[DavidSKAF3]

Here's another question which will likely result in a broad mix of replies.

What would you say are either the top, or perhaps how would you say, "most well-regarded" lenses for Bokeh?

Is a more expensive lens generally expected to have more appealing Bokeh?

Are there any surprising cheap lenses, Bokeh-wise?

Thanks to all!

[rbefly]

Hello David,
Now you've narrowed the qualifications down to an area that I can relate to, although you'll still get lots of varying replies. Here's mine;
Vivitar Series 1 90mm f/2.5 VMC Macro. aka "The Bokina".
Bokeh to die for. Google it and see for yourself.
JMO, YMMV,
Ron

[jeffshaddix]

Volna-9 50/2.8 macro - gaussian background bokeh that's quite rare, and not too expensive, though harder to use (M42).

[DavidSKAF3]

Fascinating! I guess these unique lenses can turn up just about anywhere?

[sterretje]

I can't say if it's the champ but I love the bokeh results of the Vivitar 55/2.8 macro.

[DavidSKAF3]

A pattern of "champs" or maybe even one specific champ might emerge from the various replies. I expect it's a matter of taste by and large.

Vivitar has come up twice.

Interestingly, and I could not say how or why, but I've always had the impression that Vivitar makes cheap, second-rate camera accessories and whatnot. And so I ignore Vivitar items when I am scrolling through lists of lenses for sale. And I do the same with Promaster and Quantaray. And both Sears and JC Penny, too!

Hmmm. Guess there is something big I don't know here?

[Miguel]

A pattern of "champs" or maybe even one specific champ might emerge from the various replies. I expect it's a matter of taste by and large.

Vivitar has come up twice.

Interestingly, and I could not say how or why, but I've always had the impression that Vivitar makes cheap, second-rate camera accessories and whatnot. And I ignore Vivitar items. And I do the same with Promaster and Quantary and Sears and JC Penny, too!

Hmmm. Guess there is something big I don't know here...

Vivitar is cheapo now, buuuut then the brand was quite a game changer in the photo biz. Do some online homework to learn more.

M

[scratchpaddy]

Pretty sure most of the replies are going to be listing old lenses, with the exception of some Limiteds.

My own favorite is the Helios 40 (85mm f/1.5), which is unfortunately not cheap anymore. It's technically a pretty awful lens at wide apertures, but the bokeh has some major swirl to it.

My second favorite is the FA 50 f/1.4. It's so wonderfully smooth at f/2. I've never handled the earliest 8-element Takumar version of this lens, but I've read that it's even better. I do have the 50 f/1.2, though, and I actually like the bokeh of the f/1.4's better.

[scratchpaddy]

Oh, ask @pinholecam about his Takumar 100 f/2. None of us will ever get hold of that lens, but we can dream...

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/31601-takumar-club-post242...ml#post2428634

[stevebrot]

Are there any surprising cheap lenses, Bokeh-wise?

Helios 44 (choose your version) 58/2

Generally inexpensive. If the price hurts, you are paying too much. I think I paid $15 USD for my Helios 44M.

A few notes about variants:

• All share the same optical formula, derived directly from the pre-WWII Zeiss Biotar
• Helios 44-n are all screw mount with pre-set apertures, some early version are M39 rather than M42, high blade count with circular aperture
• Helios 44M and Helios 44M-n All M42 with automatic aperture. All but 44M require minor surgery to convert to manual aperture to allow for adapted use.
• Helios 44K-4 K-mount (sole exception to the dirt cheap rule due to demand)
• Many (most?) show "swirly" bokeh

One of my favs from my copy:




Steve

[stevebrot]

My own favorite is the Helios 40 (85mm f/1.5), which is unfortunately not cheap anymore.

Well, if you are going to mention the Helios 40, it is good to throw in the Jupiter-9 85/2. It too used to be fairly cheap, but demand has driven prices up, though much less than the Helios 40.

My personal fav from my copy:




Steve

[DavidSKAF3]

Well, if you are going to mention the Helios 40, it is good to throw in the Jupiter-9 85/2. It too used to be fairly cheap, but demand has driven prices up, though much less than the Helios 40.

My personal fav from my copy:




Steve

Thanks for that thorough write-up about Helios lenses.

Hope this isn't a silly question, but are the samples originally film exposures?

[Gareth]

I've owned nearly all the lenses mentioned!

Another great bokeh lens is the Super Takumar 55mm f1.8
A few I've taken with it:
Flickr Search: Pentax 55mm m42

Also, the Helios is a great lens but at the wrong angle can give swirl bokeh which is cool but can be extreme and not pleasent
Again 2 examples from my images taken with it, one showing normal bokeh, the other is swirl:
Flickr Search: Helios

[Heie]

I'd say the DA* 55 f/1.4 and the FA 77 f/1.8 are the two 'Bokeh Champs' of the current Pentax line-up. For zooms it would be the DA* 60-250 f/4 in my opinion (I never liked the DA* 50-135, but many will claim that one for the zoom title).

-Heie

[Miguel]

Is a more expensive lens generally expected to have more appealing Bokeh?

Hate to give squishy answers, but "sometimes" seems about right here. As with the excellent examples above, I favor the bokeh of older lenses. But some can be pricey.
The Helios is a bargain, and I kinda regret selling mine years ago. Fortunately they are around in good condition. Here's a shot from mine.

Tulips



My favorite bokeh lens is the Mamiya/Sekor 60mm f2.8 preset M42. (Tomioka is the same thing.) These are hard to find. When I was younger a cranky guy who owned an amazing old-style camera repair place that seemed like it was co-occupied by Dr. Emmett Brown, dug this one up for me from some mysterious cavern. These are from the *DS years ago.

Purple Heather



Dahlia



Finally, to the opposite cost spectrum, the Voigtlander SL 125mm is quite special all the way around.

Purple Violet



M