A quick question regarding bokeh favourites

[deednets]

Is there a list, like a top 10 of the best bokeh of all lenses currently available for Sony? With "best" I don't mean the most blur, but the best quality of the out of focus area when compared to the subject. The way the subject isolation "lifts" the technical quality of a shot.

Me personally, I think that there is a gentle roll-off that some lenses seem to master better than others. Dunno.




Batis 40/2 - loved the rendering, but didn't like the massive size, and no aperture ring!




Sigma 45/2.8 - my current favourite regarding OOF rendering!




Zeiss 35/2 Sonar (on RX1RII) BG a bit nervous at F4.0 but I still like it

Originally I though the GM 35/1.4 would be the best lens regarding bokeh within the 35//50 mm range, but must say that I didn't always like my shots:




Sony GM 35/1.4 F2 too flat IMO. This shot would have looked very different if I had taken it with an RX1




Sony GM 35/1.4 F2.8 again no sense of space, the BG more nah than yeah ...

I almost always liked the Zeiss 35/2 on the RX1 series:




Zeiss 35/2 F3.2 taken at an aperture slower than the 34/1.4 above. Looks photoshopped, right? But isn't.




Another Zeiss 35/2 at F3.2




There is a certain quality in those shots I personally like a lot: Zeiss 35/2 F2.8




Zeiss 35/2 F2.2

And another one with the GM 35/1.4:




Sony GM 35/1.4 F2.8




Sony 35/1.4 F2.8




Sony 34/1.4 F1.4 - the best of the 35/1.4 shots I could find

So, yeah the 35/1.4 can look ok, but on average I hardly ever managed to use it at the full potential, if that is the correct term to use? The Sigma 45/2.8 ridiculousness I found I could just use for whatever and for whatever reason I liked most shots much better than the 35/1.4.




Sigma 45/2.8, posted before but I really like the rendering

I also had the Sigma 35/2 DN DG, not a bad lens but I like the 45/2.8 and also the 90/2.8 better. So what I was wondering is whether a manual Voigtländer or an autofocus lens would maybe be better than the 35/1.4? Noticed some Pergear 35mm sample shots here and thought that those were quite good.

Regardless of price and reputation!

Deed

 

[Ralf B]

Asking as your sample shots are all in wide angle FL range. Ignoring this, I'd root for an adapted Sony/Minolta 135/2.8 STF A-Mount lens as the potential king of creamy bokeh. In native FE, the 100mm STF lens appears as an obvious choice.

And while thinking of adapting Sony/Minolta A-Mount legacy, I recall that their A-Mount 35/1.4 was never seen as the "sharpest" 35mm lens, but its bokeh was seen as a strong point. Same applies to the Minolta 85/1.4.

My 2 general cents. From own use, I love the A-Mount Minolta 85/1.4, the A-Mount CZ135/1.8 and the Sigma 35/2 DG DN.
Cheers,
Ralf

 

[ahaslett]

Interesting question, nice examples.

I recently compared my Sigma 35/2, adapted Tamron 35/1.4 SP & new Viltrox 35/1.2 LAB in a number of ways.

Shot from a tripod with MF where you can see critical focus, all at f2.2. The Tamron and Viltrox are more similar than the Sigma, which appears to be wider and have a smaller aperture than they do. All processed from RAW in C1 with identical settings.

View attachment 73b7df32acd54567a94956605757b2f0.jpg

View attachment 079a737aa7294f9f97f5a7474cad6c53.jpg

View attachment 555a78e3472443ce82fd79537764bf39.jpg

I'll leave people to draw their own conclusions.

A

--
Infinite are the arguments of mages. Truth is a jewel with many facets. Ursula K LeGuin
Please feel free to edit any images that I post

 

[deednets]

Asking as your sample shots are all in wide angle FL range. Ignoring this, I'd root for an adapted Sony/Minolta 135/2.8 STF A-Mount lens as the potential king of creamy bokeh. In native FE, the 100mm STF lens appears as an obvious choice.

And while thinking of adapting Sony/Minolta A-Mount legacy, I recall that their A-Mount 35/1.4 was never seen as the "sharpest" 35mm lens, but its bokeh was seen as a strong point. Same applies to the Minolta 85/1.4.

