Five of my favourite background blur producing lenses for mirrorless, reviewed and discussed, with sample images. You can support this channel at / zenography
Thank you for the time & effort you put into your utube channel they very informative & interesting. I have both the 135mm lenses you reviewed & agree they are both nice lenses to use. I bought a Fed 2 because of one of your videos & really like using it. I actually sold my Canon P because I prefer to use the Fed.
Thank you for always doing these. I hope at some point you get your hands on a rigid Summicron 50. If you love the Summitar you will no doubt be over the moon with the Summicron.
Another great review. Subbed/thumbs up. One of my favourite old lenses for blur is the Pentacon 135 2.8, it's one of a few lenses I've found that is referred to as "bokeh monster".
Always informative vlogs, usually on long overlooked lenses. I'm sure that if you visit any UK car boot sale you can still find cheap lenses from the lesser manufacturers (Chinon, Cosina, Konica, Yashica etc) which were often soft round the edges of the frame and will give hours of endless bokeh fun!
I enjoyed this a lot. I am going through some old equipment for possible sale, and can confirm what you said about the Helios 44 lenses. It seems the oldest produce more swirled bokeh, the newer ones only seldom. All mine are as sharp as can be, even one with a lot of scratches. I agree with your assessments of the other lenses as usual, except the Jupiter 11 which I have never seen. Thanks again.
excellent and beautiful demonstration of these lenses capabilities, with really inspiring images. It could be useful for the viewers to have more text stating the lenses that are used in each shot and the configuration, and also some more text describing the lenses in the description of the video. Which camera did you use? I suppose the lenses will behave differently on different sensor sizes, and that the lens adapters or speedboosters will play a role also.
I always shoot on a full frame Sony a7, so original focal lengths are as designed. Crop sensors increase effective focal length, by about one third for aps-c (so a 50mm lens becomes an effective 75mm) and x2 for micro four thirds (a 50mm becomes an effective 100mm). Images shot while each lens is being reviewed and discussed are taken with that lens - perhaps I ought to make this clearer? Thanks for watching.
Nice video thanks. Others you might want to look at are the Mir 1B 37mm f2.8, Jupiter 9 and Jupiter 37A. I use m42 lenses on a micro four thirds adapter. This way I can use a straight adapter, a focal reducer (changes the crop factor to 1.44 instead of 2), a tilt shift adapter or a Helicoid adapter which means that I can turn any m42 lens into a close focus lens.
@@zenography7923 this is the style I use. www.amazon.co.uk/KECAY-Mount-Focusing-Helicoid-Adapter/dp/B01HM29V2G For micro four Thirds it expands quit a bit because of the difference in the flange lengths means that there's space for a reasonable length of helicoid.
Amusing that I have four of the five, not having a Jupiter 11. Some lovely images, particularly fine from the cheap as chips Zuiko 135mm (is there any system now as reasonable and as exquisite as an OM camera (mine an OM2n) and lenses that are so low in price?). I bought my Helios recently, the real problem not being availability but quality - of the six I looked at in one dealers, only one was easy to focus and free of haze. It (like the Summitar) is also prone to flare. But still, beautiful lenses for really low prices!
The OM kit is great value at the moment, let's hope it stays that way! The Helios is one of my favourite lenses bar none, partly because of the wild way it flares!
I never really took to the 135mm lens until I got my Zuiko and Praktica lenses, I always considered it a 'portrait' lens. Goodness knows why, as I don’t normally restrict lenses like that. I do think of getting other lenses such as the Jupiter 11 for my Zorki, but I quire like how the 50mm makes you work for the image. I’m also too lazy to use a second view finder. As always a superb video, I could listen to you talking all night.
50mm is my preferred length on a rangefinder - using other lenses with them is more difficult than with an SLR. Although framelines certainly make things easier, as in the Leica M cameras, but I don't have an M! Glad you're enjoying the videos, thanks for watching!
