Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: suggestions for LF lens with similar effect to Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2

  1. #1
    David J. Heinrich
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    575

    suggestions for LF lens with similar effect to Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2

    These portraits of my cousin were shot with my Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2 (most wide open). For my portraits, I really like that creamy quality of bokeh, and extremely narrow DOF. I realize very narrow DOF isn't a problem with LF, but what do your recommend for a similarly smooth bokeh to that lens?

    http://www.tabblo.com/studio/stories/view/1686060/

    Right now, what I'm looking at are the Schneider Xenar 210/4.5 and 240/4.5 lenses.

    Also, I'm interested in the Carl Zeiss 135mm f/3.5 T* Planar 135 f3.5 for landscape work, which is said to be tack sharp wide open. Anyone used a lens similar to that (i.e., non T* verions)?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts USA
    Posts
    8,476

    Re: suggestions for LF lens with similar effect to Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2


    Vintage 180mm Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar
    5x7 Sinar P, Kodak TMY, Pyrocat HD

    The blur on the images to which you have provided a link, shows what some people might consider "unfavorable" effects in the distant circular lights. They look like rings, rather than uniform disks.

    If you search this forum, you will find zillions of posts on the subject, including very old portrait lenses.

    My favorite lenses for sharp focus and uniform blur in large format, are vintage Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar lenses (see above). As I recall, many of the Xenar lenses are of a Tessar design.


    Vintage 150mm Braunschweig Heliar
    4x5 Sinar P, Kodak TMY, Pyrocat HD

    Another favorite is Heliar lenses. They have a slightly different quality, which like most good things, is very hard to describe. Both Tessars and Heliars keep their nice qualities when stopped down a bit. I never shoot them wide open.

    All things being equal, the longer the lens, the shallower the depth of field, and the greater the blur.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Tonopah, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    6,334

    Re: suggestions for LF lens with similar effect to Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2

    Welcome to the world of brute force. The worst LF lens will have better bokeh than your Noctilux. The Xenar's you mention are terrific. A Voigtlander Heliar is a step up from the Xenar, and then you can jump off the cliff into neverland if your so inclined. Wade through my site when you have time. Lots of antique portrait lenses and pretty bokeh. I just got an old camera today from Germany that has the 180 Tessar. Very pretty Ken. Mine is sunken mount with about an inch long factory non-removable lens shade of heavy brass.

  4. #4
    All metric sizes to 24x30 Ole Tjugen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,383

    Re: suggestions for LF lens with similar effect to Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken Lee View Post
    ...As I recall, many of the Xenar lenses are of a Tessar design...
    All of them are, except the f:3.5 Xenar Typ D which is a "reverse Tessar" - or according to some books, it's a triplet. All I know for certain is that mine is a reverse Tessar.

    The f:3.5 Zeiss Planar has a similar "harsh" bokeh to that Rokkor, although not quite as pronounced. Just about everything else is smoother, with Heliar and APO-Lanthar being among the very creamiest.

  5. #5
    David J. Heinrich
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    575

    Re: suggestions for LF lens with similar effect to Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2

    Thanks for the replies everyone. I too had noticed those harsh textured OOF points; it seems to be the achilles heel of that 58/1.2 lens. It produces very creamy bokeh in many situations, but strong lights in the background are weird (I actually selected that lense over the Hexanon 57/1.2 because of impressive test results at Rokkor Files, and the Minolta:4/3rds adapter). I think I remember reading online that it could be due to imperfections in the lens coating; any other ideas for why it happens? (I'm not bothered by it too much, as most of them, I can easily photoshop away).

    Anyways, I mentioned the Xenars...what about the Xenotars? There are the 135/3.5 Xenotars. I wonder how they compare to the Carl Zeiss 135/3.5 (and how both compare to the Nikkon Nikkor-SW 90/4.5 or 90/8) in terms of sharpness and bokeh? The Zeiss 135/3.5 is supposed to be tack sharp wide open. I've read that the Xenotars aren't sharp wide open. And from all accounts I've read, the Nikkor-SWs (90/4.5 and 90/8) are supposed to be one of the sharpest lenses ever.

  6. #6

    Re: suggestions for LF lens with similar effect to Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2

    I've got a 135mm f/3.5 Tessar I love. Just creamy as long as you avoid flare. I'll see if I can find any scanned shots with it on my work computer Monday.