My 2 general cents. From own use, I love the A-Mount Minolta 85/1.4, the A-Mount CZ135/1.8 and the Sigma 35/2 DG DN.
Cheers,
Ralf

I guess I am looking for lenses where you can still identify the background as opposed to blurring everything into oblivion. My only zoom, the Tamron 70-300, can do that. Good fun, but not what I am after.

Might re-buy an RX1RII just for the lens and compactness or, just for fun, an A7CII and pair it with the Sigma 45?

Will checkout your lens suggestions, but generally feel that I am over older lenses. Had a look at a Pentax Super Takumar 50/1.4 but found in all available reviews that the bokeh was north of horrible. Thought I might get an El Cheapo Apo Lanthar, but, boy is there a difference in the oof quality???

Thanks for your response, I almost feel like Maoby here with my no traction near zero interest posts now and little to no interest in photos either. But life is good and my gear gets smaller plus no real urgency for any of my upcoming trips to try something new.

Deed

 

[MediaArchivist]

I have two E-mount favorites:

• 50/1.2GM
• 35/1.4GM

I don't (yet) own any other E mount lenses that I would list as a "bokeh favorite". As a previous poster noted, there are some A-mount lenses that are IHMO bokeh masters and in my experience work very well with an LA-EA5 on my a7Rv and a1ii:

• Minolta 35/1.4G (very subjective)
• Sigma 50/1.4 EX (not the Art version)
• Sigma 70/2.8 DG macro
• Sony 135 STF
• Zeiss 135/1.8
• Sigma 180/2.8 macro

 

[deednets]

I have two E-mount favorites:

• 50/1.2GM
• 35/1.4GM

I don't (yet) own any other E mount lenses that I would list as a "bokeh favorite". As a previous poster noted, there are some A-mount lenses that are IHMO bokeh masters and in my experience work very well with an LA-EA5 on my a7Rv and a1ii:

• Minolta 35/1.4G (very subjective)
• Sigma 50/1.4 EX (not the Art version)
• Sigma 70/2.8 DG macro
• Sony 135 STF
• Zeiss 135/1.8
• Sigma 180/2.8 macro

Thank you! Two questions:

1. is the STF Sony not a 100mm? F2.8 but the T-Stop is 5.6?
2. Any photos?? ;-)

I didn't specify this in my post but I am also interested in something kind-a-light and small-ish, volume wise. The 50/1.2 is a monster of a lens and the 35/1.4 I just sold as I wasn't convinced that the "look" it provided was what I was after.




Sony 35/1.4 I have seen better rendering, maybe a matter of taste but think the image has no potential, this might be a terrible job by the photographer of course




Sigma 45/2.8 I like the rendering of the green better and the OOF areas in general




Another example where I actually like the Sigma 45/2.8 better?? I know I shouldn't ... F2.8 and all that ;-)

Dunno maybe I am on the wrong track here, but since this is highly personal (regarding taste!) I will draw my own conclusions here.

Thanks again for your suggestions will google those lenses.

Deed

 

[bkkish84]

I have two E-mount favorites:

• 50/1.2GM
• 35/1.4GM

These are my E mount favorites, though I now prefer the Viltrox 35/1.2 LAB over the 35/1.4 GM.

I don't (yet) own any other E mount lenses that I would list as a "bokeh favorite". As a previous poster noted, there are some A-mount lenses that are IHMO bokeh masters and in my experience work very well with an LA-EA5 on my a7Rv and a1ii:

• Minolta 35/1.4G (very subjective)
• Sigma 50/1.4 EX (not the Art version)
• Sigma 70/2.8 DG macro
• Sony 135 STF
• Zeiss 135/1.8
• Sigma 180/2.8 macro

One of my all time favorites is the Nikon AF-S 58/1.4G which I use via a MonsterAdapter LA-FE1.

The trend nowadays seems to prioritize wide open sharpness. Don't get me wrong, nowadays bokeh particularly with Sony is nice but rarely 'wow'.

 

[LouMeluso]

Matter of taste, indeed.

I thought the OOF areas of my Samyang 35mm f/1.8 and 75mm f/1.8 looked pretty good for such small, light lenses.


