Modern or New Manual Lenses.

Jammy Dodger said:
A lovely set of pictures Alan; we search for perfection too much with lenses rather than producing gorgeous pictures like these, well done
Click to expand...

Very kind of you JD :D

I do have modern lenses but not the latest cutting edge ones. I do like smaller and lighter kit which is a big part of why I like to use these lenses.
 
Plain Nev said:
You're right. Last time I saw corners like that was on a Helios. :D
Click to expand...

That TTArtisan 50mm f2 displays optical issues and there's no getting away from that but it is tiny and only £79 from Amazon and only £56 from the Pergear site. I do wish the corners were better and I do wish that the vignetting wasn't so extreme but all that wont stop me using it and enjoying it.
 
Stephen L said:
Agreed. More often than not, we should concentrate on the spirit of the shot. Unless technical perfection is paramount, eg, scientific or architectural.
Click to expand...

The Pergear 35mm f1.4 has field curvature and it's soft at f1.4 but it is IMO very useable. The Syoptic 50mm f1.1 is a bit soft at f1.1 (no surprise there) and has corners that'd send people doing a decentring test into hysterics but it's a nice lens. The TTArtisan 50mm f2 is IMO the most compromised of the three Chinese lenses I have with epic vignetting and crazy corners and it's susceptible to flare (and that's partly why I bought it) but it also has good contrast and colour and sharpness and it is IMO just lovely to use.

As above, none of these lenses are going to suite people who demand the sort of across the frame performance and bokeh you'll get from a cutting edge Sony GM (or similar for Canon or Nikon) but if manual lens fun on a budget and in a tiny and cheap package is a part of the equation then any of these lenses are IMO well worth a look.

While I'm here. One more Pergear 35mm f1.4 picture.

Admiring the view...

DSC02680.jpg
 
woof woof said:
That TTArtisan 50mm f2 displays optical issues and there's no getting away from that but it is tiny and only £79 from Amazon and only £56 from the Pergear site. I do wish the corners were better and I do wish that the vignetting wasn't so extreme but all that wont stop me using it and enjoying it.
Click to expand...
Was that on your full frame Sony? Just thinking that a crop sensor might eliminate that.
 
Plain Nev said:
Was that on your full frame Sony? Just thinking that a crop sensor might eliminate that.
Click to expand...

Yes, on my FF A7.

On APS-C I'd imagine that the mushy corners and the vignetting would be pretty much non issues. Yes.

At one time a 50mm used to be my most used lens (on a Canon 5D) but these days I've gravitated more to 35mmm but I did used to use a 50mm a lot on my MFT cameras with an equiv 100mm FoV so I suppose 50mm on APS-C would be ok as long as you don't mind that 75mm equiv FoV and the loss of the wider end.

One big thing with these small Chinese lenses is that they remain small when you mount them on your camera as they don't need an adapter like a film era lens would. I suppose another plus is that you pretty much know what you're getting with these new lenses whereas buying a film era lens can be a bit of a lottery these days with some described as being in VGC in reality having fungus, sicking controls and general poor condition.
 
I can see I'm going to have to get out my 17mm TT Artisan lens. :D
 
Plain Nev said:
I can see I'm going to have to get out my 17mm TT Artisan lens. :D
Click to expand...

And post some pictures here of course :D

That's an attractive looking lens, I wish it was FF. If it was I'd have one.

I had a 17mm Tokina and a 19mm Vivitar I think they were f3.5 and 3.8 respectively. They were film era lenses, I sold them both a while back. The Vivitar is a gorgeous little thing but with a few issues the most glaring being a wavy distortion which was obvious in beach shots.
 
Last edited:
As I keep saying, if this was FF I'd buy one tomorrow :D
 
woof woof said:
A TTArtisan 50mm f2 picture taken at f2.

Mrs WW showing off her new top. It was a preset from a friend in Thailand so this picture will be zapped off to her.