I love using my Zuiko 135mm f3.5 and my Zuiko 50mm f1.4 on my OMD EM5. In fact these are the only lenses I use on it. Waiting on my adapter to arrive for my F Zuiko 38mm 1.8. After watching this video and another of yours where you have discussed the Helios 44-2 I am looking on ebay for that lens now.
There is also a very cool portrait lens of 92/2 from the Soviet diaprojector gives an excellent picture. If it is skillfully adapted. Center/edge resolution is 100/50 lines. Perfectly blurs the background. And also Jupiter-37a and Tair-11
Thanks for this video! Could you expand this to 35 mm vintage (rangefinder) lenses? Maybe Jupiter-12 lenses or alternatives? Much harder to find information about this focal length and bokeh blur.
35mm lenses for rangefinders are somewhat thin on the ground, and I don't think they're the best lenses for bokeh; minimum focus distance is fairly long, and the wide(ish) focal length limits bokeh too. Thanks for watching!
@@zenography7923 Yes, the bokeh can't be beaten with the one of a 50 mm lens. But looking at used rangefinder lens prices, the 35 mm ones are one of the most expensive, and I suspect that's due to demand. It's the ideal street shooter and all-around focal length. I have three 35 mm lenses, the Jupiter-12, one Leica M, and the CV 35/1.2 II. Huge performance differences, each has their pros and cons.
Hi, the 50mm Takumar that you have there is the 7 element version, there is a 8 element version that many prefer, I suppose you haven't tested them for character between them? Easiest way to tell them apart is the infrared focus mark, the 8 element version is between the f/4 and the central diamond, while the 7 element like yours is outside of the f/4 mark on the hyperfocal scale.
As always an interesting video. In my opinion, the Helios 44 Silver, is a quality lens, ideal for portraiture (even if the swirl effect is quite disturbing for me). To be honest, I am not enthusiastic with other Helios versions (44-2 etc.). Also the f1,4 Takumar is very soft for my taste, at least the two samples I owned some years ago.
The 1950s Canon 50 1.8 (Leica thread mount) sits somewhere between the Summitar & Helios 44 for around $100 USD. Minimum focus distance of 3.5 ft, but I use it with a Leica M to Sony E helicoid adapter to bring that down to under a foot
Hello, I was wondering if a helios 44 can fit on a m39 camera like the canon p? I am interested in the lens and I have seen some that are m39/m42 but I can't tell the difference. Thanks and love the channel!
What do you mean m39/m42? Those are two different widths of screw threading, and in camera lenses they refer to two different lens mounts with no specifications in common. How can a lens be both? Do you mean a lens with an adaptor? I'm not giving you grief, I'm just confused.
Hi Miguel, I have two of the early M39 Helios lenses, Canon P takes L39 mount, unless I have it mixed up. Anyway, the lens will mount on Leica/Canon RF but can only be used as a macro lens, it will not focus to infinity, and wouldn't couple to the rangefinder.Same thread, different flange distance.
@@jonlouis2582 thank you jon. I have been seeing a lot of helios 44 on ebay claiming that it focus perfectly on leica/canon RF. I have read on forums before that they dont focus to infinity. I'll make sure to stay away from it for my canon p. Thanks agaian!
I have a guy offering me a Olympus Zuiko 24 f2.0 and a Yashica 50mm 1.4 for trade for a lens I never use. Planning on using it on a BMPCC4K and cannot find much information on the Zuiko 24mm f2.0? Any thoughts about that lens?
I have the Zuiko 24mm 2.8 and the Canon FD 24MM F2. The Zuiko 2.8 has great resolving power for it's tiny size. I remember reading that the FD24MM F2 is a slightly better performer than the Zuiko 24 F2 but I haven't compared them side by side. My Canon FD 24 f2 is a little soft wide open but I still love the way it renders. The Zuiko lenses feel really great for manual focus, and I think the lenses lack of absolute critical sharpness will not be much of an issue for video use. I think if the lens is in good condition, I'd be surprised I'd be surprised if you are disappointed.
