BLUR - FOR NOT MUCH MONEY!

[@whatsonmytable]

Dear Sir, I am Arvind from Bangalore, India. I cannot stress on how much I value your videos. Its such a pleasure to keep listening to you shar eyour knowledge over years. I always feel so worried about what will happen to my 70-80 odd lenses that i have been fortunate to own over the last 20 years earning each one of them.

[@segarallychampionship702]

0:30 The lightness and slight desaturation is so stunning in that photo.

[@caw25sha]

It has a bit of a 60s/70s Ektachrome look.

[@sputumtube]

I've learned (learnt?) more from your channel than I did in my A-level photography course. Please keep up this exceptional work.

[@unbroken1010]

Everything except grammar 😂🤣

[@sputumtube]

@@unbroken1010 Explain?

[@unbroken1010]

@@sputumtube 🤣

[@zenography7923]

Thanks, will do!

[@ice9phil]

nice session today. I love the natural blur vintage glass can give vs. that funky electric blur people get in post. I have a twist for you, though. I have used a Takumar 120/2,8 and its big brother, Takumar 150/f4. A little smaller for a travel kit.

[@MrSimonj1970]

Nikkor 105mm f/2,5 AI or AIS is my fav cheap bokeh monster. Sharp as hell wide open, amazing bokeh and nice and small. Mine is a 1973 pre-AI model that still looks amazing on a Z6 (FF mirrorless). Bought it used in the late 80s.

[@GeorgeK356]

I have a few of the lenses you mention, in each of the focal lengths, and my wallet heaves a sigh of relief. My 2 favourite blur monsters, both on film, on the native cameras, and on my Fuji X series, are the Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 and the Olympus 135mm f3.5. Each of those lenses has its own look, the Super Tak is the radioactive one and has yellowed beautifully and the Oly is one of the most technically perfect lenses I have ever used. Another great episode Nigel.

[@unbroken1010]

The world obsessed with blur. Me F 5.6 and seeing what's there . 😂

[@JessicaNeidingHaverly]

I found that olympus 135 3.5 in an assorted lot of film accessories for $10. It's my 2nd vintage zuiko and I'm ready to just keep adding to the collection. The 50 1.8 and this 135 3.5 are just beautiful.

[@philhodgkinson1460]

What a great video is true you can have your pick of 135s many photographers have more than one... I must have 3/4 something like that...not got a pentax one Got that practika 135...same one you had with chrome strip for f numbers... Nice sharp lens too... thank you so much..... Looks like you shooting at that book fair on the South Bank too....

[@peterkwakman7440]

This lesson is a gem, i bookmarked to watch again, thanks Zen !

[@seventeendegree]

I feel most comfortable in the range between 50mm and 85mm. My favorite lenses are a Helios 40-2, Super-Takumar 50mm 1.4 and a Canon FD 55mm 1.2. For medium format the Biotar 80mm 2.8 and the Pentax 105mm 2.4.

[@johnherzel718]

I love 135mm lenses. Just picked up a copy of the Vivitar 1 series in Nikon F mount (f2.3 just to keep it unique) and I can't get over how nice it renders smooth backgrounds. I also have the Olympus 135 f3.5 which is such a beautiful lens. The colors on my Canon RP are exactly what I want and there is plenty of bokeh. I also have the Olympus 28mm f3.5, 50mm f 1.8, and the 75-150 f 4.0 to go with my film OM-1. When I want to shoot film I have it made, and a lot of it because you brought them up (the f3.5 versions of Oly lenses) Thanks for the fun!

[@alexblaze8878]

Curious: did you get the preset version of that Vivitar 135? It has 15 aperture blades/

[@johnherzel718]

@@alexblaze8878 no, mines old AI converted with 8 blades. Still one of the nicest background blurs of any lens I own. Literally have it only one week. Just got my Nikon f to Canon RF adapter 3 days ago. This is going to be fun.

[@alexblaze8878]

@@johnherzel718 that’s good to know! Thanks mate!

[@simplexj4298]

What a wonderful episode! Really enjoyed watching it. Currently waiting for that Carl Zeiss Jena 1.8 / 80mm to arrive which I purchased two days ago. It will come alongside a 1.8 / 50mm CZJ and a Praktica brick stone. I expect that 80mm to be the shining star of this bundle. Can't wait and hoping these gems are in a good shape! Watching your videos really triggered something ...

[@jimschmidt7303]

Pentax Takumar Bayonet 135mm f2.5 and Takumar 55mm f2, my 2 current favorite lenses. Very sharp, great bokeh, great separation, about $40 U.S. each for a good copy.

[@EricFosterMedia]

The knowledge you've shared over the years has helped me tremendously. Thank you! Cheers!