Samyang 35mm f/1.8 @f/2.2


Samyang 75mm f/1.8 @f/2.5

 

[MediaArchivist]

These are my E mount favorites, though I now prefer the Viltrox 35/1.2 LAB over the 35/1.4 GM.

That lens is on my list, but less of a priority since I already have the Sony.

One of my all time favorites is the Nikon AF-S 58/1.4G which I use via a MonsterAdapter LA-FE1.

I assume you mean this one?
AF-S Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G

My recollection is that lens was panned in part due to poor performance on test charts. It was purposely designed with undercorrected spherical aberrations to achieve better bokeh.

The trend nowadays seems to prioritize wide open sharpness.

The Sigma 50/1.4 I listed was critiqued for just that, but I find the bokeh quite nice. The subsequent 50/1.4 Art scored very well on tests... but the bokeh was not as nice.

 

[MediaArchivist]

Thank you! Two questions:

1. is the STF Sony not a 100mm? F2.8 but the T-Stop is 5.6?

The E-mount version is different than the A-mount version, which is a rebranded Minolta lens.

Samples:









--
Want a roXplosion!?

 

[bkkish84]

These are my E mount favorites, though I now prefer the Viltrox 35/1.2 LAB over the 35/1.4 GM.

That lens is on my list, but less of a priority since I already have the Sony.

One of my all time favorites is the Nikon AF-S 58/1.4G which I use via a MonsterAdapter LA-FE1.

I assume you mean this one?
AF-S Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G

My recollection is that lens was panned in part due to poor performance on test charts. It was purposely designed with undercorrected spherical aberrations to achieve better bokeh.

The link didn't work but there is only 1 AF-S 58mm f/1.4G

The lens isn't that sharp that wide open at close distances (I think it's a unit focusing lens without floating elements) and there was the crazy launch price (I recall $1500+) so it wasn't a hit to say the least. I had one, sold it (when I got my 50/1.2 GM) and then nostalgia hit and bought a used one.... (D'OH!) Used prices are still ridiculously high...

The trend nowadays seems to prioritize wide open sharpness.

The Sigma 50/1.4 I listed was critiqued for just that, but I find the bokeh quite nice. The subsequent 50/1.4 Art scored very well on tests... but the bokeh was not as nice.

 

[vett93]

I almost always liked the Zeiss 35/2 on the RX1 series:


Zeiss 35/2 F3.2 taken at an aperture slower than the 34/1.4 above. Looks photoshopped, right? But isn't.

...

Is this a feature or a bug? It indeed looks to me like photoshopped, except not well done....

--
"Keep calm and take photos"
Photography enthusiast, from 12mm to 600mm

 

[deednets]

These are my E mount favorites, though I now prefer the Viltrox 35/1.2 LAB over the 35/1.4 GM.

That lens is on my list, but less of a priority since I already have the Sony.

One of my all time favorites is the Nikon AF-S 58/1.4G which I use via a MonsterAdapter LA-FE1.

I assume you mean this one?
AF-S Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G

My recollection is that lens was panned in part due to poor performance on test charts. It was purposely designed with undercorrected spherical aberrations to achieve better bokeh.

The link didn't work but there is only 1 AF-S 58mm f/1.4G

The lens isn't that sharp that wide open at close distances (I think it's a unit focusing lens without floating elements) and there was the crazy launch price (I recall $1500+) so it wasn't a hit to say the least. I had one, sold it (when I got my 50/1.2 GM) and then nostalgia hit and bought a used one.... (D'OH!) Used prices are still ridiculously high...

The trend nowadays seems to prioritize wide open sharpness.

The Sigma 50/1.4 I listed was critiqued for just that, but I find the bokeh quite nice. The subsequent 50/1.4 Art scored very well on tests... but the bokeh was not as nice.

Good rendering!

Thanks for posting!

Deed

 

[Ralf B]

Thanks for your response, I almost feel like Maoby here with my no traction near zero interest posts now and little to no interest in photos either.

Well, to comfort you, have a look at DPR's Panasonic S1IIE sample gallery - and then the number of comments posted:
2 (two) when I typed this, which is four days after that gallery went online.

