Most beautiful rendering

[smith-jones]

FD mount, adapted to Sony FE with a cheap dumb adapter and double adapted to Nikon Z6 with Megadap adapter.

I really love this old lens and it was one I spent years trying to find.

They were always out of my price range or had fungus when I could find them (mostly from Japan) until I got this one cheap near mint on Ebay Australia a few years ago.

The thing is a lot of photos with it are horrible but the ones I get that I like, I really like and it shines as a portrait lens (though again a lot of misses among the hits).

The issue might just be me and focusing it.

I took a couple of dozen shots with it this morning and this is the only one I kept and only kept it to show the background rendering.

120MM at 2.8

My FD to E adapter I mostly use with it is a helicoid one as the lens does not focus the closest.

 

[fferreres]

Pretty nice!

 

[left eye]

Just arrived today. Same as other FF 50-58mm vintage lenses I have, it heavily vignettes with infinity focused landscapes (on a medium format GFX), but for closer subjects that's where these lenses give more positively and generously.

I bought this (relatively expensive) lens to feed my weird bokeh habit - though I didn't expect the 'alien-weird' of when I zoomed in on the first tests I made of a near subject. A sundial with a very bright reflecting water surface...





...no vignette correction applied, nor any clarity boost etc, just the soft glow as is.

Ok the background OOF bokeh is nice (or perhaps spooky nice), but it's the OOF specular foreground that really interests me.

A 100% crop of alien-weird 'Dali clock' beautiful, worth checking out at original size...



- this must be the fingerprint of the internal optics - in this that's what I like about vintage optics, seeing inside them when photographing what's outside them.

 

[fferreres]

A 100% crop of alien-weird 'Dali clock' beautiful, worth checking out at original size...



- this must be the fingerprint of the internal optics - in this that's what I like about vintage optics, seeing inside them when photographing what's outside them.

This is so unusual. Not sure what is going on.

 

[D Cox]

Back in the 1970s I was using a Topcon Super D as my main camera, so I have a few lenses. They all give nice images, especially (in my opinion) the 58mm Macro. I wish I had a couple more Topcon lenses.



It works well for normal distances, too.

Subtly different from the 55mm Micro-Nikkor (which is also very good).

Don Cox

 

[fferreres]

Back in the 1970s I was using a Topcon Super D as my main camera, so I have a few lenses. They all give nice images, especially (in my opinion) the 58mm Macro. I wish I had a couple more Topcon lenses.



It works well for normal distances, too.

Subtly different from the 55mm Micro-Nikkor (which is also very good).

Don Cox

I like these a lot, they render with high integrity for trying to use words, to the point I don't even recall how I ended up with 3 copies. A simple Xenotar like the Micro Nikkor, renders differently, and can't compete with ultra high res modern ones, to its advantage.

 

[simple-joy]

Back in the 1970s I was using a Topcon Super D as my main camera, so I have a few lenses. They all give nice images, especially (in my opinion) the 58mm Macro. I wish I had a couple more Topcon lenses.



It works well for normal distances, too.

Subtly different from the 55mm Micro-Nikkor (which is also very good).

Don Cox

Looks great! Do you have any images with more out-of-focus that you shot with this lens? Would be really interesting to see.

--
Experimenting manual lens enthusiast.

simple.joy

Explore simple.joy’s 4,274 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[D Cox]

You can see some bokeh here. Hexagons do tend to appear.





Don

 

[backsidewalkaround]

Back in the 1970s I was using a Topcon Super D as my main camera, so I have a few lenses. They all give nice images, especially (in my opinion) the 58mm Macro. I wish I had a couple more Topcon lenses.

It works well for normal distances, too.

Subtly different from the 55mm Micro-Nikkor (which is also very good).

Don Cox

Looks great! Do you have any images with more out-of-focus that you shot with this lens? Would be really interesting to see.

How about this one?


Fall(en) - Topcon RE Macro Auto Topcor 3.5/58



--
Flickr
TheOtherSideOfBokeh

 

[simple-joy]

You can see some bokeh here. Hexagons do tend to appear.

Excellent - thanks a lot!

Back in the 1970s I was using a Topcon Super D as my main camera, so I have a few lenses. They all give nice images, especially (in my opinion) the 58mm Macro. I wish I had a couple more Topcon lenses.

It works well for normal distances, too.

Subtly different from the 55mm Micro-Nikkor (which is also very good).

Don Cox

Looks great! Do you have any images with more out-of-focus that you shot with this lens? Would be really interesting to see.