[@zenography7923]

Glad to help

[@ArminHirmer]

great video. I use then a Tair 11a :) 135mm F2.8 but on crop either Leica M8 or Epson RD-1. Insane back ground blur and with 20 aperture blades a bokeh out of this world :)

[@Atokinox]

i love the nikon serie e 135mm f2,8 a real blur monster

[@caw25sha]

A few E Series lenses were the same focal length and aperture as Nikkor lenses, and I have read that they used the same actual elements but with cheaper coatings. Other people say they are entirely different. I've never found a definitive answer from a reliable source.

[@Atokinox]

@@caw25sha iv always heard they had same optics bit different build, idk bout the coating

[@ShutterNChill]

Adding to the affordable lens list: I just got a Montgomery Ward 135mm F2.8 for 10$ plus shipping.... (under 20$ total). I did not expect much, and I have not found much information on it. Despite the obscurity and super low price, its seems well constructed, solid metal with nice big glass. Not super sharp wide open, yet the photos have a beautiful vintage look, and there's plenty of detail on the photos anyway.

[@malcolmtice175]

Thabks for another great video. I already had the Olympus OM50mm 1.8 and the OM 135 mm. Whilst searching for the more expensive 28mm 2.8 came across The Vivitar 28mm 2.8. As new for £25 delivered. Really delighted and a joy to use on my Lumix GX80. Owing to the crop factor all I need now is a 21mm. They seem like gold dust and priced accordingly. Best wishes.

[@kcphotogeek6207]

Pentax M 135mm f3.5 is fantastic got mine for 15EUR that was the lens that got me hooked on vintage 😊

[@mosswareproaudio6328]

That Chinon is most likely a TOMIOKA lens.

[@fricki1997]

I have a 55/1.2 Porst (Tomioka), and I have to say there can be such a thing as too much blur ;) Any normal nifty fifty will give you more than enough if you're in the portrait range.

[@cefalloid]

Of course. That time reason to make 55/1.2 was to get as much light as possible as film sensitivity was ISO 100-400. At the penalty of 'too much blur". Nowadays sensors are far more sensitive so usually no need for extreme lenses...

[@teleaddict23]

Very interesting video, but you’ve not mentioned Canon FD lenses that are fantastic lenses and can be bought very cheap these days. The FD 135mm 3.5 is selling for only £40.

[@dummatube]

In traditional photographic teaching terms we call this “limited depth of field” and “differential focus”!

[@caw25sha]

Few people know that Vivitar was actually an American company but as you said outsourced their manufacturing and probably also design to Japan. I don't believe they ever designed or made anything in-house. I've never used a Vivitar lens but I assume there is considerable variation across their range in terms of design, quality and characteristics. Was it Vivitar that produced a range of lenses with a standard mount and a range of adapters for each camera mount?

[@GeorgeK356]

Yes, the T-mount. I was under the impression that later on in the company's history they did design a couple of lenses though

[@philhodgkinson1460]

2 American guys started Vivitar maybe from California.... not really sure...

[@alan-sk7ky]

Yep some of tbe badged Viv lenses are actually Cosinon lenses made by Cosina. Nothing wrong with them. Have a read up about Cosina, a ubiquitous Company contracting to everynoe 😉

[@whatsonmytable]

Also keen on knowing what setup you use to shoot this video. What cam and what lens focal length have you used. I love the colors and the beautiful softness

[@zenography7923]

For this one, just an iphone and a bit of adjustment in editing! Glad you liked the look.

[@whatsonmytable]

@@zenography7923 woww! Just cannot believe this. It's so beautiful. I really thought you've been using a vintage on a Sony or something. I don't know what it is with iphones that makes it so good. Did you shoot 4 k in portrait mode or something Sir?

[@philhodgkinson1460]

Notice you used a 90mm f4 elmar on video... guess its tricky to find a good L39 screw one at a sensible price Nigel.....

[@mike1140]

My 200mm Rikenon f4 makes some stunning blur and only cost me $25 Canadian.... And it's wonderfully sharp.

[@spookhouseplastic]

Great content as always, Nigel!

[@segarallychampionship702]

Now that I think about it, it's a shame 70-90mm aren't as popular as, say, 135mm lenses. At least for me, for a couple years I've shot vintage lenses on an APS-C camera without a focal reducer and the 75mm length on most 50mm lenses was what I used and enjoyed the most. I want to try that on film as well, but so far I haven't found anything locally. I have got a 135mm lens recently and for some reason I find it more limiting on a digital camera than on a film camera, even with a focal reducer.

[@caw25sha]

From about the mid 80s so-called "standard zooms" became popular, typically 35-70 or maybe 28-80 which probably reduced sales of short telephotos considerably. There might also be a psychological reason. If someone is intending to buy a telephoto they might go for a slightly longer one to "get their money's worth". Illogical but then people are!