OTOH, some appear to love to generate forum noise - no matter how often they made their point already - or lack any applied due dilligence.

And in general, this being a gear-focussed place, discussing pictures mostly happens only in context of discussing - well, gear. C&C on picture posts mostly happens in the form of likes.

In summary, I'd rather go for quality over quantity. I sometimes wonder why my ignore list remains empty, though.
Cheers,
Ralf

 

[MikeInOr]

Asking as your sample shots are all in wide angle FL range. Ignoring this, I'd root for an adapted Sony/Minolta 135/2.8 STF A-Mount lens as the potential king of creamy bokeh. In native FE, the 100mm STF lens appears as an obvious choice.

And while thinking of adapting Sony/Minolta A-Mount legacy, I recall that their A-Mount 35/1.4 was never seen as the "sharpest" 35mm lens, but its bokeh was seen as a strong point. Same applies to the Minolta 85/1.4.

My 2 general cents. From own use, I love the A-Mount Minolta 85/1.4, the A-Mount CZ135/1.8 and the Sigma 35/2 DG DN.
Cheers,
Ralf

I bought my Sony FE 100/2.8 STF GM lens used for a really good price. I don't understand why this lens isn't more popular. I love mine and use it frequently for portraits. I will usually grab the 100mm STF instead of my Rokinon 85mm/1.4 which is another very sharp lens with pleasing bokeh. I also love my "Twist 60" lensbaby petzl lens for its swirly bokeh but the swirly bokeh isn't appropriate near as often as the more normal and expected bokeh of the 100/2.8 STF or 85/1.4.

I was looking for the Minolta 135 STF for a good price when I found the FE 100 STF at a great price and jumped on it. "For me" the 100mm focal is more useful than a 135mm focal length.

Wikipedia:

The Smooth Trans Focus (STF) technology in photographic lenses uses an apodization filter to realize notably smooth bokeh with rounded out-of-focus highlights in both the foreground and background. This is accomplished by utilizing a concave neutral-gray tinted lens element next to the aperture blades as apodization filter, a technology originally invented (and patented) by Minolta in the 1980s, and first implemented in a commercially available lens in 1999. In contrast to soft focus lenses, STF lenses render a perfectly sharp image in the focus plane.

Both the Minolta 135mm and Sony 100mm GM lenses are F2.8. I believe the apodization filter enables a focus fall off at a faster rate... like a wider ~F1.8 or so lens.

 

[panther fan]

If its just about Bokeh quality an nothing else

1. Obviously the Sony 100mm F2.8 STF. "Only" F4 DoF and F5.6 light gathering but absolutely perfect bokeh. You will find no lens with technically better bokeh. Zero cats eyes, perfect linear bokeh gradient, trumps everything else

2. Sigma 65mm DG DN F2. Absolutely the best lens in the I-series, both in terms of general IQ, but also in terms of bokeh

3. Sony 85mm F1.4 GM (version I). Designed to minimize cat eyes, and with uncorrected spherical aberration despite all its other flaws the only other GM purely optimized for bokeh

4. Sigma 45mm F2.8. Really maximizes uncorrected spherical aberration. So great bokeh quality. Just not enough of it at 45mm, and has all the downsides of an uncorrected lens

5. Sony 24mm GM & 50mm F1.2 GM. Clean modern bokeh, so no super special charcter, but at least the very best execution of modern Bokeh in sharpness optimized lenses

PS: All your favourite shots have a well lit subject against a dark background, and all the ones you dislike have a darker subject against a brighter background. So maybe you just like the contrast better.

 

[thunder storm]

Is there a list, like a top 10 of the best bokeh of all lenses currently available for Sony? With "best" I don't mean the most blur, but the best quality of the out of focus area when compared to the subject. The way the subject isolation "lifts" the technical quality of a shot.

I think I like the Sigma 105mm f/1.4 Art at f/2.0 the most.

