Flower Patch (6) — Canon FD 50mm F1.8 Focus Shift

While a patch of flowers are blooming, I should test the Lenses as many as possible.

So, on this post, it was the Canon FD 50 mm F1.8 which was modified to have a motorized

focus.  Funnily enough, the controller of this operation was not that device I’ve designed

for focus-shift but for vibrating a lens.  Despite the battery voltage was low

(nominal 3.7 V battery could give 4.2 V soon after a flesh charge), I found that the

 same device could work for focus-shift as well with some adjustment of the timing.

Unlike the other Lenses of Canon EFS 18~55mm or Tamron &0~300mm, this

50mm lens was worked well on a hand-held shooting, and the pictures’

highlight got pretty smooth halo on them.  = That was what I wanted.

The lens was mounted in the plastic barrel which came from a broken Canon

compact camera G9, and with its barrel, the lens can extend to a close-up range

= almost 1/2 size though, unfortunately a blurring halo is an arch enemy of a

macro photography. —– still, some time, the result looks not too bad.  

(See the Bokeh on the blue flower, photo above, (click to enlarge) = they

don’t follow the “Depth of field” ! —– I don’t know how the 5D processed it )

When the lens was re-constructed in the G9’s barrel, I didn’t put the Iris,

therefore this lens is always fully open F1.8 = in this condition, quality of 

the image was rather good.   (You may feel, it’s too funny of me to say that

— Yes, a man after fuzzy image still see an importance of the sharpness)  🙂

[]

Flower Patch (5) — by 2-Element Homemade Lens (B)

2Ele Nikon

And the lens here was the other one, for Nikon mount type.  

Nikon fitting can be mounted 

on a Canon Eos body but not 

the other way round because 

the Nikon body (its frange-back 

on the Lens mount) is 2.5 mm

 thicker = Canon Lens on a Nikon body

can’t have an infinity focus but in the other hand, a mount 

converter on Canon for Nikon can have 2.5 mm to play with.

(Photo above, the lens was fitted with Nikon to EOS adapter.)

—– the reason why I further made Nikon type of this lens was,

“I wanted to have this fuzzy image in 32 MP sensor”— serious !   

(but the Canon is going to have 50 MP soon, how interesting.

—– Why 200K kind of image needs 20Mb size details ?

= this is THE Paradox — or joke Sir.   😀  )

Those two have a similar structure though, looks very different.

= Nikon type is much smaller still, as its front lens got stronger

curvature, it got stronger distortion.  And unlike Canon type,

I didn’t put an Iris (hole in a black-tape) the image has more flair.

—– (for a sake of choice, I left this fuzziness as it is.)

I got quite few lenses which give me sharp image, so it’s nice to have other

choices of the lenses which could create fuzzy, painterly images from subtle

to utterly impressionists painting like one.  The beauty of this exercise is,

I don’t need to rely on the tool (so called program) somebody else has made.

My art has to be created by myself and for it, I don’t use a readymade template.

(of cause, I didn’t make 5D camera myself, still some time I do.)   Ha ha ha.

[]

Flower Patch (4) — by 2-Element Homemade Lens (A)

There are two “2-Element Homemade Lens” = both were based on the

(supposedly) same toy camera lens (seems to have 27 mm focal length) but

one was using HOYA short-eyesight specs lens to lengthening the focal 

length, suits for a full-frame Canon 5D.  The other was using a strong concave

lens, came from a discarded zoom’s front element, and I made this for Nikon 

(though, for this test, I’ve used it on 5D with “Nikon to EOS” mount adapter.)  

As the original lens was designed for focus-free, they are the easiest  lens to 

use = unlike Pinhole, at least I could see the finder image, still no need to focus 

= just click, thanks to the camera’s AV mode.   🙂

And the photos in this post were taken by the HOYA-Canon type.

As focus-free, the lens could capture from quite close range to the distant subject

with very reasonable quality with an added “good” softness and the good deal of

halation which makes me smile with fun.  🙂

(though, I haven’t established whether its softness was the toy camera’s inherent character

 or caused by the added lens —– whichever the cause, it wouldn’t spoil my fun.)

And the images made by the toy camera lens (hence, close-up only) was in this post.

[]

Flower Patch (3) — by Double Density Pinhole

When the sun was bright and the distinctive (esp’ in color) subjects were there

= it’s the time to take the Wide-angle DD-Pinhole out.    As a kind of image, this 

lens could produce the most typical “Impressionistic” painterly image.

I very much like the image though, I may not have found the best subject

for this Lens yet.     (May be I need to go to the countryside where 

old masters took their canvas out.  🙂 )

[]

[]

Flowers by Vibrating Lens — Retake

Well, this was the retake of the previous post. — Since I found the most of the

photos there got a blurr by a hand-shake not by the vibrating motor intended.  

So I tried again using tripod. (You my need to see each photos, click, enlarged

and check the Bokeh imposed on the highlight (= bright yellow flower) and 

the sharp details maintained on the low-contrast area (= green leaves etc) )

I think, you might be convinced now the effect and the feasibility of this technique 

though, the question of What for may remain.

