ZF 85/1.4 Bokeh shots

lowfreq said:

The ZF50 and ZF85 are very similar if not the same in color,
saturation, and contrast. Both lenses has that unmistakenbly
uniform 'edge to edge' sharpness and contrast when closed down a
little. So far the only difference I see is in the bokeh. Wide open
the ZF85 bokeh seems smoother. Perhaps this has to do with the
perspective of an 85 focal length and therefore tuned for that
length? Dunno, I still like my ZF50 and will use it just as much as
my 85.

If I were to describe the ZF85 in one word, it would be smooth or
even, hence the name Planar (which means flat).

Click to expand...

Thanks for the specific reply. I'm still up in the air if I want to continue down the path I'm on or go in a different direction. I'll end up with some ZF lenses but it seems it will be for my film shooting. Thanks.
--

Fit for release from a mental institution but banned from the 3-0-0-D forum since 6-2005.

The elements that flatfive finds unpleasant are the same ones that I have come to prefer. There are people who look at a photograph with the thinking that OOF elements should be subordinate and "out of the way" and those people criticize when it "competes" for attention...and a small group of people look at a photograph and try to view the OOF elements and in-focus elements as cooperative compositional tools.

When I look at background/foreground blur, I tend to see it as a scale of choices, just as portraits are. Some people overdo it on the Softar filters and then gaussian blur and diffuse glow in photoshop, some people shoot as sharp as possible and crank the contrast. These are different extreme ways of looking at the "purpose" of a portrait. It is not a case of "one is proper and the other is a gimmick".

Shooting at wide aperture and therefore blurring the background/foreground is not necessarily about eliminating all distractions. A more agreeable way of describing it is "abstraction" of objects outside of the plane of focus.

The 105/2 DC seems to be a great lens in this regard as you can choose how that abstraction will correspond with the objects in focus. Of course, I'm sure only a very small minority ever use it to obtain "harsh" backgrounds, save for small percentage of the few artists who don't think of photography as purely reproduction.

Personally, I like the limited harshness of the ZF and the AIS 85/1.4, and would choose them in a heartbeat over a lens that renders things more smoothly.
--
Robert.
Idealism is precious.

bokeh ranks about 12th on my list when it comes to importance in my photographs... unless the oof elements and their rendering are a very integral part of the image, i don't care how the bokeh looks(well, unless it's flat out hideous -ie. mirror lens style)... ever so rarely i'll get the urge to shoot some macro flora stuff and i'll use the tokina 90/2.5 in these instances .. the other 99% of the time, i'm way (way) more concerned with other elements.. lighting, composition, subject matter, etc...

bokeh analysis is fun for gearhead talk and it's good to be aware of it but seriously, in my day to day photography, it's virtually of no importance...

i have an 85/1.4 and a 70-200 -- both of which do a fine job in their oof renderings.. when i use those lenses, the final image has a little something extra which i can appreciate and enjoy.. however, the reality is that 1250% of non photogs and 99% of photographers will never know the difference.. they too will judge the image on the more important stuff...

don't get me wrong though... i think dof is an important compositional aid and i consider it for a lot of my images... it's just the way the oof elements are rendered isn't that big of a concern..
jeff

It's obviously a nice lens; a different bokeh characteristic than the Nikkor 85mm, and I prefer the Nikkor, but that's personal choice. Given how goood the Nikkor is, though, I'm not sure why someone would get this with the D80, where you not only lose the AF, but also metering. If you have money to burn, throw some at a body, too.
--
Portfolio: http:///www.ryanbrenizer.com
Photoblog: http://www.flickr.com/photos/carpeicthus

Hi!

Nice shooting; I like fall's colors a lot.

The Zeiss 85 reminds me a lot of my AIs 85, as opposed to the AF version. the rendition of defocussed areas are almost the same with these two.

Regards
Alex

--



carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero

=> Closeup/Macro Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/magma_photography/root

anybody have bokeh pictures of the nikon 85/1.4 ais for comparison?

Hi!

I don't have too much bokeh-specific samples handy, but I'll snap some, once the rain stops;

In the meantime, here's an unprocessed test shot from some time ago (not in the aperture range you shot though):



Regards
Alex

--



carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero

=> Closeup/Macro Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/magma_photography/root

Interesting -- the bokeh is very similar in that shot, if not the same, as one of my shots. Do you like the AIS version better than the AF?

Yes please post some more!

Hi!

Personally, I prefer the MF version to the AF; it is not as "creamy" as the AF, but suits my preferences better; also. I find the Ais to be substantially sharper stopped down, while being as sharp wide open.

Since I've been an MF guy for all my life, I did not keep the AF and decided to gladly stick to my Ais.

Regards
Alex

PS: more shots will follow, as soon as the weather permits; in the meantime, here's one indoor shot I did for a little exposure consistancy test a while back (concerning non-cpu settings):



--



carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero

=> Closeup/Macro Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/magma_photography/root

I think he was a bit tough on the D80, it seems like a nice camera, in fact im probably going to get one soon.

