Comments on: bokeh – the quality of blur http://neilvn.com/tangents/2009/01/10/bokeh-the-quality-of-blur/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=bokeh-the-quality-of-blur photography by Neil van Niekerk Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:18:53 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Robert Potter http://neilvn.com/tangents/2009/01/10/bokeh-the-quality-of-blur/#comment-20831 Robert Potter Fri, 22 Apr 2011 19:22:36 +0000 http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/?p=314#comment-20831 @Phil There are thousands of variations of bokeh you can't just say only X,Y and Z type lens have it. The effect each one gives is down to each individual persons taste. I have a pile of digital photos shot with the Olympus 50mm Zuiko F1.4 giving amazing bokeh and clients loved them all and paid me in full. By the way the word "bokeh" comes from the Japanese language and literally signifies something which is unclear or out of focus. @Phil There are thousands of variations of bokeh you can’t just say only X,Y and Z type lens have it. The effect each one gives is down to each individual persons taste. I have a pile of digital photos shot with the Olympus 50mm Zuiko F1.4 giving amazing bokeh and clients loved them all and paid me in full. By the way the word “bokeh” comes from the Japanese language and literally signifies something which is unclear or out of focus.

]]> By: Matt http://neilvn.com/tangents/2009/01/10/bokeh-the-quality-of-blur/#comment-20442 Matt Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:45:47 +0000 http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/?p=314#comment-20442 @Phil 'bad' is bright edges, bright centres, coma (as previously discussed). IMO, the boke of the 2/105 in the demonstration is ok but not stellar (especially considering that the shot is at f5.6). I would rate any Sonnar formula lens (e.g DDR Zeiss Jena) or Angenieux as better than this. Thanks for a good article and blog. Best, M @Phil ‘bad’ is bright edges, bright centres, coma (as previously discussed). IMO, the boke of the 2/105 in the demonstration is ok but not stellar (especially considering that the shot is at f5.6). I would rate any Sonnar formula lens (e.g DDR Zeiss Jena) or Angenieux as better than this. Thanks for a good article and blog. Best, M

]]> By: Phil http://neilvn.com/tangents/2009/01/10/bokeh-the-quality-of-blur/#comment-19655 Phil Mon, 28 Mar 2011 04:49:37 +0000 http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/?p=314#comment-19655 With all due respect to Robert Potter, I believe that the bokeh on your pic is an example of bad bokeh. I get that wiry impression from it that Neil mentioned in his article. For better perspective, try to look at a pic taken with a Canon 135/2L where the transitions are much smoother. Or try an 85/1.8. Please understand that this in not a critique of your skills but fair commentary on the properties and characteristics of the lens. I don't think any amount of skill can get good bokeh out of a lens with bad bokeh (if I read Neil's article right). Bokeh is what it is. As far as the rendering of the shot goes, I happen to think it was done very well. Colors came out great and the subject matter stands out from his background. FWIW I'm also still confused as to why it should be construed as "good," "neutral" or "bad" bokeh when all of it is subjective. True art should be a product of the artist, not the instrument. With all due respect to Robert Potter, I believe that the bokeh on your pic is an example of bad bokeh. I get that wiry impression from it that Neil mentioned in his article. For better perspective, try to look at a pic taken with a Canon 135/2L where the transitions are much smoother. Or try an 85/1.8.

Please understand that this in not a critique of your skills but fair commentary on the properties and characteristics of the lens. I don’t think any amount of skill can get good bokeh out of a lens with bad bokeh (if I read Neil’s article right). Bokeh is what it is.

As far as the rendering of the shot goes, I happen to think it was done very well. Colors came out great and the subject matter stands out from his background. FWIW I’m also still confused as to why it should be construed as “good,” “neutral” or “bad” bokeh when all of it is subjective. True art should be a product of the artist, not the instrument.

]]> By: Stefon http://neilvn.com/tangents/2009/01/10/bokeh-the-quality-of-blur/#comment-14993 Stefon Sun, 16 Jan 2011 11:58:00 +0000 http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/?p=314#comment-14993 Very good article that explain a lot about bokeh and separate the reality from the "urban legend"... Always a pleasure to read your site. Very good article that explain a lot about bokeh and separate the reality from the “urban legend”…
Always a pleasure to read your site.

