X-Fujinon 55mm f1:2.2 lens and Bubble Bokeh

[Dan Deary]

<p>My brother found a Fujica STX-1 with this 55mm lens in a garage sale and gave it to me(bless all those people who give me cameras). I have not used it yet and decided to research the lens. The lens is a 4 element design with 4 groups a slight variation of a Tessar I presume. This was written up by Rick Drawbridge favorably in 2009( http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00S0Q0 ). In my research, it appears this lens is highly regarded for its sharpness and also by digital camera users for its"Bubble Bokeh." <br>

Check out this site: </p>

<p>I was rather horrified and felt the results were ugly and after seeing these samples it really turned me off to ever using the lens. I wonder though if its the digital medium that creates this form of bokeh or does it translate to film as well? I am curious as to everyone"s experience with this lens. And am I alone in the belief that bubble bokeh is ugly?</p>

[john_bear]

<p>Yep - that's ugly.</p>

[User_6502147]

<p>Yes, but not necessarily. Given different conditions and avoiding overexposure, you might get something really special. It may take little of "outside the box" thinking.</p>

<p>Les</p>

[kirk_strauchler]

<p>Reminds me of the much coveted Meyer Optik Trioplans. In the right circumstances, I think it would be great.</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>It's considered a highly desirable effect in many quarters, <strong>Daniel</strong>; have a look at:</p>

<p>http://www.meyer-optik-goerlitz.com/kickstarter_trioplan/</p>

<p>I think you've found a rather excessive example of the bokeh on Flickr, and I don't like it at all in that image. Still, as the others have intimated, given the right circumstances, used with skill and refinement, it can be quite beautiful. In my post on the Fujica ST605N I don't appear to have managed to display an image with <em>any</em> bokeh to speak of, and I really wasn't aware the lens could do this! I'll try it on a digital platform and see what I can come up with.</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>I agree with the others. This is interesting bokeh. It could be distracting, but I don't really think it is ugly: it could certainly produce some unique photos.</p>

[john_robison4]

<p>I have that lens in M42 mount. It came on a Fujica ST605n picked up at a photo show, I needed a M42 mount body for a couple of Takumars that had come my way. Have not tried it out because the plastic focusing outer ring just crumbled into several bits and fell apart. I can still focus the lens but there is no distance scale or DOF scale. It seems from looking at ebay photos this is a common problem with this lens.</p>

<p>There were apparently two versions of this lens in screw mount and I think mine might be the second version. Maybe I'll just wrap some black masking tape around the bare aluminum focusing ring to get a bit of a grip and try mine out.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>All depends on personal taste. There was a time (admittedly a brief moment) when mirror lenses were new and no shot without "bubbles*" was trendy enough.</p>

<p>Sometimes this was called "brokeh"!</p>

<p>_________<br /> * At the time, called "do-nuts", perhaps in honor of the local constabulary?</p><div></div>

[john_robison4]

<p>Rick, just looked at that offer on the trioplan. Holy cow!? Fifteen hundred Euros!? If I wanted a 100mm f2.8 in an M42 mount I'd stick with a much more affordable 105mm Takumar.</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>Yes, I can't see myself fronting up with fifteen hundred Euros, any time soon...</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>Here's an example of a more restrained circular bokeh, from an old A. Schacht Ulm 135mm R Travenon f/4. It isn't quite the "Soap Bubble "effect, which tends to feature a more defined edge to the circles and a more transparent inner, but this can vary with the aperture applied and the lighting.</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>OK, despite it being a dull day with intermittent rain showers, I dashed out and took a few pics with the Fujinon 55/2.2 mounted on a Sony A7r, with the lens wide open. With strong dappled light in the background the bokeh certainly gets pretty busy and (to me) unattractive, as the first image shows. However, with a more subdued background, as in the second image, the bokeh becomes rather beautiful. In my humble opinion, of course! See what you think.</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>#2</p><div></div>

[Dan Deary]

<p>Rick, I agree the 2^nd image is much better and would be acceptable even to me. I appreciate your efforts in throwing a positive light on this lens. The web sites I looked at however seem to me to be in a competition to see how many bubbles they will produce. It reminds me of that old SNL sketch featuring Christopher Walken and the band Blue Oyster Cult singing “The Reaper” with Walken repeatedly asking for “More Cowbells!!” In this case it’s “More bubbles!!”</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>I suspect you'd like Stan Freyberg's famous spoof on the Lawrence Welk band, with the insistent request "Somebody turn off the bubble machine"... It's actually an interesting lens, <strong>Daniel</strong>, pretty much unique in it's era, a throwback to pre-Tessar days (as I understand it) with the Una formula of four separate elements, the aperture being manipulated between the 1st and 2nd elements. But it's very sharp and renders colour very accurately.</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>Light through leaves is the absolute "torture test" for bokeh.</p>