[@segarallychampionship702]

@@caw25sha I actually forgot i have a 28-70 zoom lens that I can mount on my film cameras.. I've used it only on digital so far but I do use the longest end of the zoom range often.

[@segarallychampionship702]

Unrelated fact: Last summer I bought a 24mm (RMC Tokina 24mm f/2.8) lens so I could have a wide angle lens for my digital camera. I didn't like the photos out of it at all. After getting the focal reducer, the images from that lens feel better. Either I'm trying to justify buying that focal reducer, or a 35mm focal length is really not for me.

[@scrptwic]

I bought a Samyang 85mm1.4 A lens Manuel focus lens for a reasonable price a couple years ago. I also have a Takumar 135 3.5 as well as a Pentax 135 3.5 and Chinon 135 2.8 all great lenses I also have the rare Pentax 150mm3.5 the same size as the 135mm lens

[@ashsphotolounge]

I have the 85mm Samyang, great lens - don't forget the 90mm F4 Elmar, the cheapest Leica screw mount lens you can buy and glorious blur, I have a 1939 uncoated one that I got for £80.

[@mitchellwnorowski6747]

Love your channel but i am opposed to bokeh. I shoot Olympus, primarily waterfowl and i'm happy to get not just the bird but the flora and fauna in focus. Occasionally use a few of my om mount lenses for flower closeups.

[@anthonygainsford1893]

Yes, of course. But the first question in photography, just in my opinion, before I leave home or, decide what gear I’m taking out with me is, what am I trying to photograph? Is your great photo a picture in your mind? Is this or that lens, something that could do the job? Could it, or should it, take the picture you want? So is this relevant? Get the shot you create in your mind. Not the shot you think your gear can take.

[@tomislavmiletic_]

6 - 7 yrs ago I bought a Zuiko 135mm f3.5 for about €20, and last year a Zuiko 200mm f4 for €100. Prices are rising ladies and gentleman, snag those lenses while they are still reasonably cheap...

[@thegroove2000]

Some of the vintage lens prices are wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy over estimated. Of course its not the camera and lenses overall but the user. Happy shooting.

[@andreiput9492]

hello. here's an idea. i have some of these lenses as well. perhaps one idea could be to compare lens formula at certain focal lengths to see how that made a difference to images. That would be interesting.

[@zenography7923]

Thanks for the suggestion!

[@sclogse1]

I imagine the next thing to chat about after this is compression..

[@nevillewatkins4997]

I find myself using blur more and more lately for separation.

[@denislaroche3957]

nikkor 105 f2.5 from 1973, still going strong om my D700, cheers

[@caw25sha]

1973 would be just pre-AI wouldn't it? I had the AI-S. Very nice lens.

[@denislaroche3957]

@@caw25sha I believe its ai...

[@caw25sha]

@@denislaroche3957 AI lenses have duplicate small and large numbers on the aperture ring.

[@denislaroche3957]

@@caw25sha you are right, mine is non Ai but was modified to be ai'edI was told by the shop where i bought it

[@caw25sha]

@@denislaroche3957 I believe that was very common. I've seen a lot of lenses on sale described as such.

[@kainbre]

ahahaha YEA ... that is 3 ! :)

[@sclogse1]

You can see what's coming. Software that will give you a choice of vintage lens blurs. Not just the Photoshop choices..But till then, after you've had your milk and cookies, grab a Minolta Celtic 135mm 2.8. Find the right seller and right lens. You might pay 35 dollars. It's unbelievable.

[@zenography7923]

I'll look out for one, thanks for the tip!

[@philhodgkinson1460]

Any comment Nigel about Amazon shutting down DP review....they don't even appear to want to sell it on!!! Anyways leave that one with you...... I am extremely disgusted with Amazon. Likely accountants are to blame!!!

[@zenography7923]

It seems an odd decision - but I believe they've just issued lots of redundancies across the company, so there's a wider context I guess.

[@myblueandme]

please 105 2.5 Ais nikkor next time

[@caw25sha]

I wonder how much they are worth these days. I bought mine in the early 2000s when people were dumping all their "useless obsolete junk" film stuff so you could get anything for a pittance.

[@myblueandme]

@@caw25sha great. I think they were produced in mass numbers. but still hard to find and fewer ppl talk about them.

[@myblueandme]

@@caw25sha what your experience is. Are they good? better thn olympus 100 mm 2 Zuiko or Vivitar 100 mm ?

[@januszjanis3444]

Serdecznie Pozdrawiam

[@charleslawrence7327]

Have you tried blur on toast

[@zenography7923]

Yes, but I can't find any that spreads straight from the fridge. I anticipate the lovely blurry flavour eagerly but so far have been disappointed as it tends to clump without prior heating to 43 degrees. Hotter than that and it just evanesces right out of the pan.