial out house and still takes prime lenses from 40 yrs ago that you can pick up for pennies on eBay etc (I didn’t bring the two I have on this trip). In body image stabilisation as well means any lens you attach is covered 😊

I’ve transitioned recently to RAW and started using Lightroom on my iPad for post processing - bit of a learning curve.

IMG_8052.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users