Nice. Personally I feel the Helios 44-3 looks better than the 44-2 because of the better coating used. Other than that it's the same lens. And would Def have a look at the Jupiter 9.
Both the Helios 44 (58mm, not 55mm) and the Helios 40 85mm will swirl in the right conditions, however the Hellios 40 gives much more. The 40 though is really an art lens; it's wackiness really is off the scale. I like the lens very much, although some might say it's a bit too wacky! There are three videos on it on this channel, so you can judge the results for yourself, but many prefer the 44 as it's more restrained in its effect. Also, the 40 is extremely large and heavy - definitely not a walk-around lens!
Full frame is my preference, though aps-c is very nice too. Had a Nikon D80 some years back, followed by a D90 - both excellent cameras, though I preferred the colour from the D80.
i know ive said this before but you really need to discover the magic of minolta.. the rokkor 58 1.2 is one of the undeniable kings of bokeh, the 1.4 is also very nice...
![Rob49 - On Dat Money (with Cardi B) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/fTFS58mHJh8/mqdefault.jpg)
Your channel is my absolute favorite! You got it going on brother! I love vintage glass!
Many thanks, glad you're enjoying the channel!
My favorite 135mm is the Meyer Optik Gorlitz 135mm f2.8. It has 15 aperture blades and keeps creamy smooth bokeh even stopped down.
Great video, as usual!
Many thanks Ian, glad you're still enjoying them!
Thank you for the time & effort you put into your utube channel they very informative & interesting. I have both the 135mm lenses you reviewed & agree they are both nice lenses to use. I bought a Fed 2 because of one of your videos & really like using it. I actually sold my Canon P because I prefer to use the Fed.
The Fed 2 is an unsung treasure, a really nice camera, and so cheap too. Glad you're enjoying the videos!
Thank you for always doing these. I hope at some point you get your hands on a rigid Summicron 50. If you love the Summitar you will no doubt be over the moon with the Summicron.
I would so much love to try one! Maybe someday...
Before the video came out, the Zuiko 135mm was already on the way to my home. Can't wait!
Enjoy!
You liked it?
Ive got Jupiter 8 and 11 for my alpha7 and they are lovely :) Also have Minolta MC Rokkor - PF 50m f1.7 also a beast :)
you sounded like you sneaked up in the midnight to make this video without disturbing your wife
You're not far off the mark - I recorded it early one morning when only me and the cat were awake!
Another great review. Subbed/thumbs up. One of my favourite old lenses for blur is the Pentacon 135 2.8, it's one of a few lenses I've found that is referred to as "bokeh monster".
Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
Always informative vlogs, usually on long overlooked lenses. I'm sure that if you visit any UK car boot sale you can still find cheap lenses from the lesser manufacturers (Chinon, Cosina, Konica, Yashica etc) which were often soft round the edges of the frame and will give hours of endless bokeh fun!
Glad you're enjoying the videos, thanks for watching!
Another excellent video
Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
I enjoyed this a lot. I am going through some old equipment for possible sale, and can confirm what you said about the Helios 44 lenses. It seems the oldest produce more swirled bokeh, the newer ones only seldom. All mine are as sharp as can be, even one with a lot of scratches. I agree with your assessments of the other lenses as usual, except the Jupiter 11 which I have never seen. Thanks again.
Many thanks for watching, glad you enjoyed it!
The Takumar 70-200 F/4 is wonderful also.
Stupidly sold my 35mm stuff when i went to 6×6 format.
Looking for it again.
Love the Zuiko 135mm f3.5. Extraordinary lense for street photography and portraits indeed.
It's lovely, one of my favourites!
This guy is making lenses sound like sex lol.... awesome video man! Love your channel!
Many thanks, very glad you're enjoying them!
I own the Zuiko 50mm f1.4 one.. IMO this lens also produces a smooth dreamy bokeh, it's Amazing! in fact I shot an entire wedding event with it :)
It's a fantastic lens, easily up to any shoot you can throw at it. One of my absolute favourites!
excellent and beautiful demonstration of these lenses capabilities, with really inspiring images. It could be useful for the viewers to have more text stating the lenses that are used in each shot and the configuration, and also some more text describing the lenses in the description of the video. Which camera did you use? I suppose the lenses will behave differently on different sensor sizes, and that the lens adapters or speedboosters will play a role also.
I always shoot on a full frame Sony a7, so original focal lengths are as designed. Crop sensors increase effective focal length, by about one third for aps-c (so a 50mm lens becomes an effective 75mm) and x2 for micro four thirds (a 50mm becomes an effective 100mm).
Images shot while each lens is being reviewed and discussed are taken with that lens - perhaps I ought to make this clearer? Thanks for watching.
Congrats on the video. Please do mention what amera such lenses are mounted to when reviewing.
What camera were the sample images shot on please?
Hi there, all shot on the Sony A7. Thanks for watching!
Nice video thanks.
Others you might want to look at are the Mir 1B 37mm f2.8, Jupiter 9 and Jupiter 37A.
I use m42 lenses on a micro four thirds adapter. This way I can use a straight adapter, a focal reducer (changes the crop factor to 1.44 instead of 2), a tilt shift adapter or a Helicoid adapter which means that I can turn any m42 lens into a close focus lens.
A helicoid adaptor sounds like a really useful piece of kit - I'm going to look into them very soon. Thanks for watching!
@@zenography7923 this is the style I use. www.amazon.co.uk/KECAY-Mount-Focusing-Helicoid-Adapter/dp/B01HM29V2G
For micro four Thirds it expands quit a bit because of the difference in the flange lengths means that there's space for a reasonable length of helicoid.
Amusing that I have four of the five, not having a Jupiter 11. Some lovely images, particularly fine from the cheap as chips Zuiko 135mm (is there any system now as reasonable and as exquisite as an OM camera (mine an OM2n) and lenses that are so low in price?). I bought my Helios recently, the real problem not being availability but quality - of the six I looked at in one dealers, only one was easy to focus and free of haze. It (like the Summitar) is also prone to flare. But still, beautiful lenses for really low prices!
The OM kit is great value at the moment, let's hope it stays that way! The Helios is one of my favourite lenses bar none, partly because of the wild way it flares!
Thanks for sharing your knowledge, the leica killing me !
I never really took to the 135mm lens until I got my Zuiko and Praktica lenses, I always considered it a 'portrait' lens. Goodness knows why, as I don’t normally restrict lenses like that. I do think of getting other lenses such as the Jupiter 11 for my Zorki, but I quire like how the 50mm makes you work for the image. I’m also too lazy to use a second view finder.
As always a superb video, I could listen to you talking all night.
50mm is my preferred length on a rangefinder - using other lenses with them is more difficult than with an SLR. Although framelines certainly make things easier, as in the Leica M cameras, but I don't have an M! Glad you're enjoying the videos, thanks for watching!
I love using my Zuiko 135mm f3.5 and my Zuiko 50mm f1.4 on my OMD EM5. In fact these are the only lenses I use on it. Waiting on my adapter to arrive for my F Zuiko 38mm 1.8. After watching this video and another of yours where you have discussed the Helios 44-2 I am looking on ebay for that lens now.
Make sure you buy the KMZ version - others aren't as good!
There is also a very cool portrait lens of 92/2 from the Soviet diaprojector gives an excellent picture. If it is skillfully adapted. Center/edge resolution is 100/50 lines. Perfectly blurs the background. And also Jupiter-37a and Tair-11
Not sure what a diaprojector is, but the lens sounds very interesting! Thanks for watching.
@@zenography7923 If interestingly I have a lens 2/92 done under the bayonet of Nikon F, in a corps from mir-38b. I can send to you for a review.
@@zenography7923 Thank you for reviews that you create for people!
@@mitya_ka That would be wonderful, I'd love to review your lens. If you email me at Zenography11@gmail.com we can discuss. Thanks!
@@zenography7923 Sent a letter, check your mail. Thanks!
Thanks for this video! Could you expand this to 35 mm vintage (rangefinder) lenses? Maybe Jupiter-12 lenses or alternatives? Much harder to find information about this focal length and bokeh blur.
35mm lenses for rangefinders are somewhat thin on the ground, and I don't think they're the best lenses for bokeh; minimum focus distance is fairly long, and the wide(ish) focal length limits bokeh too. Thanks for watching!
@@zenography7923 Yes, the bokeh can't be beaten with the one of a 50 mm lens. But looking at used rangefinder lens prices, the 35 mm ones are one of the most expensive, and I suspect that's due to demand. It's the ideal street shooter and all-around focal length. I have three 35 mm lenses, the Jupiter-12, one Leica M, and the CV 35/1.2 II. Huge performance differences, each has their pros and cons.
Hi, the 50mm Takumar that you have there is the 7 element version, there is a 8 element version that many prefer, I suppose you haven't tested them for character between them?
Easiest way to tell them apart is the infrared focus mark, the 8 element version is between the f/4 and the central diamond, while the 7 element like yours is outside of the f/4 mark on the hyperfocal scale.
I've heard the 8 element version is a little nicer, but haven't tried it, though I'd certainly like to! Thanks for watching!
Ever try a Fujinon 55mm f2.2? Beautiful and perfectly circular soap bubbles. Cheap m42 lens too
I think I may have one somewhere, must give it a try...
3 50mm
2 135mm
1. @ :58 Pentax Takumar 50mm F1.4
2. @ 2:51 Helios 44-2 50mm F2
3. @ 5:40 Sumitar 50mm F2
4. @ 8:50 Jupiter 11 135 F4
5. @11:51 Olympus 135mm f3.5 E Zuiko
Thanks for showing them here
As always an interesting video. In my opinion, the Helios 44 Silver, is a quality lens, ideal for portraiture (even if the swirl effect is quite disturbing for me). To be honest, I am not enthusiastic with other Helios versions (44-2 etc.). Also the f1,4 Takumar is very soft for my taste, at least the two samples I owned some years ago.
I found the Tak 1.4 a bit too soft too - for me the 1.8 is better.
And the Helios covers the sensor of my Hasselblad X1D, amazing on that camera. A 15dollar lens on a 5000 dollar camera :-)
Now that's an eclectic combination!
The 1950s Canon 50 1.8 (Leica thread mount) sits somewhere between the Summitar & Helios 44 for around $100 USD.
Minimum focus distance of 3.5 ft, but I use it with a Leica M to Sony E helicoid adapter to bring that down to under a foot
That adaptor sounds really interesting - I didn't know they existed!
Is the Canon F-1 the greatest unknown, sleeper camera? Or perhaps people hadn't heard of it yet relative to other hyped up cameras.
I haven't used the F-1, but hear it's a very nice machine... Thanks for watching!
you need to try some minolta rokkor glass. the 50(5cm) 1.8 super rokkor rangefinder lens, it is a real hidden gem, can be pricey though
I've heard very good things about the Rokkors - would love to try one someday!
@@zenography7923 they are definitely worth a look
Zenography try the rokkor mc 85mm f 1.7 :-)
Hello, I was wondering if a helios 44 can fit on a m39 camera like the canon p? I am interested in the lens and I have seen some that are m39/m42 but I can't tell the difference. Thanks and love the channel!
What do you mean m39/m42? Those are two different widths of screw threading, and in camera lenses they refer to two different lens mounts with no specifications in common. How can a lens be both? Do you mean a lens with an adaptor? I'm not giving you grief, I'm just confused.
Hi Miguel, I have two of the early M39 Helios lenses, Canon P takes L39 mount, unless I have it mixed up. Anyway, the lens will mount on Leica/Canon RF but can only be used as a macro lens, it will not focus to infinity, and wouldn't couple to the rangefinder.Same thread, different flange distance.
@@jonlouis2582 thank you jon. I have been seeing a lot of helios 44 on ebay claiming that it focus perfectly on leica/canon RF. I have read on forums before that they dont focus to infinity. I'll make sure to stay away from it for my canon p. Thanks agaian!
Yes you can. Find a good ebay seller that states that the lens has been optimized for infinity focus.
I can only echo what everyone else has said - not possible I'm afraid. Thanks for watching!
The Richard Attenborough of vintage lenses.
Thanks, that is indeed a compliment!
I have a guy offering me a Olympus Zuiko 24 f2.0 and a Yashica 50mm 1.4 for trade for a lens I never use. Planning on using it on a BMPCC4K and cannot find much information on the Zuiko 24mm f2.0? Any thoughts about that lens?
I have the Zuiko 24mm 2.8 and the Canon FD 24MM F2. The Zuiko 2.8 has great resolving power for it's tiny size. I remember reading that the FD24MM F2 is a slightly better performer than the Zuiko 24 F2 but I haven't compared them side by side. My Canon FD 24 f2 is a little soft wide open but I still love the way it renders. The Zuiko lenses feel really great for manual focus, and I think the lenses lack of absolute critical sharpness will not be much of an issue for video use. I think if the lens is in good condition, I'd be surprised I'd be surprised if you are disappointed.
I've never used it myself, though I've heard it's outstanding! Thanks for watching.
Nice. Personally I feel the Helios 44-3 looks better than the 44-2 because of the better coating used. Other than that it's the same lens. And would Def have a look at the Jupiter 9.
I'll certainly try the J9 someday, it has a great reputation!
Would you say the Helios 55 mil is better for swirl/overall character or the Helios 85 1.5?
Both the Helios 44 (58mm, not 55mm) and the Helios 40 85mm will swirl in the right conditions, however the Hellios 40 gives much more. The 40 though is really an art lens; it's wackiness really is off the scale. I like the lens very much, although some might say it's a bit too wacky! There are three videos on it on this channel, so you can judge the results for yourself, but many prefer the 44 as it's more restrained in its effect. Also, the 40 is extremely large and heavy - definitely not a walk-around lens!
@@zenography7923 Alright, thanks...I guess you know somethin' Jon Snow
Olympus zuiko 50mm f1.4 or f1.8 best lenses
i've own the f1.8 no complain:)
Like reading poetry.
Thank you!
Good video!
Lenes asmr
for Bokeh it's quite interesting if you use APSc or full frame
Full frame is my preference, though aps-c is very nice too. Had a Nikon D80 some years back, followed by a D90 - both excellent cameras, though I preferred the colour from the D80.
I feel like you’re about to sell me something illegal when you say “a bit of the blurry stuff” hahaha
A good sideline for Jessie and Walt perhaps?
@@zenography7923 It's too late for them I think but they should have while they still had some soul left
what mount is the Summitar?
Mine is in Leica Thread Mount, although I think there were some made in M mount?
@@zenography7923 thank you very much, need to look for an M-Mount
i know ive said this before but you really need to discover the magic of minolta.. the rokkor 58 1.2 is one of the undeniable kings of bokeh, the 1.4 is also very nice...
Would love to try these - I'm looking for more lenses just now and will check these out.
Vintage lenses explained my agent Smith - from the Matrix. LOL
Good explanations, though!
:) Thanks!
"If you're looking for bubbles on a budget"
:)
👍☕️
Thanks!
For the love of God, please replace your opening bump with something that doesn't instantly cause tinnitus.
I've reduced the volume - a lot. Sorry if it was too loud!
that voice though...eeww...🔞
No need to freak out because you grew an extra leg over it!
Creepiest voiceover EVER.
:)