How about this one?


Fall(en) - Topcon RE Macro Auto Topcor 3.5/58

That's really beautiful - thank you very much!

--
Experimenting manual lens enthusiast.

simple.joy

Explore simple.joy’s 4,274 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[Cerridwen]

Is there such thing?

Simply, no. Beauty is subjective, however generalizations exist.

 

[backsidewalkaround]

Although I'm quite late to the party, I'd like to add a suggestion. I own the Tamron SP 2.8/30 (60B), which I hardly ever take along (because it is big and gives me a lot of unwanted looks and heavy - so not something I'll usually be taking on my bike trips), but whenever I use it it gives me magical images. It's sharp in the center at f/2.8 (not like the Contax 100-300, but very good). It's not a landscape lens, but it doesn't need to be, although it is also able to deliver, if stopped down enough.
The magic may only be, because that's what every 2.8/300 will do (I only have this one), but this certainly is a good one and quite affordable (at least it was for me).
I won't share portraits of my family (unless more or less unrecognizable), but hope that you still like what I give you. It's about the rendering after all.







--
Flickr
TheOtherSideOfBokeh

 

[Mike Micro 43]

Is there such thing? What lenses, really the one you think best represent beautiful rendering, are your most precious glass? Pictures of the lens encouraged along with some sample image.

If beautiful equates to super-soft bokeh I suggest the ISCO Ultra-Star HD-Plus projection lenses (the red ones F/1.85):

Mike.


ISCO Ultra-Star HD-Plus 80mm


ISCO Ultra-Star HD-Plus 95mm

Also the Schneider-Kreuznach Cine-Xenon F/2 range have astonishing 3D-pop (whatever that is):


Schneider-Kreuznach Cine-Xenon 60mm


Schneider-Kreuznach Cine-Xenon 55mm

 

[fferreres]

Is there such thing? What lenses, really the one you think best represent beautiful rendering, are your most precious glass? Pictures of the lens encouraged along with some sample image.

If beautiful equates to super-soft bokeh I suggest the ISCO Ultra-Star HD-Plus projection lenses (the red ones F/1.85):

Mike.

Also the Schneider-Kreuznach Cine-Xenon F/2 range have astonishing 3D-pop (whatever that is):


Schneider-Kreuznach Cine-Xenon 55mm

Wow, these look amazing. A great choice for those on M43 (except the ISCO, is that one FF?!). I don't have any of these lenses, but I DO have this Cat Model, serial number places it around 2018.


Micro Tiger Classic circa 2018 version - made with Summicron v1

 

[Mike Micro 43]

Is there such thing? What lenses, really the one you think best represent beautiful rendering, are your most precious glass? Pictures of the lens encouraged along with some sample image.

If beautiful equates to super-soft bokeh I suggest the ISCO Ultra-Star HD-Plus projection lenses (the red ones F/1.85):

Mike.

Also the Schneider-Kreuznach Cine-Xenon F/2 range have astonishing 3D-pop (whatever that is):


Schneider-Kreuznach Cine-Xenon 55mm

Wow, these look amazing. A great choice for those on M43 (except the ISCO, is that one FF?!). I don't have any of these lenses, but I DO have this Cat Model, serial number places it around 2018.


Micro Tiger Classic circa 2018 version - made with Summicron v1

Very nice! Looks like a lovely cat taken with a lovely lens...

Mike.

 

[fferreres]

Is there such thing? What lenses, really the one you think best represent beautiful rendering, are your most precious glass? Pictures of the lens encouraged along with some sample image.

If beautiful equates to super-soft bokeh I suggest the ISCO Ultra-Star HD-Plus projection lenses (the red ones F/1.85):

Mike.

Also the Schneider-Kreuznach Cine-Xenon F/2 range have astonishing 3D-pop (whatever that is):


Schneider-Kreuznach Cine-Xenon 55mm

Wow, these look amazing. A great choice for those on M43 (except the ISCO, is that one FF?!). I don't have any of these lenses, but I DO have this Cat Model, serial number places it around 2018.


Micro Tiger Classic circa 2018 version - made with Summicron v1

Very nice! Looks like a lovely cat taken with a lovely lens...

Mike.