View attachment 393706

Again, this is a lens which many will not consider and it does have issues the most obvious one visible here is the swirly mushy corners at wide apertures. There's also a lot of vignetting especially at wider apertures when focusing further away. These issues are unlikely to spoil every shot and may be acceptable trade offs against the very low price and the tiny packaging.
Click to expand...

The bokeh looks a little strange around her as well. It seems more pronounced just behind her compared to the top corners?
 
Edited out to declutter the thread.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I don't quite understand what you mean but it's possibly distance related. See here for an experts review, maybe the bokeh at different distances section may help but in all this remember that this is a cheap or even very cheap and probably simple lens :D

phillipreeve.net

Review: TTArtisan 50mm 2.0 - Return of the Nifty Fifty - phillipreeve.net

ContentsIntroductionSample ImagesDisclosureSpecificationsHandling / Build QualityVignettinglight falloffoptical vignettingcolor castSharpnessinfinity (42mp Sony A7rII)portrait distance 1.4 m distance (42mp Sony A7rII)close (0.6 m, 1:8.9, 42mp A7rII)Flare resistanceSun outside frameSun inside...
phillipreeve.net phillipreeve.net

Generally I think that the bokeh wide open is a country mile better than just about any film era 50mm f1.x I've owned. Other than that I think this sort of background is amongst the worst you can have if smooth bokeh is your aim.
Click to expand...

Sorry, probably wasn't explaining it very well. To me, the red square looks like more bokeh than the blue square, even though they seem to be the same distance away?


sample.jpg
 
gman said:
Sorry, probably wasn't explaining it very well. To me, the red square looks like more bokeh than the blue square, even though they seem to be the same distance away?


View attachment 393997
Click to expand...
I must confess I hadn’t noticed this till you mentioned it, but it is quite strange. But then, bokeh seldom bothers me.
 
Edited out to declutter the thread.
 
Last edited:
Aye probably a combination of things, it was just something that stood out to me so I thought it worth a mention.

When I follow the tree line against the sky from left to right I can see it shifting quite harshly there as well and whilst there are distances at play here, something about it looks unnatural. Same when I looking at the top right tree and then as I bring my eye down the tree the bokeh seems to get stronger. Of course as you say it's a £56 lens, but it would be interesting to see the same shot with a similar Sony GM lens or something?
 
Edited out to declutter the thread.
 
Last edited:
Pergear 35mm f1.4. I couldn't get any closer. I took this picture and then inched forward but away they flew.

DSC02641.jpg

100%.

DSC02641-c.jpg

I cant remember if I took this with peaking or the magnified view but whilst my eyes last the focus is good and easy enough for me :D

Something occurred to me recently.

I used to take a lot of pictures with a 50mm at f5 so I'm going to give 35mm and f3.5 or there abouts a good go for a similar but 35mm look (50/5=10mm, 35/3.5=10mm.) Some lenses don't have enough markings to be completely sure what setting you're at but a notch below f4 will do :D
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
The most obvious difference at the skyline is that the tree tops in the centre are clearly further away. I think the differences here are down to distance and lighting and colour and contrast and to me it does look natural. Looking up and down rather than across again I'm not seeing anything clearly unnatural rather than a result of all of the above but I am familiar with the place and have photographed it many times, your opinion does clearly vary. If there is anything here due just to the lens it should be visible in other picture too at least to a degree and I don't think it is.

This is not a criticism of you but just generally on this site over the years I've seen various criticism of the bokeh in pictures I've taken especially when they include messy foliage and the like but I don't remember anyone ever posting similar pictures for comparison that look better (if they've posted any at all and usually they don't) and by similar I mean at the same aperture with similar scenes, backgrounds and relationships. You can't compare even two 50mm shots if they're at different apertures or of different scenes.