 

[ray_burnimage]

I’m not aware of any top ten list but my 2 favourites, bought for this exact purpose, are 50mm 1.2GM and 135mm 1.8GM. With 35mm 1.4GM deserving an “hounourable mention” in third place:





View attachment 4fafda2ccda24f198284c2803daf1fa3.jpg
135mm GM @ 1.8



View attachment 2c4a634018984654ae980347805661ce.jpg
50mm GM @ 1.2




35mm GM @ 1.4



--
Follow: https://www.instagram.com/ray_burnimage/

 

[Impulses]

Favorite and "best" aren't necessarily the same thing, after all, bokeh qualities are ultimately subjective. Your "more nah than yeah" may be the opposite for someone else... Without defining that, it's hard to suggest the best lenses or favorites that'll also appeal to you... I think your issues with the 35GM might go beyond it's actual rendering but I digress.

Personally, I like bokeh that's as smooth as possible, regardless of how shallow the DoF actually is as you said. The more smoothed out the background is the more the subject stands out IMO, but there's a few other things that play into that aspect too, higher contrast at wide open apertures can help too (though that's easier to massage in post).

Things like optical vignetting and field curvature play into it too, the former leads to cat eye's bokeh in the corners (which some find distracting, some are ambivalent about, and some actually like the effect when it's more pronounced and swirly), the latter can lead to in focus edges that don't correspond to the aperture used (because the field of focus curves back out, or if it curves back in it could help).

I find that it helps to talk about all those specific things rather than going "yeah this lens has that special something and that one doesn't", even if that's true at times. There's a lot more things one can point to but they're often treated too ambiguously. Spherical aberrations and astigmatism can lead to double edges or the so called nisen bokeh, but at the same time a small dose of SA can soften up things nicely.

Even LoCA can make bokeh busier as it adds obvious outlines, but some lenses that are highly corrected for it (eg Voigtlander APOs) don't have the creamiest bokeh either. Ultimately, the biggest factor tends to be how you frame and position subjects, distance to them and the background will often matter a lot more than any lens trait... But when you have no control over that or when you're looking for that last degree of perfection, an ideal lens can help.

https://phillipreeve.net/blog/bokeh-explained/

I'd say the 85GM is high on the list, as are the 35/50 f1.2 Voigtlander Noktons, TTArtisan's 50/1.4, reviews of Sirui's semi recent 85/1.4 Aurora have impressed me in that regard, the Viltrox 35/1.2 LAB seems to have a small edge on the 35GM in this regard without some of the sacrifices that the Sigma 35/1.2 DN made to get there (most notably in flare handling), the 50/1.2 GM surely belongs on the list too, I think Samyang's and Viltrox's 135/1.8 have a small edge on the GM when it comes to bokeh too (less cat's eye).

Edit: From what I remember the Viltrox 85/1.8 also looked better than most other 85s including Sony, so did the TTArtisan 75/2 but the Viltrox looks better than that one still. I also think it's easier to nail really smooth bokeh on an 85 or 50 than on a 35 or wider.

I think the Sigma 45/2.8 DN earns a place on the list, though it might make more sacrifices than others to achieve smooth rendering (but they're sacrifices that seem relatively easy to live with). Outside of the manual Noktons, all the other lenses I've mentioned are larger, the 45/2.8 had a different design goal than most small modern AF lenses. I dunno that it's outright better than the 35GM in that regard, but I think that requires side by side shots to determine rather than a grab bag of shots over time or a subjective impression (no offense, I think lens size and how it's used and other stuff plays into the shots you'll take/get too FWIW).

I bought the TTArtisan 50/1.4 largely for it's rendering, as well as the CV 21/3.5. I think the Sony 20G & 24GM are underrated in this aspect, they do a few subtle things (excellent CA correction, good flare handling, really flat field, almost no cat's eye on the 20G) that other manufacturers' fast wides aren't doing or aren't matching anywhere to the same degree, that's part of why I like using the 20G as a pseudo 30/2.7 in crop mode.

Sometimes when you crop you magnify a lens' flaws and that's particularly true of bokeh rendering, so lenses with smoother backgrounds and less flaws lend themselves better to that, it's not just about sharpness (which is the most over analyzed aspect of any lens, regardless of use case). There's probably loads more lenses that could make the short list, the big question is what sacrifices they make for nice bokeh (however you define that).