—– may be purely my endulgement, loves of the soft image.    

I would say, why not. 

(99% of the art are utterly useless, anyway.)  😀

————————————————————-

PS: The Lens I used were Canon EFS 18~55mm IS-II, Tamron Zoom 70~300mm,

the homemade device I used looks like this.

[]

 

Flower Patch by the Vibe-lens

I found a nice flower patch —– so, I took the pictures with the Lens Vibrating

Device for its first field test.   Yet there is the fundamental paradox, shake

the lens with vibrating motor to get painting like soft image but not as such 

to give too much blur, while flowers were blown by the wind and a holding 

hand shakes as well. —– So, some were successful but others were shaken 

too much still, as long as picture looks interesting, it’s OK.  🙂

(Lens used were, Modified Canon EFS Zoom 18~55mm IS-II,

Tamron Zoom 70~300mm, Canon 5D Mk-III)

With normal view, the flower looks like this.  🙂

Enjoyed ? —– or disturbed ?    Ha ha ha.  😀

[]

Vibe and Shift — (I mean together)

Isn’t this bokeh beautiful ? —– otherwise the photo looks just like

normal (photo left) —– What I gave to this photo was a shake.

(The lens was Tamron Zoom 70~300 mm)   As the vibrating motor

 was attached on the front filter ring, when it was vibrating, the 

focus ring was slipping off the prefocused position too.   Hence the

exposed photo gained a blur and an out-of-focus bokeh together.

(I think it looks like a softness of the Zeiss lens.  🙂 )

 While developing the device system

 which will give a good vibration 

 while shutter opened, I needed to

 tinker a lot on the electronic circuit.  

 As I don’t have any more Canon G9’s

battery, I resorted with Panasonic Lumix camera’s battery which has only 3.7 V

and its low Voltage gave me a lots of headache of instability.

Anyhow, I had to give numerous test click again and again while changing

the component etc etc = so, those photos were the by-product of the making.

The photos above here were created when the device was mounted on the

Canon EFS 18~55 zoom lens. = with funny halation, this photo looks like

an old anastigmat lens’.  🙂     Somewhat sweet isn’t it ?

 When photo was taken, while the lens 

 was vibrating, the hold of the camera 

 often shaken as well, creating just

 blurred image.

 (Never mind nobody is perfect.  🙂 )

 ( —– Such blurr could be utilized

 somewhere other photo session.  🙂 )

— When I finished the building work,

I’ll take the camera out for a field test.

(hopefully, before the Summer ended.  Ha ha ha  )

[]

Lens ID — EXIF or Selfy

On the previous post, in order to show the sample photo of each lens, 

I took a lots of sample photos. —– then, to compile and name them, 

I found a difficulties —not always I could tell the photo by which lens.   

The each file of the photo normally having EXIF data though, it needs 

to have the lens’ ID from the lens’ rom memory in other words, lens

got to be a dedicated type.  

Unfortunately, lots of my lens isn’t genuine or dedicated type, so that

there was no EXIF data (still, I have 10 genuine lenses from Canon

— other lenses I’m still using with converter, adapter may be 20 

 altogether ?)  therefore often I have to guess which lens it was.

 ( When EXIF said 0mm lens, 1/8 second and if ISO setting was 12800 

= it’s likely a pinhole ! —– On the end, I decided to take “Selfy” on 

a mirror or a photo of the lens itself to record which lens was used

to take its sample photo.

Incidentally this was the Wide-angle Double Density Pinhole. (clopped photo)

By  this, low-contrast, low-color-contrast test shot, some of them showed

that they were not suited for this kind of subject !

= still I got good chart to select each of them.

[]

What is the Softness of the Lens ?

(Photo above is a sample of  “Lens Vibration” with Tamron 70~300mm lens)

A man who was amazed of me pursuing the softness of the image,

asked me what’s such a fuss all about ? —– I asked him what lens

has he been using ?  

He said, such as 24~70, 70~200 both F4, and used to have 10~20mm as

well.  And his understanding of the softness was “degrading halation”

of the lens, hence when he need such effect, he use vaseline on a filter

(to degrade the sharp image). (= Obviously He had no chance to learn

the Softness by himself.)   

Then, I asked, has he ever heard the softness of the Zeiss 85mm F1.4

lens.  —– He said that he had heard about it but never used that

lens or seen the image consciously.

[]

Not only this guy but many people misunderstood that the Bokeh is

just  a halation — which was utterly wrong.—– So, I promised him

to show the sample photo of the Zeiss 85mm F1.4 lens and its typical

soft image.   Sound funny though, a lots of people heard the legend of

that 85mm lens but very few of them actually seen the demonstration

photo of its softness.

—– Why bother with soft images ?  = Zoologist Desmond Morris (famous with his book “Naked Ape”  “Man watching” ) pointed out the matter in his book  “Woman watching” that when we adore the thing or the person, our eye’s pupil wide open = making the image fuzzy.    May be that is the image what we most wanted.  And that was why Artistic Images are often fuzzy, like the oil paintings or even abstract. = Clear sharp image is for practical / prosaic use.

