mike_elek Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Earlier, Lynn posted some very nice work from her Sonnar. I mentioned that I had a photo that showed some really wild out-of-focus effects. While looking for some slides, I came across the negatives. I don't believe there were lights around the windows. I can't really recall anything extraordinary. By the way, the true "bokeh" (man, I hate that word) fans would puke if they look at this. I thought it looked pretty cool. This was shot on generic Kodak 200 with an f/2.0 Zeiss-Opton Sonnar wide open. Another wide shot, so you gotta click the link below.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_hall1 Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Congrats! Looks like you got the world's shortest reflex lens! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel_iggers Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 I think the way you got the archways of light (the "bokeh") is great. (What exactly do the afficionados approve or disapprove, as far as "bokeh" is concerned?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis triguez Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Very good lens. The lights behind, help to stand out the head of the figure. Good composition: You used the Vitruvio's Golden Section Law. Many people tend to forget this easy law and neglect the composition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bacsa Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 :) that looks very interesting, Mike, in the good way interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aizan_sasayama Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 bokeh afficionados should be renamed "smooth nuts", haha. the true bokeh man tries this and that, goes with what works better. it all depends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edhebert Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 ouch! It looks as though the "bokeh" is *really* odd here. In particular, the lower right part of each out-of-focus highlight looks even more pronounced than the rest of the ring (like it's "shifted" or something). The tops of the ring are barely visible. Daniel, I'm no bokeh afficiando by any stretch, but those harsh rings defining the outer edge of the out-of-focus highlights are distracting from (or possibly in some opinions, "supplementing") the intended in-focus subject. I've never seen anything quite like this from my Sonnar, and I shoot wide open a lot. Though mine is an f/1.5, not an f/2.0. Do you think there'd be that much of a difference in the designs? Thanks for sharing it, Mike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennybee Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Mike, that is a great picture. Nice atmosphere and colours. You did not slip with you Dremel tool on the lens surface by any (mis)chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gib Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 could be an illustration from a high school physics textbook showing particle physics or how light is both a particle and a wave time for more coffee...... and I actually like the photo a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gene m Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Very odd looking, but I like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stwrtertbsratbs5 Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Strange. My 50/1.5 Sonnar has never produced such an effect. Is it the term "bokeh" that you dislike, Mike, or the effect? If it's the word, then maybe we can use OOFA (out of focus areas) as a term, instead of bokeh ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_elek Posted November 25, 2004 Author Share Posted November 25, 2004 Robert, it's really the focus (!) on this term to the point where photos are praised or dismissed on how the background looks, rather than the overall composition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
summitar Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 It would be nice if we had an in-focus shot of the background to understand what could cause such an effect. Could flare have played a role with off angle light coming into the lens? I find it strange that the central figure showed up so well and the background is so strange. Interesting shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 It looks to me that it has nothing to do with "Bokeh"or anything like that. You just happen to have a lemon. The mention about a Dremel is correct, I think. If you like it for the artifacts it produces, then it is truly a one of a kind gem. Amazingly, it seems focus very sharply where you intend it to! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulh Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 That's pretty wacky! But I do like it ... Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_4711 Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Hello Mike, a very fine classic shoot, but is not amazing. The Zeiss Opton Sonnar and later Zeiss only have a double base aperture blades for harmony picture results. The Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar East-Germany and russian Jupiter 8 and 3 don't include. I find this double aperture base in a Canon 1:1,8/50mm M 39 LTM too. Anyone in a other lens ? peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stwrtertbsratbs5 Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Fair enough, Mike. Bokeh is just one characteristic to consider. And I must admit, I have seen shots where the most interesting part of the photo is the bokeh. That is what I simply refer to as a bad photograph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_m Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 What shutter speed was used for that shot? It looks like some kind of light source was moving faster than the shutter. Could it have been a slow speed and some internal gears that move during the slow speeds were reflected through the lens. Just a wild guess. How is the internal baffling in that camera? Any bright bits of metal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_elek Posted November 27, 2004 Author Share Posted November 27, 2004 It was a Thai restaurant with a number of archways leading to different dining areas of the restaurants. No physical doors -- just archways. The restaurant might have had lights around the archways, but I don't recall that being the case, despite having had lunch their every other week for about two years. Don't recall the technical data. Probably about 1/10 or 1/25. This was with a Contax IIa -- an excellent camera, by the way. It doesn't suffer from any internal flare. I was testing the lens -- so I wasn't out shooting seriously. Just snapping away to finish up the roll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mskovacs Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 I think that you are onto something with the lights Mike. I have a very similar-looking shot made on my Rolleiflex 80/2.8 Xenotar wide open. The background was a lit Christmas tree and the small lights made a pattern exactly like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 Ed, with strong side lighting, that kind of lopsided boke is possible with any lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mskovacs Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 Apologies for the content (my youngest "model" Ally), but I this photo shows that the close-up performance of the Sonnar 50/1.5 is also superb, even set wide open at minimum focus. This was shot yesterday with my <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/2786022">separated CZ Sonnar</a> and is about an 80% crop.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mskovacs Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 Here's another one with a lot of fine details, stopped down f/8 or so I guess.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now