  7. #7
    Wally Wally's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    214

    Re: suggestions for LF lens with similar effect to Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2

    Quote Originally Posted by dh003i View Post
    Thanks for the replies everyone. I too had noticed those harsh textured OOF points; it seems to be the achilles heel of that 58/1.2 lens. It produces very creamy bokeh in many situations, but strong lights in the background are weird (I actually selected that lense over the Hexanon 57/1.2 because of impressive test results at Rokkor Files, and the Minolta:4/3rds adapter). I think I remember reading online that it could be due to imperfections in the lens coating; any other ideas for why it happens? (I'm not bothered by it too much, as most of them, I can easily photoshop away).
    ...
    Try this little experiment with your 58 Roccor: Focus on something about 20 feet away, and include some edgy stuff in the very near foreground, and again, arrange to shoot wide-open. Print one of these and tell us whether the bokeh is more pleasing. I was told that some lenses that produce harsh-edged circles of light from point sources far in the background may produce very smooth bokeh for near out-of-focus objects.

  8. #8
    David J. Heinrich
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    575

    Re: suggestions for LF lens with similar effect to Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2

    Quote Originally Posted by Wally View Post
    Try this little experiment with your 58 Roccor: Focus on something about 20 feet away, and include some edgy stuff in the very near foreground, and again, arrange to shoot wide-open. Print one of these and tell us whether the bokeh is more pleasing. I was told that some lenses that produce harsh-edged circles of light from point sources far in the background may produce very smooth bokeh for near out-of-focus objects.
    Thanks, I'll give that a try sometime.

    but here are some other shots where the bokeh of that lens was important; in these, there are no bright background lights in the pictures, so that issue doesn't come into play. Under ideal conditions, it does seem to have good bokeh both in front and behind subject (the piano shots were ones where I was messing around with hand-holding the lens and tilting it slightly):

    Flower blues
    Tilted Plane of Focus on book & lamp
    Hydrangeas in bloom
    Piano in Silence/Isolation

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis, Ind.
    Posts
    589

    Re: suggestions for LF lens with similar effect to Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2

    I think that as you study more images you will find that bokeh is quite a bit more subtle than just effectively blurring areas in front or behind the plane of focus. Your Rokkor is very effective at that, but that is just one aspect of good bokeh. To some people, having a properly round (rather than polygonal) aperture is an essential part of good bokeh.

    I understand that it is conventional wisdom that good boheh results when an out-of-focus point source is transformed to a 2 dimensional Gaussian or bell shaped distribution at the film plane. Bad bokeh results when an out-of-focus point source is transformed into an annular ring. I remember reading that the mathematics of lens design is such that many lenses will have the former characteristic when the point source is behind the plane of focus and the later characteristic when it is in front of the plane of focus (or vice versa.)


    I don't see the annular ring problem in Flower Blues, perhaps because the out-of-focus highlights are so out of focus. I think that I detect a bit of it in the hydrangeas where the highlights behind the plane of focus seem to have a subtle ghost rather than a ethereal glow.

    You are of course free to appreciate or even prefer the look of your Rokkor. I am just trying help you to understand where others are coming from.

  10. #10
    David J. Heinrich
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    575

    Re: suggestions for LF lens with similar effect to Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2

    Quote Originally Posted by aduncanson View Post
    I think that as you study more images you will find that bokeh is quite a bit more subtle than just effectively blurring areas in front or behind the plane of focus. Your Rokkor is very effective at that, but that is just one aspect of good bokeh. To some people, having a properly round (rather than polygonal) aperture is an essential part of good bokeh.

    I understand that it is conventional wisdom that good boheh results when an out-of-focus point source is transformed to a 2 dimensional Gaussian or bell shaped distribution at the film plane. Bad bokeh results when an out-of-focus point source is transformed into an annular ring. I remember reading that the mathematics of lens design is such that many lenses will have the former characteristic when the point source is behind the plane of focus and the later characteristic when it is in front of the plane of focus (or vice versa.)


    I don't see the annular ring problem in Flower Blues, perhaps because the out-of-focus highlights are so out of focus. I think that I detect a bit of it in the hydrangeas where the highlights behind the plane of focus seem to have a subtle ghost rather than a ethereal glow.

    You are of course free to appreciate or even prefer the look of your Rokkor. I am just trying help you to understand where others are coming from.
    Ahh, I think I see what you're saying there; a double-image of the hydrangeas out of focus. I also notice that in some of the piano shots. That's a diff problem from the grainy dots that direct light sources seem to be made into, though.

    Thanks for the explanation.

    While I don't like those things, I tend to like the lens' bokeh, in some cases. (some of the other hydrangea and piano shots, and lens shots). You may be right, that it is because there is so much blurring, that such helps the bokeh look nice in some situations.

Similar Threads

  1. Schneider 47mmXL coverage test
    By Micah Marty in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 16-Nov-2000, 12:17
  2. Suggestions for first 8x10 lens
    By Brad Daniels in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 22-Aug-2000, 13:33
  3. Suggestions on 165 0r 180mm lens. What about tele lenses?
    By Wayne Crider in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 4-Jun-2000, 01:09
  4. Technikardan 45S lens selection 450 mm+
    By Dave_958 in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 19-Apr-2000, 17:50

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •