howiebrou Posted March 6, 2019 Share #41 Posted March 6, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) 10 hours ago, a.noctilux said: Has anyone done "apo 35mm" for 135 format yet ? APO-Summicron SL 35mm Asph Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 6, 2019 Posted March 6, 2019 Hi howiebrou, Take a look here 35mm Noctilux Lens. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
alan.y Posted March 6, 2019 Share #42 Posted March 6, 2019 15 hours ago, a.noctilux said: Has anyone done "apo 35mm" for 135 format yet ? Leica just did! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
a.noctilux Posted March 6, 2019 Share #43 Posted March 6, 2019 (edited) 👍 for Leica Marketing Mastering "Apo-asph. Masterpieces" "... a total of 13 elements ..." Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ... 🎲maybe the second "full frame Apo 35mm" could be "Apo-Noctilux-M 1/35 asph." then. Time for me to begin selling some "not use gear" while waiting for this ultimate Nocti 😉 Edited March 6, 2019 by a.noctilux Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ... 🎲maybe the second "full frame Apo 35mm" could be "Apo-Noctilux-M 1/35 asph." then. Time for me to begin selling some "not use gear" while waiting for this ultimate Nocti 😉 ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/294847-35mm-noctilux-lens/?do=findComment&comment=3696292'>More sharing options...
jaeger Posted March 6, 2019 Share #44 Posted March 6, 2019 (edited) It would be a big, heavy and expensive approach. Wouldn't it be a better approach to improve the "usable ISO" for 2 stops then a 35mm lux will become a 35mm Noct. Edited March 6, 2019 by jaeger Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMAL Posted March 6, 2019 Share #45 Posted March 6, 2019 vor 11 Stunden schrieb dkmoore: Agreed but most likely they would take a similar design approach, perfect. Are 35s any less prone to aberrations than a 75mm (serious question)? I agree. Wide angles are more prone to abberations. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted March 6, 2019 Share #46 Posted March 6, 2019 1 hour ago, jaeger said: It would be a big, heavy and expensive approach. Wouldn't it be a better approach to improve the "usable ISO" for 2 stops then a 35mm lux will become a 35mm Noct. I think modern cameras already have good enough ISO capabilities to shoot in available light. But ISO can not make shallower DOF! That's why we still want fast lenses. 😉 But I'm sure it will be expensive, and probably too big for my taste. However, I would pay anything for small Noctilux! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaeger Posted March 6, 2019 Share #47 Posted March 6, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) 5 hours ago, evikne said: modern cameras already have good enough ISO capabilities to shoot in available light. M doesn't stands for modern. 5 hours ago, evikne said: shallower DOF the biggest enemy of bokeh/DOF is wide angel lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 6, 2019 Share #48 Posted March 6, 2019 1 minute ago, jaeger said: the biggest enemy of bokeh/DOF is wide angel lenses. That is intriguing. Would you please elaborate? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted March 6, 2019 Share #49 Posted March 6, 2019 5 minutes ago, jaeger said: the biggest enemy of bokeh/DOF is wide angel lenses. With 35mm at f/1.4–2.0 and a proper relation between foreground and background one can still achieve lots of bokeh. Actually I find such "wide angle bokeh" especially fascinating. And at f/1.0 it would be even better! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 6, 2019 Share #50 Posted March 6, 2019 Both the 21 & 28 Summiluxes can provide intersting bokeh, if used with care. The 21 is Not as sharp as the 28 wide open, but not bad. Granted, as Evikne says, you need to be close enough to your subject to get the benefit of the shallow dof, but it is easily achievable. Jono’s test shots with the 28 amply demonstrate this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frame-it Posted March 6, 2019 Share #51 Posted March 6, 2019 (edited) On 3/5/2019 at 3:09 AM, mikeamosau said: Depends on what is considered a 35mm Noctilux...f/0.95, f1.0, f1.25? All would have a big effects on the size. I personally hope it would be at least f/1.0 That Zenit thing is a bit of a monster. Has there been any images posted that were taken with that lens? https://www.thephoblographer.com/2018/09/27/first-impressions-zenit-m-digital-rangefinder-camera/ https://www.cinema5d.com/zenit-m-with-35mm-f-1-0-lens-russian-legendary-brand-enters-digital-age-interview-and-footage/ Edited March 6, 2019 by frame-it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaeger Posted March 6, 2019 Share #52 Posted March 6, 2019 2 hours ago, pico said: That is intriguing. Would you please elaborate? it's as simple as I said, I can't elaborate more. Or you are picking on my typo? "angle" ok? IkarusJohn is correct but ONLY if the subject is close enough. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaeger Posted March 6, 2019 Share #53 Posted March 6, 2019 2 hours ago, evikne said: With 35mm at f/1.4–2.0 and a proper relation between foreground and background one can still achieve lots of bokeh. Actually I find such "wide angle bokeh" especially fascinating. And at f/1.0 it would be even better! Yes again if the subject is close enough. If you really like bokeh why don't you pick up a 50Lux or tele lens, it is a real question and not being sarcastic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 7, 2019 Share #54 Posted March 7, 2019 There’s something curious about the wide angle of view and shallow depth of field. Maybe it’s a cliché like landscapes with everything in focus, moving water like mist in some ethereal Celtic movie or telephotos with just a little in focus? My preference is for the subject to be in focus and for the “effect” not to be the main purpose of the image. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted March 7, 2019 Share #55 Posted March 7, 2019 7 hours ago, jaeger said: If you really like bokeh why don't you pick up a 50Lux or tele lens, it is a real question and not being sarcastic. OK, I'll try to explain. Of course I use longer focal lengths too. 50 mm is my favorite. I have both Summilux and Noctilux, and a 75 mm Summilux. But for some reason I think the bokeh from tele lenses longer than that look mostly boring. Maybe because our subconsciousness tells us that "everybody" can achieve a blurred background with a tele lens. And maybe for the same reason I think wide angle bokeh is especially attractive and fascinating: The combination of wide angle and shallow DOF it is less common and more difficult to achieve. You preferably need a FF camera and a fast wide angle prime lens, you must be close to your subject, and the subject needs some distance to the background. And the background also needs certain qualities to give a pleasant bokeh effect. I also often like the dramatic perspective when going up close with a wide angle lens. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaeger Posted March 9, 2019 Share #56 Posted March 9, 2019 you seem to answered your own question and verified my answer too. The conclusion is that two F steps wouldn't give you much bokeh in wide angle. Anyway, you can google "toy city" image to see how it would look. It's kind funny but was that similar to what you are looking for? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMAL Posted March 10, 2019 Share #57 Posted March 10, 2019 vor 14 Stunden schrieb jaeger: you seem to answered your own question and verified my answer too. The conclusion is that two F steps wouldn't give you much bokeh in wide angle. Anyway, you can google "toy city" image to see how it would look. It's kind funny but was that similar to what you are looking for? In my opinion you can see every stop more in a wide angle, while the effect on a Tele lens doesn’t change that drastic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 10, 2019 Share #58 Posted March 10, 2019 (edited) On 3/7/2019 at 2:20 AM, evikne said: The combination of wide angle and shallow DOF it is less common and more difficult to achieve. 24mm lens at ƒ2.8 Edited March 10, 2019 by pico 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkmoore Posted March 10, 2019 Share #59 Posted March 10, 2019 53 minutes ago, pico said: 24mm lens at ƒ2.8 very nice and good example for this thread. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted March 10, 2019 Share #60 Posted March 10, 2019 Here's another. It's from Jono's review of the APO SL 35/2.0. He shot mostly at f/2.0 . I have plenty of 24/2.8's some of which show nice OOF areas, but they not as poetic as the link just above. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now