One of the most drool-worthy lenses on the planet?

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Richard, Jul 25, 2008.

  1. Richard

    Richard Guest

    1. Advertisements

  2. Richard

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Ray Fischer, Jul 25, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Richard

    RichA Guest

    Still channeling the teenager from the 1990s I see. Also, 4 fluorite
    elements would kind of drive up the cost. Costly to buy, hard to
    work.
     
    RichA, Jul 28, 2008
    #3
  4. Richard

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Is that the best response you can come up with?
    And you can buy a watch which doesn't tell the time, is made with steel
    from the Titanic, and costs over $100,000.
     
    Ray Fischer, Jul 28, 2008
    #4
  5. Richard

    RichA Guest

    Difference being the lens is functional and serves a purpose that some
    people have. I doubt their customers are buying for the same reasons
    the Titanic watch buyers are.
     
    RichA, Jul 28, 2008
    #5
  6. Richard

    Ray Fischer Guest

    So does the watch. It tells you whether it's day or night.
    How many do you think that they actually sell? A couple of dozen?
     
    Ray Fischer, Jul 29, 2008
    #6
  7. Problem is, the rivets keep popping loose.
     
    Blinky the Shark, Jul 29, 2008
    #7
  8. Richard

    Bruce Guest

    Bruce, Jul 29, 2008
    #8
  9. Richard

    Richard Guest

    He's right, as far as that lens goes. It was obviously designed to render
    the sharpest macros possible, not to make the out of focus background look
    nice.
     
    Richard, Jul 30, 2008
    #9
  10. Richard

    Steve Guest

    And yet, it does. Take a look at some of the pictures in the article
    and the out of focus areas look silky smooth and very nice.
    Unfortunately I don't see anything like point light sources in the out
    of focus areas. That would be interesting.

    Steve
     
    Steve, Jul 30, 2008
    #10
  11. Richard

    Paul Furman Guest

    The one to compare is the text at an angle to the focal plane side by
    side with a 60mm nikkor. I never heard of a 60mm nikkor macro, it's
    about $500 & the coastal is what, something like $5,000? The CA is much
    less on the coastal APO but the bokeh if anything favors the nikon.
    That's the only valid test for bokeh: side by side for the same scene.
    Bokeh is seldom obviously different for similar lenses and this is no
    exception. And I'm a big bokeh hound :)

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Jul 30, 2008
    #11
  12. Richard

    Steve Guest

    They both look about the same to me except for the CA. I don't think
    you can tell much about what the bokeh of a real photo with out of
    focus highlights and point sources of light is going to look like from
    that shot of text. If you took a lens with horrible bokeh and shot
    that angled text it would probably look the same as those.

    Steve
     
    Steve, Jul 30, 2008
    #12
  13. Richard

    Paul Furman Guest

    Agreed.

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Jul 30, 2008
    #13
  14. Richard

    Richard Guest

    I don't know if it would or not. "Bokeh" or the rendering of out of focus
    areas in the image must be influenced by lens quality as the in-focus image,
    but I don't know if the relationship is the same for bokeh as for in-focus
    detail. It's a fascinating question and I don't know if anyone has ever
    quantified it.
    ..
     
    Richard, Jul 31, 2008
    #14
  15. Richard

    Steve Guest

    I honestly don't quite know what you're trying to say there. But the
    only thing I'm saying is that the way the lens, any lens for that
    matter, renders the out of focus areas of that slanted text is not a
    good indicator of how it will show out of focus highlights and point
    sources of light. Quite a few lenses will likely render the out of
    focus areas of text very similarly. I know, I've tested several of my
    lens for back focus with charts and text just like that and they all
    look very similar. But once you look at a varied background with
    "things" in it that are out of focus, glints, lights, etc., they
    render that kind of stuff very differently.

    But as for the bokeh of that particular lens, it looks pretty good to
    me on the real photos on that page.

    Steve
     
    Steve, Jul 31, 2008
    #15
  16. Richard

    RichA Guest

    Basically, my question concerns how optical quality effects bokeh, how
    are they related? It's possible quality and bokeh are inverses of
    each other since a 50mm f1.2's image is poor quality wide open, but
    the bokeh might be good, better than a 50mm f1.8 lens that would have
    higher wide open image quality.
     
    RichA, Jul 31, 2008
    #16
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.