Bokeh vs shallow depth-of-field (DoF)
The first thing you might notice in this image is our super-cute model, Johannie.
Next you will probably notice either:
– the strange background pattern, due to the bokeh of this lens
– or the shallow depth-of-field of the Nikon 50mm f/1.4D used wide open
– or the lighting on her, (a reflector),
These are all inter-related in some way for this photo …
Bokeh
With this photo I want to illustrate a certain point about bokeh – shallow depth-of-field is not the same as having great bokeh.
It was shot with a 50mm lens, at the widest aperture – f/1.4
While the DoF / depth-of-field is wafer-thin, the out-of-focus leaves and branches in the background have an intrusive harsh shape to the edges. The out-of-focus benches in the background also have that strange double effect to their shape. This is because this lens exhibits harsh bokeh. Not smooth. Definitely not “buttery”.
I want to reiterate this again – even though the depth-of-field is shallow, the bokeh remains harsh. This is simply due to the actual optical design of this lens. In this case I used the Nikon AF-D 50mm f1.4 lens, but the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 and Canon 50mm f/1.8 look very similar. Ideally we’d want a lens that offers shallow depth of field to also exhibit great bokeh – a smooth rendition of the background. This comparison between various Canon 50mm lenses show how the bokeh differs, with the more expensive glass performing better.
Shallow depth of field
Using a shallow depth of field is possibly the easiest way to direct attention to your subject. Your subject pops out from the background, giving a near 3-D effect when used well. And then we just need to take care of our lighting, our composition and the background, for more effective on-location portraits.
The things we need to consider in our photography are nearly invariably inter-connected like that in some way.
Using a reflector for lighting
Since I desired a very shallow depth of field in such bright light, the wide aperture forced a high shutter speed. The shutter speed being higher than maximum flash sync speed, would mean I’d have two options:
– use high-speed sync on my flash. This would mean reduced output on my flash. And the easiest would be to use wireless radio controllers like the Radio Poppers.
– use a reflector.
Camera settings: 1/4000 @ f1.4 @ 200 ISO
I had my assistant hold up a white reflector to throw some light directly onto our model. This then created that interesting tightly ‘focused’ light on just her face and upper part of her body. The light that is reflected from the sun like this is pretty harsh, so I made sure that Johannie didn’t have to look directly into this. I also had my assistant throw the light onto her for very short moments in which I’d shoot a burst of images.
This would also explain the change in color balance across our model’s body. Her face is now lit by sunlight, yet the rest of her body is still in shadow. Two different white balance settings would be needed .. which of course is impossible in-camera. But I like the effect here – it helps direct attention to her.
A reflector is often used for just a bit of fill-light on the subject, but in this case the light from the reflector becomes a main source of light.
Related articles
- More articles on bokeh
- Bokeh – the quality of blur
- Bokeh – a few notes
- Full-frame vs Crop-sensor comparison : Depth-of-field & perspective
- How to get a blurred background in photos
- Effective on-location portraits
That’s a great explanation/illustration of why bokeh is not always good and also why good bokeh is not hand in hand with shallow DOF.
hello neil,
sorry for speaking so, but you are right. this bokeh is ugly. you see the picture and you feel something not harmony, just disturbing you.
a kind of growling, not stabilized.
it feels as the picture has some vibrations, like a machine where you may destroy concrete*gg*.
i have found a lot of pics of you where the bokeh looks very good and blowy.
you can feel the softness and the speaking of the picture was where good, like leaving good wine.
i will try this with my panaleica summilux 25mm/1.4 and the olympus 50mm makro/2.0.
thanks for sharing and your upcoming blog about bokeh.
your site is such as fantastic and great :-))
grts
olympus
I found that Nikon 50mm lenses have very bad bokeh that you really have to watch your background and make sure you don’t have too much going on in the background. It is one of the reasons I returned the lens when I bought it last year. If you want a 50mm with nice creamy bokeh at 1.4 then Sigma 50mm would be a great choice. Good article Neil as always.
The out-of-focus benches in the background also has that strange double effect to their shape.
edit:
The out-of-focus branches in the background also have that strange double effect to their shape.
humbly,
fred
Fred .. I was actually referring to the benches behind her that you can see between her feet. Those too exhibit that harsh doubling of the edges.
Neil,
I just bought the Canon 50mm 1.4 lens, but you stated here that this lens also produces bad bokeh. When I was reading the reviews on BH website a lot of people stated it had a buttery bokeh, which is why I bought it. I will return it if you can recommend something better in that price range? I’m looking for a 35mm or 50 mm with a 1.4 aperture. I’m also on a limited budget, but I really value your opinion.
Sincerely,
Laura
Laura .. the Canon and Nikon 50mm f1.4 lenses are renowned for this type of harsh bokeh. I’m not sure what the Sigma lens does. Perhaps the Nikon 35mm f1.8 is worth checking out?
How noticeable it is, depends on the background. But a lens with great bokeh will always reproduce it better.
I wouldn’t necessarily return the lens. It is very useful to have in your bag. Just don’t expect wonderful bokeh from it.
If you want smooth bokeh, then the 85mm f1.4 is hard to beat. It’s exceptional.
Hey Neil,
Despite the terrible bokeh of the 50mm 1.4D (which you’ve mentioned in previous articles as well), I notice you’ve kept this lens around for a long time. Why do you continue to use it? In what situations does it shine?
I only ask because I own the same lens, and I was recently considering selling it actually.
-Nick
Nick, I have both the AF-D and G versions of the Nikon 50mm f1.4 … but it is probably my least used lens in my bag.
For my tastes, a 50mm lens is just not tight enough, nor wide enough. I like the versatility of zooms, and when I want narrow depth-of-field, there is the 85mm f1.4 .. that said, I do feel that a 50mm lens is inexpensive enough (in the grand scheme of things), that one should always keep one in a camera bag. Just in case.
But if you need to sell it to make funds available for another lens, I can totally see why.
I’ve seen this type of ugly bokeh before, but I thought it was particular to the Nikon 50mm 1.4G (the new one). I actually have the 1.8, and I’ve never seen it on that lens.
Wonderful Image Neil! Although yes the Bokeh and the ‘circles of confusion’ are quite distrubing for most I think that it is very painterly almost ‘Impressionistic’ and works well because of the Wb difference in the model so I might be in the minority here :) If the subject matter isnt a beautiful model in a black dress but is a wedding or engagement shot then I think it would not work. Thanks again for showing this :)
Hi Neil, have you tried to stop down to f2 using this lens? I read some reviews and find out that most of the fast lenses have a bit nervous bokeh if used wide open. but stopping it down a little bit will improve the bokeh, while preserving shallow depth of field.
check this link for more info on this particular lens:
https://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/441-nikkor_afs_50_14_ff
Hi Neil,
I was surprised that the Nikon 50mm 1.4’s bokeh was… frankly quite unpleasant. I recently bought a used Sigma 50mm 1.4 and I am sure you would love its bokeh.
I was after a canon 1.4 but got the siggy only because i found it cheap…i took my chance and it was the best decision i have made in a long time. Very smooth bokeh….Sigmas aren’t supposed to be that good. Sorry to turn your post into a praise for sigma but sorry..i couldn’t help it.
I think Nikkor 50/1.8 has nicer bokeh than 50/1.4 however build quality is much worse.
OMG! All this time I have been associating bokeh with shallow depth of field. Glad I found this article.