This phenomenon must explain the crucial point in what is the Art.  —– With an idiosyncratic view, you may think that the fuzzy image is poorer as an information media.  But it is too superficial. = fuzzy image may seemed to have less amount of the information “Bit” though when it projected into our brain, it stimulates and induces far more information.   Because fuzzy image is not as specific and precise, it would overlap and related to many more images or bague memories.  In another word, fuzzy image is far more rich.

This sample image here was taken by the very Zeiss 85mm Planar F1.4  lens

and its part-enlargement.

This rather prominent Bokeh is the legendary softness of the lens.

(Without this, I didn’t buy this lens and changed camera from Nikon 

to Contax and it was a start of my 30 odd years long affair with

soft image.) 

And this is a sample image of Zeiss 55mm F1.4.  The Bokeh is slightly

less still, the image has the same characteristic of the Zeiss lens.

(Sharp still Soft)    🙂

If you think that all the 85mm lens has more or less the same character,

as the size of the minimum circle of confusion is the same, hence

theoretical depth-of-field is the same, then have a look this

AF Nikkor 85mm F1.8.  — This lens shows very little Bokeh of the 

Spherical Aberration, still showed  slight Chromatic Aberration. 

(faint blue lines on the edge)

How about the latest designed lens, Canon EFS 18~55mm IS-II.

(this photo, at 55mm) Image quality is good but it has a Chromatic

aberration — blue lines on the edge.

And this was done by 10 times more expensive lens, EF 24~70mm F2.8

(at 70mm)  It’s got to be very sharp = and no softness at all

= prosaically dry image !  

In contrast, this 100-year-old Anastigmat 75 mm F5.4 lens shows

not-sharp at all image, yet “somewhat” common with Zeiss lens

 = wet, but not necessary soft, just too much halation of fungi.

If you think that the softness could be just added by the digital

manipulation ?   Well, those samples were made by so-called “Soft

focus effect” of the Picasa 3.

(This one has the sharp center right of the flower) = as digital effect

doesn’t know 3D depth of the subject, its Bokeh doesn’t follow the

distance but gave a halo in gradually intensifying circle = looks

too unnatural and messy.

And this one was made without the center = everywhere is evenly

fuzzy = looks no different from a low resolution security-camera.

Soft image is not the same to low resolution fuzzy image nor just out

of focus Bokeh = it needs to have a sharp core image together with

slightly dispositioned (not sharply converging) light which creates wet

softness. (Good soft image looks as if it is a mesmerizing moistened

skin = wet !)   Look the afore sample photos again.  Why Zeiss lenses

has Bokeh while Nikon 85mm (even though it was F1.8 not F1.4) has

not at all.  That was why the Carl Zeiss 85mm F1.4 lens keeps its 

legendary reputation.

(and I’ve been working hard to simulate its softness by different means.)

—– Convinced ?  

[]

Soft Image by Lens Vibration

After seeing the results of Somerset House shooting, I realized that the

“Focus-Shifting Technique” may not suite for that kind

of subject. —–> Then, I should try the 

Camera  Shake or Lens Vibration.

 There was a  good sample in my past

 experiment.    (Though, to replicate the

 same, perfect effect was not very easy.)

So that, in this time, in order to give a good shake to the camera, I devised a

vibrating element (small motor with ex-centric rotor) mounted on the lens. First, I tried it with Sigma Zoom 28~200mm while mounting the motor parallel

to the lens’ axis.(Photo above left)   But together with an effect of the gravity,

lens vibrated simple up and down.  Therefore, I changed to mount the motor 

perpendicular to the lens axis. (Photo center, Canon EFS 18~55 mm Zoom.  

And the Photo right, Tamron Zoom 70~300 mm)  

= As a result, the lens vibrates much more complexed way

= making a blur every direction.  — Still, there was much more decisive factor

here = the Sigma’s Zoom was quite hefty size and the weight, in comparison to

the almost weightless Canon EFS ZOOM 18~55mm which optical unit must be

lot easier to be shaken. —– (Position of the motor or its direction, such as on top

of the lens or 4:o’clock, 10:o’clock position and the camera’s direction etc are

also crucial)  It was the matter of the balance between the vibrating force and the

inertia of the optical unit or the camera body = hell lot of complicated dynamics.

On the end, a simple rule was, that if it wasn’t good, change the position of

the motor and try again. 🙂

This is the same flower as before, but here by the Lens Vibration on the

Tamron Zoom 70~300 mm at 130 mm . —– check the photo clicked and

enlarged to see its original sharp details and the added soft blur.  

Then to have a comparison with previous photo by the Focus Shift.

I know, I’m doing a very destructive aggressive approach to the photography,

somewhat akin to a musician smashing his own instrument though, I’m not

doing this for the sake of Conceptual Blah Blah but simply to create 

aesthetically nice soft image. —- It’s a paradox Sir.  

And, I’m having a fun— a lots.   😀  

( I need to go back to the Somerset House again and a field shooting to prove

that those exercises are not for wasting the time.   Ha ha ha. )  

[]