Various cheap alternatives to Trioplan; lenses producing soap bubble bokeh on Nikon D800 and Sony A7

Jarek, if you can, do borrow a Micro 4/3 camera and prove to yourself that there is more to image quality than just sensor size :-)

At base ISO200 up to 800ISO to tiny sensor is incredibly good as long as one knows how to expose properly. But if one was to shoot in really low light and have very high ISO setting, or exposures are rather bad and need a lot of recovery in post production then no doubt the larger sensor does win.
I will borrow a M43 camera and follow your precautions. You opened my eyes to new possibilities afforded by those smaller sensors - there are apparently many lenses that will not cover larger ones.

Best

Jarek
small is beautiful, if you know how to use it.... (that's what she said ;-) )
 
small is beautiful, if you know how to use it.... (that's what she said ;-) )
Wisdom of simple things is usually toughest to get across.

Jarek
 
Is the Wray Supar also a triplet ?

The 3 1/4 inch f4.5 is another bargain basement lens (£5 to £10) which seems to perform very well on M4/3, showing very good resolution and absence of CA (and the usual relatively low contrast).

A test shot from last year I came across, with crop:

2e60c649371a4f859a5c9edce7a7abc0.jpg



2982bbc439cc45be985585663ad158b5.jpg
 
I agree it's not coma, and I agree that vignetting often causes swirl. However, here I'm not sure. Looking at the enlargement of the bubble you showed, the bright bubble edge seems to stretch all the way around the bokeh ball. I'd not expect that for vignetting; I'd expect to see the bright edge on the inner side but not on the outer side. I wonder if this is a combination of SA (bright edge) with severe tangential astigmatism (swirl). What do you think?
Sorry for the long delay because I have been busy and I need good weather to shoot examples. We really need simply examples, examples that have minimal impact by other issues, to show the effect of mechanical vignetting (e.g., cat-eye bokeh).

Cat-eye bokeh is mainly because the lens front rim/tube clips off a portion of an out-of-focus circular disc near the image edge/corner. As aperture is closed down, those out-of-focus disc get smaller and can eventually be not clipped by the lens front rim/tube. As a result, sooner or later, those out-of-focus discs near the edge/corner of an image will become more circular.
Yes, thanks, I'm aware of this.

My point is whether we're seeing vignetting or tangential astigmatism. Bright edges are typically caused by spherical aberration. Radial compression is typically caused by vignetting but can be also caused by severe tangential astigmatism. Now, a combination of spherical aberration and vignetting would give radial compression but bright edges only towards the field center, but a combination of spherical aberration and tangential astigmatism would give radial compression but bright edges both towards and away from the field center. This lens seems to give images with the later character. However, you can easily confirm it by simply checking visually if you see vignetting.

This difference would also show up very clearly in Hank's laboratory measurements of the OOF PSF.

Regards,

Alan
 
Indeed! I don't know this lens. Can you shed some light on it?

Jarek
An undoubted producer of bubbles:

f610af468b0b4945b5f0dfbed5876724.jpg

Crop -

75e76e4c6d0949388b4291fafdfbe687.jpg


--
 
a lens that was designed for the full frame interchangeable-lens rangefinder Olympus ACE works well for me if I want slightly subdued bubbles

E.Zuiko 4,5cm f2.8 @f2.8
E.Zuiko 4,5cm f2.8 @f2.8



The real strength in that lens however lays in the "smoky" effect bokeh that no other modern lens of mine can give me.

153ea41efd7f429983d44a613d04ac27.jpg

I believe the less glass elements a lens has the more interesting the bokeh will be: E.Zuiko is a 5 element design
 
Not really - picked up cheaply, on a whim. It's a very small lens, with an M39 thread at the rear, and a fairly short registration distance.

I'll try and post a picture of it tomorrow.
 
OK, thanks.

Jarek
Not really - picked up cheaply, on a whim. It's a very small lens, with an M39 thread at the rear, and a fairly short registration distance.

I'll try and post a picture of it tomorrow.
 
The first photo represents something akin to what I have seen, but the second one - I have never seen such OOF effect. Had you known about this bokeh before you bought the lens or was it a surprise discovery?

Jarek
a lens that was designed for the full frame interchangeable-lens rangefinder Olympus ACE works well for me if I want slightly subdued bubbles

E.Zuiko 4,5cm f2.8 @f2.8
E.Zuiko 4,5cm f2.8 @f2.8

The real strength in that lens however lays in the "smoky" effect bokeh that no other modern lens of mine can give me.

153ea41efd7f429983d44a613d04ac27.jpg

I believe the less glass elements a lens has the more interesting the bokeh will be: E.Zuiko is a 5 element design


--
 
I was familiar with the E.Zuiko 42mm f2.8 (refitted from Olympus 35RC) and I liked the bokeh there. However I desired a lens where I could control the aperture and the designation E.Zuiko was promising a similar look. Samples on Flickr didn't really show a definitive answer so I did punt a bit. I much rather chase bokeh than "I.Q." ;-)
The first photo represents something akin to what I have seen, but the second one - I have never seen such OOF effect. Had you known about this bokeh before you bought the lens or was it a surprise discovery?