But for you if your using a manual focus lens, The D200 allows you to meter where the D80 doesnt apparently. I dont use MF lenses, so let me know if you wanna get rid of your D80 and get a D200, maybe ill take the D80 off your hands

Ben

--
Meow
http://public.fotki.com/LindoPhotography/

Funny that a guy who doesnt care about Bokah so much has 2 of the lenses I would consider to have the greatest Bokah

--
Meow
http://public.fotki.com/LindoPhotography/

just because i dont have it right now don't mean i ain't never used it. take your 21098741209843 million dollar manual focus glass and have fun
--
n i k o n D 5 0
5 0 f / 1 . 8 D
7 0 - 3 0 0 G
2 8 f / 2 . 8 D
V I V I T A R 2 8 0 0

Benjammer said:

Funny that a guy who doesnt care about Bokah so much has 2 of the
lenses I would consider to have the greatest Bokah

--

Click to expand...

85/1.4, 70-200, and the champ of all champs, the Bokina.. (tokina 90/2.5 AT-X macro)

check Todd's review for a full introduction to the tokina..
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=13056277

it's not that i don't care about bokeh, it's just that bokeh is not a make or break element of a photograph.. i could show you some great photographs with bad bokeh (and i mean truly great photographs)... i could show you plenty more bad photographs with great bokeh...

realistically, it's not important.. the picture is either good or no good and i've yet to see an instance where bokeh was the deciding factor..

jeff

Hey Guys.

I just posted 10 new pics of the ZF85 from my flickr page.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/16349992@N00/sets/72157594369562890/

Hey FlatFive! You inspired me to make better photographs -- I had a high this morning shooting! Thanks for the criticism.

There getting more interesting both at showing the good and bad characteristics of the lens. I look fowards to more samples. Keep it up, these are useful.

hey seija.. may i ask but what do you deem as the good and bad characteristics of the ZF85? can u be specific?

(The ZF looks like a very attractive lens, but I've already got the Nikon 85mm ais and like it.)

Very nice and interesting to think about but I will stick with AF and flash metering with the Nikon version.

lowfreq said:

Hi guys.

I finally got a chance to get out and do some more shooting with my
new ZF 85. The shots below were all taken between 1.4 and 4.0. I do
not have the exact numbers since the ZF does not communicate with
my d80.

Anyway I've heard so much bad rap of the ZF 50 having bad bokeh
from previous posts. So I decided to test it out with the ZF 85.
Since I am not as experienced as you guys with other lenses, to me
the bokeh on the ZF 85 looks very good. I'd go even further and say
it looks impressionistic. Anway you decide.

My take on the ZF 85 from this experience, shooting in broad
daylight, is that this is a very colorful lens (like my ZF 50) -- I
mean that literally. I'm having so much fun shooting with this
lens; even more so than my ZF 50 because of the DOF.

Please mind the dead flowers shots.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/16349992@N00/sets/72157594369562890/

Click to expand...

One at f1.4:



And one at f2.0:

This is one heck of a sharp lens. I have noticed that the resulting photos need much less USM attention in post-processing. To be honest, I printed one without any USM at all, and it looked excellent!

At 1.4 if there's a lot of light you can get some haze or misty veiling of the image. Stopped down to 2 you don't notice that.

At 1.4 it is BRUTAL to focus on moving people. I am very out of practice with respect to manual focus. I didn't actually switch to AF until my Elan IIe in 1998, but in the intervening 8 years I've apparently lost the knack for focusing on anything remotely moving. Even a sitting person can provide a challenge... This weekend I lost a few otherwise excellent shots due to my inability to keep up with my subject's movement. I am not worthy!!

I stopped down to f2.8 and get a higher propensity of keepers, but still missed some true greats. I need to practice.

Sharpness is fine wide open if you get your plane of focus correct, and are accurate in your focusing. Each stop brings even more sharpness, up through f8 where it's as sharp as anything I have ever used before. It slays my old Canon prime glass. You'd have to be careful with f8, though, it would be very unforgiving of complexion

I like the color and especially the contrast... The Zeiss has a look of it's own, very saturated and contrasty. I like that, some may not.

Distortion is very low, which is nice.

Bokeh is pretty good, but at 1.4 it can be a bit "swishy." Being aware of your background is important. If you have a lot of tree branches or otherwise busy objects in the background, I'd probably pick f2 over 1.4. Things can tend to look a bit busy at 1.4. That's being pretty picky, though, I'm happy with how it draws out of focus objects.

I compared it to my 18-200 this weekend, some tripod shots of a building. I was curious. As you would expect, the Zeiss slayed the 18-200 in all respects... But that didn't surprise me, really.

The thing is: I get a LOT more keepers with my 18-200 or 17-55... (this is not shocking, just an observation). Using the 85/1.4 is exacting, precision work. And I thank goodness for digital as I can delete the out of focus shots instead of fretting over film... I'm going to play with this Zeiss for a little while longer and then make a decision of whether to keep it or go with the Nikon 85/1.4. I like the way the Zeiss draws better, and when the planets align I really like the images... But unless I can get the MF knack back, I don't like restricting myself to immoveable objects I like candid and street photography best, and that's where I have the most fun.

This has been a bit of a shock for me, a reminder of how much of a crutch modern technology has become to me.

Just some thoughts, HTH.