I have the Minolta MC 58mm f1.4 and it only has 6 blades. I suppose I will have to try it but won't hold my hopes up that it's formation will be circular.
I have the Minolta MC 58mm f1.4 and it only has 6 blades. I suppose I will have to try it but won't hold my hopes up that it's formation will be circular.
There's more to life than round highlights. The old Minolta does creamy OOF backgrounds at large apertures better than almost any fast prime I've shot.
I just purchased a Nikon S2 with a 5cm/1,4 that has 12 blades but I haven't had the chance to use it yet. I do have to add my thoughts on the Minolta Auto Rokkor 58/1,4. This lens gives the creamiest bokeh that I have ever seen from any lens. I have a few examples around here somewhere that I will try to post. But in the mean time check out the Rokkor files for comparisons of Minolta lenses and the bokeh they produce, you may be surprised.
The Zeiss-Opton Sonnar f1.5 on my Contax iiiA has 11 blades.. however at f2.8, f4, and f5.6 the circle is a jagged pattern. at other apertures, it is almost completely round.
Question: Wide open, arent most apertures completely round? It is certainly true for my Zuikos, where the aperture is completely out of the light path and a metal ring is all that is visible. Stopped down, you wont have much bokeh anyway.
While not exactly what the OP asked, in my experience the number of blades doesn't necessarily correspond to good bokeh.
For example, my Zeiss (for Rollei) 35 & 85mm f/1.4 lenses have nearly triangular aperture openings (looks like 3 blades, but probably really 6 or more), but also stellar bokeh.
I can think of some RF lenses (presumably many-bladed - can't verify right now) whose bokeh I find pretty awful...