Open Photography Forums  
HOME FORUMS NEWS FAQ SEARCH

Go Back   Open Photography Forums > Digital Camera Discussion > Lenses: DSLR and Rangefinder, MF adaptions to 35mm such Zoerk

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 7th, 2015, 07:36 AM
Doug Kerr Doug Kerr is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alamogordo, New Mexico, USA
Posts: 8,518
Default Intersting portrait lens from Lensbaby

Lensbaby has announced a 56 mm f/1.6 portrait lens, the "Velvet 56", with fully manual focus and aperture controls:

http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/04/l...ens-ever-made/

via Canon Rumors

The lens will be available with a variety of mounts, initially for the major DSLR families and later for major mirrorless interchangeable-lens camera families.

For macro work, the lens will focus to a magnification of 1:2.

The lens is said to "[Evoke] the image style and construction quality of classic portrait lenses of the mid-20th century . . ."

Best regards,

Doug
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old April 7th, 2015, 09:24 AM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is online now
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,571
Default

This is truly amazing. They are attempting to reproduce, essentially the filunction of a Visual Quality" Pinkhams & Smith barrel lens of some 80 years past. This is the same ideas behind the Cooke PS945 (9" for 4x5 LF film). The light from the lens edges makes the bright areas of the focus plane glow.

However, from the pictures, the results are nice but merely marginal.

Still, it's for some $550 and not $4,700!!!

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old April 7th, 2015, 09:54 AM
Doug Kerr Doug Kerr is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alamogordo, New Mexico, USA
Posts: 8,518
Default

Hi, Asher,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher Kelman View Post

However, from the pictures, the results are nice but merely marginal.
Indeed. But of course I'm sort of like that myself these days.

Like most Lensbaby products, I'm not sure I want to have done what it does.

Quote:
Still, it's for some $550 and not $4,700!!!
$500.00 for the black one, $600.00 for the silver.

Maybe its a matter of bang (if you can call what it does "bang") for the buck.

Best regards,

Doug
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old April 7th, 2015, 03:37 PM
Sam Hames Sam Hames is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Kerr View Post
Like most Lensbaby products, I'm not sure I want to have done what it does.

$500.00 for the black one, $600.00 for the silver.
They lost me at that price. I had a Helios 44-2 (A 58mm f/2 m42 mount soviet era lens)
once upon a time which did essentially the same thing for an order of magnitude lower price.

Sam
__________________
My Blog
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old April 7th, 2015, 05:32 PM
Doug Kerr Doug Kerr is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alamogordo, New Mexico, USA
Posts: 8,518
Default

Hi, Sam,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Hames View Post
They lost me at that price. I had a Helios 44-2 (A 58mm f/2 m42 mount soviet era lens) once upon a time which did essentially the same thing for an order of magnitude lower price.
If I were you, I'd get another one.

Best regards,

Doug
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old April 7th, 2015, 08:20 PM
Doug Kerr Doug Kerr is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alamogordo, New Mexico, USA
Posts: 8,518
Default

It's hard to me to believe that I would ever want to cause something like this:



Joye Ardyn Durham: Untitled

but then I'm just an old telephone engineer.

Best regards,

Doug
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old April 8th, 2015, 08:58 AM
Jerome Marot Jerome Marot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Munich, Germany.
Posts: 3,751
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Kerr View Post
It's hard to me to believe that I would ever want to cause something like this
But maybe you would be interested in the various patents on the subject?

For example, US1347673, from 1920, which reads:

The present invention relates to photographic objectives and more particularly to portrait lenses.

Since the beginning of the art of photography lens designers have concentrated their eiforts trying to evolve a lens free from aberrations. rIhese efforts especially since the introduction of special optical glass, have met with almost complete success. Most' of the well known types of portrait lenses, in particular, are so fully corrected as to produce a critically sharp picture in the focal plane.

As ideal as this condition may be from the stand point of the computing mathematician striving to compromise the various opposing factors, its advantages are offset to a great extent by the disadvantage of lack of depth, especially for larger images.

Since for bust pictures, or for pictures of 'the head, the person to be photographed is relatively close to the camera, the image plane is correspondingly moved away from the lens. The conjugate relation of object plane and image plane under these conditions is such that relatively small changes of object plane causes an appreciable shifting of the image plane. The photographic significance of this point is that, if the object plane proper covers certain parts of the head or body of the person, these parts will appear sharp and distinct while points to the rear or in front of this object plane appear diffused or indistinct.