]]> By: Robert Potter http://neilvn.com/tangents/2009/01/10/bokeh-the-quality-of-blur/#comment-10768 Robert Potter Fri, 05 Nov 2010 04:12:35 +0000 http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/?p=314#comment-10768 I bought an old Olympus 50mm Zuiko F1.4 lens off ebay for $100USD and fitted it with an adapter ring to use it on my Canon 40D. I also bought a spilt focus screen to help me do manual focusing. I believe that this lens gives you one of the best bokeh looks even compared to expensive modern lenses. Take a look at this shot I took using the Zuiko 50mm F1.4 lens at F2. http://www.photoshoot.com.mx/bokeh/rp_bokeh_web.jpg There are some awesome cheap manual lenses with great bokeh available on the second hand market. I bought an old Olympus 50mm Zuiko F1.4 lens off ebay for $100USD and fitted it with an adapter ring to use it on my Canon 40D. I also bought a spilt focus screen to help me do manual focusing.

I believe that this lens gives you one of the best bokeh looks even compared to expensive modern lenses.

Take a look at this shot I took using the Zuiko 50mm F1.4 lens at F2.

http://www.photoshoot.com.mx/bokeh/rp_bokeh_web.jpg

There are some awesome cheap manual lenses with great bokeh available on the second hand market.

]]> By: Neil vN http://neilvn.com/tangents/2009/01/10/bokeh-the-quality-of-blur/#comment-10105 Neil vN Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:13:12 +0000 http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/?p=314#comment-10105 <blockquote>If everything else stays the same .. point of view; aperture; etc .. then the cropped sensor is just that - a crop of a (hypothetical) larger image. So the bokeh has to be the same then. Neil vN</blockquote>

If everything else stays the same .. point of view; aperture; etc .. then the cropped sensor is just that – a crop of a (hypothetical) larger image. So the bokeh has to be the same then.

Neil vN

]]> By: Jeremy T http://neilvn.com/tangents/2009/01/10/bokeh-the-quality-of-blur/#comment-10104 Jeremy T Mon, 11 Oct 2010 10:32:01 +0000 http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/?p=314#comment-10104 Hi Neil, You've said a few times in the comments that sensor size doesn't affect bokeh quality. However, as the bokeh is affected to quite a large extent by the depth of field, this may not hold true - the reason behind this of course being that depth of field is affected by the size of the focal plane. If you consider that, when using lenses of the same equivalent focal length (and for this example, say with equal optical quality) to obtain the same FOV on full frame and APS-C sensor bodies, aperture needs to be changed to accomodate the depth of field. Obviously there is a noticeable difference in the depth of field. The point is, anyway, that this change in DOF would affect the bokeh, would it not? Hi Neil,

You’ve said a few times in the comments that sensor size doesn’t affect bokeh quality. However, as the bokeh is affected to quite a large extent by the depth of field, this may not hold true – the reason behind this of course being that depth of field is affected by the size of the focal plane.

If you consider that, when using lenses of the same equivalent focal length (and for this example, say with equal optical quality) to obtain the same FOV on full frame and APS-C sensor bodies, aperture needs to be changed to accomodate the depth of field. Obviously there is a noticeable difference in the depth of field.

The point is, anyway, that this change in DOF would affect the bokeh, would it not?

]]> By: Renato Costa http://neilvn.com/tangents/2009/01/10/bokeh-the-quality-of-blur/#comment-6914 Renato Costa Mon, 31 May 2010 20:40:37 +0000 http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/?p=314#comment-6914 Very nice article Neil. Worth to mention the existence of Minolta/Sony 135mm STF 135mm f/2.8 [T4.5], with its apodization filter that provides a very high quality bokeh. So great that made me buy a Sony body, only to use this gem. Regards. Very nice article Neil.
Worth to mention the existence of Minolta/Sony 135mm STF 135mm f/2.8 [T4.5], with its apodization filter that provides a very high quality bokeh.
So great that made me buy a Sony body, only to use this gem.
Regards.

]]> By: Carl H http://neilvn.com/tangents/2009/01/10/bokeh-the-quality-of-blur/#comment-6186 Carl H Thu, 22 Apr 2010 16:05:24 +0000 http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/?p=314#comment-6186 Thank you for bringing this point to the surface. The term bokeh has become the buzz word of the digital world...and used incorrectly 95% of the time. Thank you for bringing this point to the surface. The term bokeh has become the buzz word of the digital world…and used incorrectly 95% of the time.

]]> By: AndrĂ© P. http://neilvn.com/tangents/2009/01/10/bokeh-the-quality-of-blur/#comment-6125 AndrĂ© P. Mon, 19 Apr 2010 16:14:11 +0000 http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/?p=314#comment-6125 Great explanation. My mind was already set on shallow DOF = Bokeh... But, as always you make me that "aaaaaaaaaaaah... of course... how stupid" feeling. Great explanation. My mind was already set on shallow DOF = Bokeh… But, as always you make me that “aaaaaaaaaaaah… of course… how stupid” feeling.

]]>