The Summicron v1 is also a very nice lens, with weird nutcase bat-crazy swirly mood, showing the element in 3D at an angle like in crescent moon. Instead of just a cats eyes, it's like cats eye in 3 dimensions). And also features little spherical, like a modern lens but laoded with bokeh charm (for good or bad). It's really like the baby of the swirlest of Helios with a modern macro (lower resolution, but a flat disc for f3)

 

[smith-jones]

Although I'm quite late to the party, I'd like to add a suggestion. I own the Tamron SP 2.8/30 (60B), which I hardly ever take along (because it is big and gives me a lot of unwanted looks and heavy - so not something I'll usually be taking on my bike trips), but whenever I use it it gives me magical images. It's sharp in the center at f/2.8 (not like the Contax 100-300, but very good). It's not a landscape lens, but it doesn't need to be, although it is also able to deliver, if stopped down enough.
The magic may only be, because that's what every 2.8/300 will do (I only have this one), but this certainly is a good one and quite affordable (at least it was for me).
I won't share portraits of my family (unless more or less unrecognizable), but hope that you still like what I give you. It's about the rendering after all.

Yes, my 300 2.8 adaptall I mentioned earlier is the 60B

It is actually still probably the LIGHTEST 300 2.8 made (or at least that I can find so far).

I keep meaning to add photos from it with my Nikon Z6 but here are some older shot with my Sony A7s. (and NEX-3n).

I have used it across formats and brands for a couple of decades now and it was dropped some years ago and made changing adaptalls very hard so i know just leave it with a Nikon adaptall and then have a F to EF adapter and then a EF to E adapter for the Sony and when i use it on the Z6 I add another adapter!!!!

 

[backsidewalkaround]

Although I'm quite late to the party, I'd like to add a suggestion. I own the Tamron SP 2.8/30 (60B), which I hardly ever take along (because it is big and gives me a lot of unwanted looks and heavy - so not something I'll usually be taking on my bike trips), but whenever I use it it gives me magical images. It's sharp in the center at f/2.8 (not like the Contax 100-300, but very good). It's not a landscape lens, but it doesn't need to be, although it is also able to deliver, if stopped down enough.
The magic may only be, because that's what every 2.8/300 will do (I only have this one), but this certainly is a good one and quite affordable (at least it was for me).
I won't share portraits of my family (unless more or less unrecognizable), but hope that you still like what I give you. It's about the rendering after all.

Yes, my 300 2.8 adaptall I mentioned earlier is the 60B

It is actually still probably the LIGHTEST 300 2.8 made (or at least that I can find so far).

I keep meaning to add photos from it with my Nikon Z6 but here are some older shot with my Sony A7s. (and NEX-3n).

I have used it across formats and brands for a couple of decades now and it was dropped some years ago and made changing adaptalls very hard so i know just leave it with a Nikon adaptall and then have a F to EF adapter and then a EF to E adapter for the Sony and when i use it on the Z6 I add another adapter!!!!

Nice shots, there. Yes the 60B is definitely a keeper and a charmer too with beautiful bokeh. I've had it for about 5 years now and have left it on the bench for too long. This thread reminded me to take it out more often.
I put it on my camera without one of the old adaptalls, so no adapter stacking necessary.
In my experience quite a few of the old adaptall-adapters are a bit problematic, because they have been abused and don't fit perfectly anymore. So I'm glad I don't need them on my Sony cameras.

--
Flickr
TheOtherSideOfBokeh

 

[simple-joy]

Is there such thing? What lenses, really the one you think best represent beautiful rendering, are your most precious glass? Pictures of the lens encouraged along with some sample image.

If beautiful equates to super-soft bokeh I suggest the ISCO Ultra-Star HD-Plus projection lenses (the red ones F/1.85):

Mike.

Very impressive shots. Excellent work with both of those lenses! I have a Isco Ultra-Star HD (Blue Star) and while that isn't bad in terms of sharpness and rendering, it shows significantly more CAs than your images suggest the Red Star lenses do. Are they equivalent to the Schneider Cinelux?

 

[simple-joy]

Because of the great shots with Cine-Projection lenses shown here, I also wanted to mention my favorite slide-projection lenses so far in terms of rendering:

One is the Braun Ultralit PL 90 mm f/2.4:

Prison with a view

https://flic.kr/p/2nGRXd7

Ultralit grass

https://flic.kr/p/2nGW3td

Feeling punny today?

https://flic.kr/p/2nGW2ZT

the other one the Braun Ultralit PL 90 mm f/2.8 B-MC with variable aperture (aka Reflecta Agomar):

I select you!

https://flic.kr/p/2nNaue5

Yell out, color!

https://flic.kr/p/2nSoAfr

--
Experimenting manual lens enthusiast.

simple.joy

Explore simple.joy’s 4,274 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com