Manual lenses are making an obvious sacrifice, shedding AF allows them to use different designs and heavier focus groups, that can also make them smaller though. eg the tiny TTArtisan 50/2 is far from the sharpest in the group but I think it actually has nicer rendering (and better CA correction) than the Sony 40/50G, Samyang 45/1.8, or Viltrox 50/2 Air. Most zooms make a sacrifice here to some extent...

Some people count sunstars and flare handling under "rendering", some don't, when talking about bokeh those things can get conflated and some of the lenses with great (by my definition, ie the smoothest) bokeh can also have fatal flaws when it comes to those other aspects. The TTArtisan 50/1.4 flares terribly at f1.4 but stopping down to f1.7 helps it a ton, some lenses introduce more flaring ghosts as they're stopped down... All this is decidedly not a black and white matter.

TL;DR: Define what you think is the preferable/optimal bokeh before starting this conversation (I have a sense of what your preference is based on past convos but many won't), then an actual shortlist of favorites can follow. People that like swirly bokeh or bokeh balls with well defined and etched outlines won't like any of the lenses I suggested for instance, they may prefer something else from vintage stuff to modern options with a different emphasis.

Edit: A lot of vintage lenses can have great bokeh but I feel like most make more sacrifices to get there (than modern stuff, regardless of whether it's AF or MF), and a good chunk of vintage lenses seem to be sought out for funkier bokeh with more obvious traits that stand out rather than the smoothest rendering... There's some not so vintage stuff that stands out tho, eg Sigma's 105/1.4, what a beast tho (in every sense bokeh beast, massive lens physically, etc.).

Edit #2: Background bokeh can also differ massively from foreground bokeh, most lenses are more optimized for the former since it's the more common use case but sometimes you do have OOF elements in the background. Sorry about the wall of text, I'm sure someone is grumbling about the lack of pics, but TBH I find that some posters also share a lot of pics and don't actually see the same things in them that I do...

 

[Impulses]

Asking as your sample shots are all in wide angle FL range. Ignoring this, I'd root for an adapted Sony/Minolta 135/2.8 STF A-Mount lens as the potential king of creamy bokeh. In native FE, the 100mm STF lens appears as an obvious choice.

And while thinking of adapting Sony/Minolta A-Mount legacy, I recall that their A-Mount 35/1.4 was never seen as the "sharpest" 35mm lens, but its bokeh was seen as a strong point. Same applies to the Minolta 85/1.4.

My 2 general cents. From own use, I love the A-Mount Minolta 85/1.4, the A-Mount CZ135/1.8 and the Sigma 35/2 DG DN.
Cheers,
Ralf

I bought my Sony FE 100/2.8 STF GM lens used for a really good price. I don't understand why this lens isn't more popular. I love mine and use it frequently for portraits. I will usually grab the 100mm STF instead of my Rokinon 85mm/1.4 which is another very sharp lens with pleasing bokeh. I also love my "Twist 60" lensbaby petzl lens for its swirly bokeh but the swirly bokeh isn't appropriate near as often as the more normal and expected bokeh of the 100/2.8 STF or 85/1.4.

I was looking for the Minolta 135 STF for a good price when I found the FE 100 STF at a great price and jumped on it. "For me" the 100mm focal is more useful than a 135mm focal length.

Wikipedia:

The Smooth Trans Focus (STF) technology in photographic lenses uses an apodization filter to realize notably smooth bokeh with rounded out-of-focus highlights in both the foreground and background. This is accomplished by utilizing a concave neutral-gray tinted lens element next to the aperture blades as apodization filter, a technology originally invented (and patented) by Minolta in the 1980s, and first implemented in a commercially available lens in 1999. In contrast to soft focus lenses, STF lenses render a perfectly sharp image in the focus plane.

Both the Minolta 135mm and Sony 100mm GM lenses are F2.8. I believe the apodization filter enables a focus fall off at a faster rate... like a wider ~F1.8 or so lens.

I think they have a unique look, I was tempted by the 100/2.8 STF a few times but idk if in practice I'd prefer carrying it to a 135/1.8... The apodization filter doesn't just soften the background, it shapes some things and renders a diffused look to highlights... I think some people chase a similar (tho far less elegant) effect with the mist filters.