Comparing this lens to larger and more expensive modern lenses at f2 is IMO pretty pointless as the modern ones are going to be better in just about every respect. Comparing it to film era 50mm f1.4's and f1.8's seems a better comparison and I have a few of both. Compared to those I think this lens probably has the least nervous bokeh at f2 or at whatever aperture the film era lenses can do around f2 apart from the very obvious smeary and darker corners. The lens isn't massively decentred and it doesn't seem to display significant field curvature or significant optical vignetting or any other optical issue except the swirly dark corners. The main things with this lens are IMO that it's tiny and cheap and for some uses good enough :D
Click to expand...

To me the tree on the right looks almost sharp at the very top when compared to the bottom of it? There's just something about the bokeh in the background that caught my eye in that particular photo. The subsequent two photos are much tighter framed with the subject closer, so perhaps not ideal as a comparison, but the bokeh looks lovely in those.
 
Edited out to declutter the thread.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Why wouldn't it if it's in the background and pretty much on the same plane as to make little difference?

Looking at it at 100% the only real differences I can see is that the top of the tree is (at 100%) more of a blurry mess than the bottom and not sharper or even as sharp and yes those mushy corners are an issue with this lens. Also the bokeh balls are marginally smaller and distorted at the top corners of the picture and this is exactly what I'd expect to see as it's due to optical vignetting and you can see this in the examples in the review I linked above.

Overall I'm sorry but I just don't see the things you're seeing. I see differences at different points in the frame but I can see reasons for them which I've explained above and I don't see them as significant lens created issues. Apart from the mushy corners. Keeping in mind that this is a 50mm f2 and a cheap one I think that apart from the vignetting and mushy corners it's a good lens. Apparently it only just covers the FF frame.
Click to expand...

That's my point, it's on the same plane yet the bokeh at the top looks less pronounced that at the bottom.

Maybe it's the style of bokeh that certain lenses produce that's drawing my eye to it, it just seems different. The photo in post #32 (different lens?) also seems to draw my eye to the bokeh around the tree to the left, with a sort of swirl effect as well.
 
Edited out to declutter the thread.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I don't quite understand what you mean but it's possibly distance related. See here for an experts review, maybe the bokeh at different distances section may help but in all this remember that this is a cheap or even very cheap and probably simple lens :D

phillipreeve.net

Review: TTArtisan 50mm 2.0 - Return of the Nifty Fifty - phillipreeve.net

ContentsIntroductionSample ImagesDisclosureSpecificationsHandling / Build QualityVignettinglight falloffoptical vignettingcolor castSharpnessinfinity (42mp Sony A7rII)portrait distance 1.4 m distance (42mp Sony A7rII)close (0.6 m, 1:8.9, 42mp A7rII)Flare resistanceSun outside frameSun inside...
phillipreeve.net phillipreeve.net

Generally I think that the bokeh wide open is a country mile better than just about any film era 50mm f1.x I've owned. Other than that I think this sort of background is amongst the worst you can have if smooth bokeh is your aim.
Click to expand...

gman said:
Sorry, probably wasn't explaining it very well. To me, the red square looks like more bokeh than the blue square, even though they seem to be the same distance away?


View attachment 393997
Click to expand...

Almost looks like some excessive field curvature or something going on.
 
woof woof said:
I'm not convinced that field curvature is the significant and obvious thing here as if it is it'd be significant and obvious in other pictures and I don't think it is. I think "something going on" is the big thing here and I think there's a lot of somethings going on.

Looking at the lens and the example pictures here and in that review where field curvature only gets a "might also play its part" I can't see that it's high and clearly the cause, not like with the Pergear where it's clearly and obviously visible. What's more visible to me is the corner issues and coma and although optical vignetting is low it's clearly there. Other than that sharpness across the frame seems to be predictable and as expected to me until we get to the corners. Plus, have a look at this, it's a more side on shot. Here we can see that there's great variation in the direction of growth and depth and add to this colour and contrast and light and shape and I think this also has a large part in what you guys are focusing on.

I think it also has to be remembered that complex messy scenes like these are a torture test for any lens at wide apertures and f2 is still relatively wide.

