Best Bokeh Lens

nope... 85 2.2 soft is a unique beast, I don't there is any thing like it anywhere.

Great to know that.
I found out that the A*85 and the FA77 optic formula are quite the same, the FA*85 on the other hand does seem to be one of a kind as well.

I have a couple of manual lenses with interesting bokeh. I'll start with these two:

Vivitar 2/28 (kiron made)@f/2:

[IMG]http://i490.photobucket.com/albums/rr270/ploski4/dezevnaprestolnica.jpg[/IMG]
taken on a walk through my lit-up hometown of Ljubljana (Slovenia)

[IMG]http://i490.photobucket.com/albums/rr270/ploski4/upsidedown8.jpg[/IMG]
another "day shot"

PK Makinon 2,8/135 @f/2,8:

[IMG]http://i490.photobucket.com/albums/rr270/ploski4/mijau.jpg[/IMG]

In my opinon bokeh is a matter of personal taste. I can only speak for myself when saying that I like these two

Vivitar 2/28 bokeh is certainly nice as an feature but it isn't for every type of photo.

Makinon 2,8/135 looks pleasant though, very nice Luka

I suppose Bokeh preference is to the viewer.
Personally I love the Bokeh that Leica lenses produce (just go on flickr to see). But with their curved 15 blades, what do you expect? Very creamy no harshness at all, and of course sharp as anything.....
Of course Pentax primes are not far behind, as are 3rd party lenses.
Personally the best bokeh that mine produce ar as follows:-

Sigma 105mm Macro
link
Tamron 90mm F2.5 SP Macro with 2x
link
SMC-Pentax FA 50mm F1.4
link

The Pentax 50mm produce a little harder bokeh, but still it is very nice.

So, unless you can afford £4K for a Leica M9 and a further £7K for a 50mm Noctilux F0.95, then the Pentax option does not seem so bad.....

Iain, aperture blades have nothing to do with Bokeh, it's a marketing myth. It's for them easier to say that curved or larger number of blades lead to better bokeh but no such thing is true.

The bokeh becomes so harsh if the lens over corrects and move the light to the outside making those doughnut you see at Luka first photo, it will never get soft. Actually the lens needs to direct the light to the centre and then you get an drop off at the edges making them soft.

Iain, I'm sorry to say that I need an password to see your photos so I don't know.

ps. if you want smooth bokeh, then this lens must be the best link

I disagree a little, but I know what you mean.

The only reason I mention, blades, is that you can (and do sometimes) see the defined blade outline on the bokeh. for example the hexagon. Where as having more curved blades lessen the impact on the harsh straight lines that lesser blades can give. It is not a myth. However, the impact only affects shorter lenses (up to 50mm in reality) as longer lenses counter the blade structure more and more. For instance once you get beyond 200mm, and wide F stop then the effect is non-existant, nice smooth bokeh.

As for the links, leave it with me. I might have to do them again.

I love that abstract night shot with the Vivitar!

My 135mm f3.5:

That shot of Ljubljana is really beautiful, Flat 4. There's nowhere obvious to rest the eye, but it doesn't matter as the colours and bokeh effect are sensational.

Stefan I totally agree with you on the part of vivitar's bokeh. It's use is limited by the type of photo. In some cases, like the one above where there is some new year's lightning decoration, the photograph can benefit from it, but in many other cases, where you get multiple light sources in the background, it can be harsh and too obvious.

Mhuni, thank you for your compliments.

To continue with bokeh samples:

M42 pentacon 4/200 (old version with 16 aperture blades) @f/4
[IMG]http://i490.photobucket.com/albums/rr270/ploski4/natravniku800.jpg[/IMG]

M42 Helios 44M 2/58 @f/2 (one of my favourite lens):
[IMG]http://i490.photobucket.com/albums/rr270/ploski4/helios58-2jpg.jpg[/IMG]

regards, Luka

DA*60-250 - Taken this morning down by the lake

I've seen distinct hexagon highlights with a 90mm 6-blade lens (and perhaps longer ones too), so it doesn't only affect lenses up to 50mm.

I quite like these 2

DA*50-135 @ f2.8

[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/50-135-f28.jpg[/IMG]

and FA 31mm ltd @ f3.5

[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/Bazar-Dried-Peppers.jpg[/IMG]

(I've had sizing problems, so these are saved for web - hopefully it hasn't changed the colour too much)

Kind regards to all

You got two terms mixed up are giving more meaning to bokeh then it is.

What you mean is the blur disk, blur circle, or blur spot.
The aperture surely defines the shape on those and how the light is distributed in the disk is called bokeh.
At least that was the meaning when it was introduced but now it has the global meaning that everything that is out of focus is bokeh... they are a bit right because bokeh is about the light after all but out of focus blur is a much better word then and better to understand, in my onion but who am I.

Thank you all for the other photos.
Thought I would do that in another comment not to clutter things up

@Will, lovely front focus blur you've there, it's nicely blurred and not distracting at all.

@Luka, these are very nice, somehow long lenses always have a good bokeh, must be a construction thing to get the long focal length.

The Helios 44M has also a very nice bokeh, it's quite soft.

@David, thank you for the shot, the bokeh looks very good as well.
Thought there would be more photos here with that lens

@Nathan, I also love the DA*50-135 but just behind the DOF there is a small range where the bokeh gets busy. Since it's a small range it can create some interesting effect with being distracting but got one shot where most of the background is in that range and it doesn't look good
But when you get past that point the bokeh is nicely soft and pleasant as you show us

The FA 31mm ltd is a lens I haven't seen much from but it's a very good lens as well according to your photo, what a lovely lens. Very well balanced by the looks of it.