camera lens bokeh discussion.

[taneepak]

Certain lens designs are famous for their good bokeh (out-of-focus background). The Zeiss Sonnar and the Leitz Summilux rangefinder lenses are legendary in this area. Even a 50 year old Sonnar lens (rangefinder type) can produce better bokeh than a modern top quality Canon or Nikon lens.

[taneepak]

How about
50mm f/1.4 1/60 using a 50mm f/1.4 AIS on my D40 so no metering or AF
(handheld, indoors and low light)

Better, but if you look hard you will see an outline of your camera's pentagon shape blades. Get your hand (borrow or buy) on a Sonnar or Summilux portrait lens (German origin) and compare.

[Neil Nicholls]

Better, but if you look hard you will see an outline of your camera's pentagon shape blades.

Where? I don't know what I'm looking for.

edit:
do you mean caused by the diaphragm in the lens or something in the camera?

[kwun]

Where? I don't know what I'm looking for.

edit:
do you mean caused by the diaphragm in the lens or something in the camera?

i cannot find it either.

besides, the photo was shot wide open at f/1.4. when wide open, the aperture is round. it is only shaped when stopped down.

[Cheung]

Have to confess I have the same difficulty as Neil. Pentagon means five sided. There are some blurry bits in the top left quadrant which "with the eye of faith" might look something like five sides - possibly..? Other than that the only other five sided objects I can see might be the petals on the flower.

Perhaps for 95% of the population, the bokeh is good enough. There are some people who can really discern the details for whom it would make a difference.

I'm glad not to have tried those classic lenses because they would be just wasted on me.

[kwun]

can u deal with a "bubble like" crystal rather than a flat one? hehe......that would be a challenge!
by the way, it's a nice watch and it doesn't seem to be 10 years old!!!

hm... i don't know. i don't own a watch with a bubble crystal.

yeah. i love this watch. very reliable and the design is simple and effective. i hope it will last for another 10, 20 yrs.

[Neil Nicholls]

there are 7 blades in that f/1.4 lens also

[taneepak]

Where? I don't know what I'm looking for.

edit:
do you mean caused by the diaphragm in the lens or something in the camera?

Look at the whitish background out-of-focus small 'flowers' at the bottom. They have an outline that is shaped a bit like a pentagon or maybe 6 to 8 sided aperture diaphragm blades. A good shape would have no outline, roundish and softly fading away at the edges. The one at the top behind the left flower also can be improved.

[taneepak]

This is the type of bokeh to strive for : http://www.flickr.com/groups/birdbok...7594098282277/

[Neil Nicholls]

This is the type of bokeh to strive for :

OK, yes, that looks good.
But is that just because there are no other things near the subject. The background is a long way back from the subject, and so is very out-of-focus.


still don't really see what you mean in my photo.
Can you just download it, edit it in paint and stick some arrows in or something?

[Neil Nicholls]

oh!
did you mean here?
I'm not sure if that's just a coincidence or not.

[taneepak]

OK, yes, that looks good.
But is that just because there are no other things near the subject. The background is a long way back from the subject, and so is very out-of-focus.


still don't really see what you mean in my photo.
Can you just download it, edit it in paint and stick some arrows in or something?

There out-of-focus background can show some details of the background if it is important you need to connect it with the center of focus or it can be used to make your center of focus or attention stand out. Your flowers is the second type, and being white you need really good bokeh to make it stand out. As it is we are seeing too much clutter at the back which are not reproduced to have a good bokeh to make your front flowers stand out.
I am not too good with the computer and will have to get someone to point out-you mean inserting pointers and arrows?-to me or teach me how to highlight the points of light at the back that are more pentagon than round.

[taneepak]

oh!
did you mean here?
I'm not sure if that's just a coincidence or not.

Yes, and also more to the left. These non-round points of light should be round, very soft and should have absolutely no edge or outline to enhance the flowers instead of being a distraction. Something like the pictures of the two birds.

[red00ecstrat]

Yes, and also more to the left. These non-round points of light should be round, very soft and should have absolutely no edge or outline to enhance the flowers instead of being a distraction. Something like the pictures of the two birds.

it isn't fair to compare those two pictures in this way!
firstly, i m pretty sure that bird picture wasn't shot with a 50mm lens! secondly, both shots were in different situation and with different background.
even if they were shot in the same situation with lenses with same focal length and same aperture. is there anything wrong with that "pentagon"? do you think it's too annoying somehow?

[Neil Nicholls]

there are 7 blades in that f/1.4 lens also

out of focus points of light in the background produce circles when fully open , and heptagons when stopped down.
I haven't got any lenses with 5 blades.

[kwun]

out of focus points of light in the background produce circles when fully open , and heptagons when stopped down.
I haven't got any lenses with 5 blades.

Neil is that directly from your 50/1.4 AIS? if so, i must say that the current production 50/1.4 AF-D that i got has much worse looking bokeh.

[red00ecstrat]

it remind me some interesting stuff! may by it's silly somehow.
if u cut a little star and stick it in fromt of your lens. then those "whatevertago" will become a star! of coz your can try that with different shape.