Jarek



The real strength in that lens however lays in the "smoky" effect bokeh that no other modern lens of mine can give me.

153ea41efd7f429983d44a613d04ac27.jpg

I believe the less glass elements a lens has the more interesting the bokeh will be: E.Zuiko is a 5 element design
--
 
And I am glad you are. Genuine bokeh chasers are a rare breed indeed and you definitely are one of them.

Keep up excelent work!

Best

Jarek
I was familiar with the E.Zuiko 42mm f2.8 (refitted from Olympus 35RC) and I liked the bokeh there. However I desired a lens where I could control the aperture and the designation E.Zuiko was promising a similar look. Samples on Flickr didn't really show a definitive answer so I did punt a bit. I much rather chase bokeh than "I.Q." ;-
 
Yes they are not common and are also quite expensive so when I saw one in excellent condition well below the normal asking price. I wrung my hands, told myself I was silly and not to do it, wept a little, turned my sporran upside down and shook a few bawbees (small denomination coins) out of it, mortgaged the cat and bought it before some other enterprising collector got to it before I did.
Tom, unfortunately I know the itch when one sees a hard-to-find lens. A few times I came across one, had no money to spare, and I convinced myself I did not need it, somebody else bought and I felt really bad for a long time like a kid deprived of promised candy.
The front optical block screws off in normal Komura style but the focusing element does not part in the middle "Sonnar-style" like many other Komura telephotos do. So this is one that I will have to cover new territory with. The Uni-adapter ends are supposedly exchangeable but removing the FD mount is not necessarily giving me access to the helicoid. I think I am going to have to find and remove the focus limit pin first (before I can even see the helicoid drives). As this is a short lens I am likely looking at least at a double nested helicoid - so it is best left to a long lazy day when I am not in a rush.
I envy you the understanding of the inner workings of lenses. I am so ignorant. But perhaps this stops me from buying more lenses - particularly ones I would need to work on a lot.

Best

Jarek
Jarek,

I now might have pulled apart and mostly repaired 30+ lenses (maybe quite a lot more as i have not been counting). It is a good mental vibration when success has been achieved and the lens may only have needed a good clean. But I have had some spectacular failures and have been tearing my hair out in frustration on quite a few occasions - even it I have glued the hair back on later when it suddenly “worked”.

I am no expert and every new-type lens is a bit of an aventure but I am gradually getting more experienced on figuring out the “way into” a lens which is usually the hardest part of the exercise. I usually spend a reasonable amount of time simply inspecting a lens and trying to work out the disassembly procedure before I even contemplate touching a tool or trying to unscrew anything.

Practice seems to be improving my chances and making me quicker but it can be a very frustrating exercise. Some lenses of course seem to be made in a way to discourage “amateur repair technicians”. Good tools, patience, mechanical sympathy and a tray to work within are essential.

The biggest issues are breaking or losing screws and slippage on, obstinate threaded, seemingly unremovable lock rings.

I have a “naughty box” of lenses that I need to try and fix when I get around to it - an inevitable by-product of buying second hand lenses.

I can be quoted: “If you buy enough old lenses then sooner of later you will have to become a lens mechanic”.

--
Tom Caldwell
 
Last edited:
Tom, so far my failure rate has not exceeded what is economically viable, but mostly because I have not made too many attempts. About a year ago I tried to recover a Mirotar lens from a broken Minox camera and I failed so badly that I gave up in discouragement. But perhaps I started with a mission impossible task instead of trying something easier.

Jarek
Yes they are not common and are also quite expensive so when I saw one in excellent condition well below the normal asking price. I wrung my hands, told myself I was silly and not to do it, wept a little, turned my sporran upside down and shook a few bawbees (small denomination coins) out of it, mortgaged the cat and bought it before some other enterprising collector got to it before I did.
Tom, unfortunately I know the itch when one sees a hard-to-find lens. A few times I came across one, had no money to spare, and I convinced myself I did not need it, somebody else bought and I felt really bad for a long time like a kid deprived of promised candy.
The front optical block screws off in normal Komura style but the focusing element does not part in the middle "Sonnar-style" like many other Komura telephotos do. So this is one that I will have to cover new territory with. The Uni-adapter ends are supposedly exchangeable but removing the FD mount is not necessarily giving me access to the helicoid. I think I am going to have to find and remove the focus limit pin first (before I can even see the helicoid drives). As this is a short lens I am likely looking at least at a double nested helicoid - so it is best left to a long lazy day when I am not in a rush.
I envy you the understanding of the inner workings of lenses. I am so ignorant. But perhaps this stops me from buying more lenses - particularly ones I would need to work on a lot.