View attachment 394220

All in all I think this has taken this thread way away from what I originally hoped and it's turned into minute nit picking of leaf and twig wide open bokeh of a £56-£80 lens and I've felt the need to respond but I'm beginning to regret being drawn into this as it seems to be dragging on.

I've edited JD's quote but this sums up how I feel and have pretty much always felt even in these digital days.
Click to expand...

The photo above is not an appropriate comparison due to the subject placement.

It was an observation about one photo with that lens, it really isn't a big deal so no need to keep dragging it on.
 
Let's not get carried away here. The purpose of the thread was to comment on manual lenses on digital cameras. Alan has some which I've never heard of, so it is interesting to see the results, and decide for myself whether I would find one useful or not depending on how I viewed the results. Different people have different needs and opinions. That's fine. If you don't like the look of a particular lens then don't buy one. By all means say what you don't like about it - that's fine. But there's no need to turn it into a minute analysis of the things.
 
Edited out to declutter the thread.
 
Last edited:
Don't do that Alan. We'd miss you.
 
Plain Nev said:
Don't do that Alan. We'd miss you.
Click to expand...

Sure you would ;) The thing is Nev, although this is a bit of a lifeline for me and others in similar situations one question is. Is it worth the hassle? At the mo I find I have to be so selective about the threads I post in and who I interact with that the answer is... Maybe not.
 
Guys, really?
I've just caught up in here, yeah I know, but I have a lot of others places to visit too ;)
But then again, I shouldn't be surprised at how many different responses and opinions that appear from a simple question, or statement.
That's the way things go on TP.
woof woof said:
and have thought about leaving this forum behind
Click to expand...
Hotel California rules apply

woof woof said:
At the mo I find I have to be so selective about the threads I post in and who I interact with
Click to expand...
That's always a good plan, and if it comes to it, I'm sure you are aware of the ignore function, it can save your mental health at times :)
Just don't go near Hot Topics, you really would be tearing hair out in there
 
woof woof said:
Oh for God sake.

As I said. The picture above is only meant to show the shape of the trees.

I've already backed out of other threads and thought about leaving this whole forum so many times.
Click to expand...

I've read back my posts carefully and I'm at a loss as to where I've been insulting or offensive towards you to justify putting that on me. If I have, then I'm happy to apologise and lets move on. I'm sure you know me well enough on here by now that it wouldn't be intentional. :hug:
 
Edited out to declutter the thread.
 
Last edited:
Cobra said:
Guys, really?
I've just caught up in here, yeah I know, but I have a lot of others places to visit too ;)
But then again, I shouldn't be surprised at how many different responses and opinions that appear from a simple question, or statement.
That's the way things go on TP.

Hotel California rules apply


That's always a good plan, and if it comes to it, I'm sure you are aware of the ignore function, it can save your mental health at times :)
Just don't go near Hot Topics, you really would be tearing hair out in there
Click to expand...

Maybe this thread would be better in the pictures for please section?

And yes, I will use the ignore function more often.
Cobra said:
In that case, try this (y)

View attachment 394690
Click to expand...

If I ignore the thread is still trashed anyway so what's the point?
 
woof woof said:
If I ignore the thread is still trashed anyway so what's the point?
Click to expand...
I'm just suggesting that that you ignore Graham, not the thread.
 
I've only got one modern manual lens: the 7.5mm Samyang. It does what I want from it...

Fisheye empty single deck bus E-PM1 1310049.JPG
 
LeeRatters said:
I can't recall what camera you use Stephen, but my boy has the Samyang 12mm f/2 on his A6000.

Voigtlander do a full frame 12mm too I think.
Click to expand...
On m4/3 ATM. I'll have a look at the cost of the Voigtlander - I have a LM to m4/3 adapter knocking around. Thanks for the suggestion. The Samyang might suit if they do it in m4/3. And it's cheap!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top