A well known remedy to obtain depth of focus is to stop down the lens in order to allow only slender light cones to pass and thereby decrease the circles of diifusion in front and in the rear of the principal'image plane. This remedy, however, operates at the expense of speed because the light is cut out in proportion as the lens is stopped down. A portrait produced in this way is, moreover, objectionable in that the critical sharpness-` in parts of such a portrait has a weird, unlifelike and displeasing effect.

The photographer is thus forced to adopt either of two alternatives either one of which results in an objectionable portrait or to make a compromise between extremes, which compromise entails the objectionable results of both. The outstanding characteristic features are always lack of depth, lack of softness, or both in more or less pronounced form.

It is the primary object of this invention to provide a photographic objective which combines high working speed, great depth of focus and good definition.


or that one, US1629361, from 1926, which reads:

The present invention is based upon a new fact which consists in the possibility of obtaining distinct images, with soft outline, on ortho or panchromatic plates, by means of non-chromatic objectives and without correction of the visual focussing.

It has been known since the beginning of photography that the said objectives can give diffused images only upon ordinary plates when the focussinr effected by sight is not corrected by calculations or by any other means capable of placing the sensitive plate in the plane of intersection of the chemical radiations.

Experiments carried out with a very dispersive objective have shown that, without rectifying the focussing, it is possible to obtain distinct images with soft outline, when the ordinary plate is replaced by ortho or panchromatic plates. The more similar is the curve of sensitivity, relatively to the various radiations of the spectrum, given by plates with their compensating screen, to that given by the retina, the more distinct is the image. This experimental fact is of the highest importance, it allows of giving a new direction to the photography, rendering it more artistic, more pictorial and this on an essentially physiological basis, because our visual apparatus uses also a panchromatic plate, the retina, a. compensating screen, the yellow pigment of the macula and an optical system of large opening, not at all achromatic, consist-ing of the cornea, of the crystallin and of the iris diaphragm. The eye also produces images havlng a soft outline which are not at all similar tothe sharp outlines given by the classic objectives. The latter are of course precious for the documentary photography which requires precision in the details, but cannot be suitable for the pictorial photography, the object of which is to reproduce the nature such as it is seen by the paintercolourist.


This to show that producing not so sharp images has been the focus of considerable research for a long time...

(There is even a class for that purpose defined in the international patent classification: the first link).
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old April 8th, 2015, 01:34 PM
Doug Kerr Doug Kerr is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alamogordo, New Mexico, USA
Posts: 8,518
Default

Hi, Jerome,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerome Marot View Post
But maybe you would be interested in the various patents on the subject?

For example, US1347673, from 1920, which reads:

[I] The present invention relates to photographic objectives and more particularly to portrait lenses.

<snip>
Thanks for this nice citation.

Indeed I recognize the frequent desire for a "soft" effect in portraiture. And I know that there have been many discussions her about lenses that produce various flavors of that.

But I would never want to do to a dog what was done in that shot!

Thanks.

Best regards,

Doug
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old April 9th, 2015, 12:02 AM
Jerome Marot Jerome Marot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Munich, Germany.
Posts: 3,751
Default

Does someone know the optical formula of that lens? It does not seem to be available on the lensbabies web site.

Last edited by Jerome Marot; April 9th, 2015 at 05:00 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon EOS Autofocus - BFCV and micro-adjust (MA) Doug Kerr Imaging Technology: Theory, Alternatives, Practice and Advances. 11 November 14th, 2011 02:44 PM
Eyeglass lenses and "vertex power" Doug Kerr Imaging Technology: Theory, Alternatives, Practice and Advances. 0 November 10th, 2010 06:47 AM
Lens MTF and resolution Doug Kerr Imaging Technology: Theory, Alternatives, Practice and Advances. 3 October 16th, 2010 06:36 AM
Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM zoom lens - Part 1 Doug Kerr Lenses: DSLR and Rangefinder, MF adaptions to 35mm such Zoerk 10 December 8th, 2009 08:46 PM
Understanding and selecting lenses Rhys Sage Layback Cafe 13 September 13th, 2008 08:47 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:12 PM.


Posting images or text grants license to OPF, yet of such remain with its creator. Still, all assembled discussion 2006-2017 Asher Kelman (all rights reserved) Posts with new theme or unusual image might be moved/copied to a new thread!