Best

Jarek
Jarek,

I now might have pulled apart and mostly repaired 30+ lenses (maybe quite a lot more as i have not been counting). It is a good mental vibration when success has been achieved and the lens may only have needed a good clean. But I have had some spectacular failures and have been tearing my hair out in frustration on quite a few occasions - even it I have glued the hair back on later when it suddenly “worked”.

I am no expert and every new-type lens is a bit of an aventure but I am gradually getting more experienced on figuring out the “way into” a lens which is usually the hardest part of the exercise. I usually spend a reasonable amount of time simply inspecting a lens and trying to work out the disassembly procedure before I even contemplate touching a tool or trying to unscrew anything.

Practice seems to be improving my chances and making me quicker but it can be a very frustrating exercise. Some lenses of course seem to be made in a way to discourage “amateur repair technicians”. Good tools, patience, mechanical sympathy and a tray to work within are essential.

The biggest issues are breaking or losing screws and slippage on, obstinate threaded, seemingly unremovable lock rings.

I have a “naughty box” of lenses that I need to try and fix when I get around to it - an inevitable by-product of buying second hand lenses.

I can be quoted: “If you buy enough old lenses then sooner of later you will have to become a lens mechanic”.
 
Australia seems to offer photo opportunities everywhere. Excellent.

By the way my wife's former boss is in Australia right now with her husband on a short trip. Today she sent an SMS to my wife: "We rented a car. I am scared to death. We are trying to adapt to wrong-side traffic".

Best

Jarek
Capital city traffic here is "as frantic" as anywhere. They need to get well out of the capital cities where the traffic might be easier to deal with. But they might not have enough time - it is a big country with big distances.

Tom
I found this old image taken with the Takumar 35/2 using a GXR and M mount module (adapted). 12mp aps-c.

[ATTACH alt="Australian "bush" it is not all dry and desolate"]1703570[/ATTACH]
Australian "bush" it is not all dry and desolate

--
Tom Caldwell


--
Tom Caldwell
 
I have found those Komura lenses tat are built to the Sonnar design principal fairly easy to work on and clean up.

The Sonnars screw apart in the middle by grabbing the lens barrel in both hands and simply screwing them apart. Left hand up right hand down. There is usually a bit of tightness that holds them in place but once released just keep screwing - then you should find focus mechanism in one hand and optical element in the other.

I am not absolutely sure but believe that all Sonnar design are basically built this way.

I know when it is wise not to did a deep hole though. I bought what seemed a perfect Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 90/3.5 in LTM for what seemed a fairly reasonable price. It was only a while afterwards that I noted that the front part of the barrel was loose in its mount - could be moved sideways. I diagnosed this as an internal guiding washer that had been displaced - I could see it (the problem) through the back of the lens but could not put it back into position without disassembling the lens. Which resisted all my efforts to get inside to do this. Glued in screws, etc. Voigtlander was not co-operative for amateur repair-men. In any case I sent it off to a professional to repair and it came back - cost $50 (and well worth that to get a perfect lens).
 
Indeed! I don't know this lens. Can you shed some light on it?

Jarek
A little checking shows it's probably from the Braun Paxette. Annoyingly, the register distance is just a mm or so less than M42, so it needs a custom helicoid to reach infinity.

Here's a picture of it mounted on the shorter M42 helicoid (using an M39-M42 ring). Doesn't look bad at all ?



64c55a1daf4242f3b80cdb6ceea60b08.jpg

 
Looks like a factory-made lens. Truly excellent job on this one.

Jarek
Indeed! I don't know this lens. Can you shed some light on it?

Jarek
A little checking shows it's probably from the Braun Paxette. Annoyingly, the register distance is just a mm or so less than M42, so it needs a custom helicoid to reach infinity.

Here's a picture of it mounted on the shorter M42 helicoid (using an M39-M42 ring). Doesn't look bad at all ?

64c55a1daf4242f3b80cdb6ceea60b08.jpg


--
 
Indeed! I don't know this lens. Can you shed some light on it?

Jarek
A little checking shows it's probably from the Braun Paxette. Annoyingly, the register distance is just a mm or so less than M42, so it needs a custom helicoid to reach infinity.

Here's a picture of it mounted on the shorter M42 helicoid (using an M39-M42 ring). Doesn't look bad at all ?

64c55a1daf4242f3b80cdb6ceea60b08.jpg
just like a bought one :-)

I now prefer macro helicoids to adapt most of my lenses since it increases the MFD anyway and I always know where the focusing ring is, something not consistent with the different brands/models of vintage lenses!
 
Tom, so far my failure rate has not exceeded what is economically viable, but mostly because I have not made too many attempts. About a year ago I tried to recover a Mirotar lens from a broken Minox camera and I failed so badly that I gave up in discouragement. But perhaps I started with a mission impossible task instead of trying something easier.

Jarek
I found that harvesting the Minotar was slightly more difficult than some simple lenses but adapting/refitting it was not too difficult

Back focus is rather short tho

Minotar 35mm f2.8 (from Minox) refitted for Micro 4/3
Minotar 35mm f2.8 (from Minox) refitted for Micro 4/3
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top