I provided samples above which you can look at. Often the more 'characterful' M mount lenses can be tricky under certain conditions. Some older zoom lenses always give distracting bokeh, but almost all M mount lenses are potentially good. Learning a lens is all about having an idea what works and what doesn't for your taste. It depends on the lens, the relative distances, the chosen aperture, the lighting and the subject. ![]() Hard to put in words, but generally double lined edges and overlapping hard edged rings make for a distracting background. Can't say that same for FLE judging from many photos. Mind you, the 35 summicron has more structured/busy bokeh than the Q2, as much as I loved a smooth bokeh, I've come to appreciate that certain Leica lenses are just special, it's busy yet very pleasing and not distracting. I find that the Q2 lens didn't render in a way that the bokeh separate from the subject, where the 35 summicron does a lot better. It has, however, tremendous pop to the images without the help of blurry background, but in a very clinical way. ![]() The initial excitement didn't last that long that the lens render rather flat in comparison in terms of bokeh. And I expect some viewers to disagree and most viewers (non-photographers) to not even consciously notice this.Funny that I just bought a Q2 alongside my 35mm summicron asph v1. But its not exactly "beautiful" (even though its pretty good for a UWA). But I think in this case, it works because it enhances the contrast between the snowy, winter background and the little golden leaf hanging on. Its bokeh is quite dramatic, so it might not work for most photos. It is such a wide angle, people don't usually associate it with bokeh, since wide angle lenses tend to have a huge DoF and aren't really used for bokeh photos. The OoF area doesn't take attention away from the subject, but it compliments it. The transition between in-focus and out of focus isn't jarring, and while the background flowers are out of focus, you can still tell their shapes. The first one is the DA 40mm XS with its rounded aperture blades: Of course, even jagged bokeh can work for some photos. Generally speaking, fast lenses and tele lenses will create "more bokeh" (as wrong as that phrase may sound), while wide angle or slow lenses tend to make more jagged, harsh bokeh. There are some rule of thumbs, but they might not always apply. But most of us don't have that many lenses and don't have their specific bokeh-types memorized. Ideally, bokeh would be part of your consideration when deciding which lens to use. But it does have a certain character, and while it is difficult to say which bokeh is "good" you can quickly notice when its "bad." But it depends on many things! It depends on lens design, aperture, and distances (between photographer and focus, between focus and background, etc.) as well as the background itself. So, if I write review on the lens without telling that I got my first DSLR last November, I may just give the wrong impression about my skills and a credibility of my opinion.īokeh is quite subjective. For example, on jewelry supply forum I can see who leaves feedback to product: student, amateur or professional. I just thought about one thing: in lens review it would be helpful if every reviewer would add years they do photography. and I still don't when it comes to reading an experts I think my Jupiter-9 has 15 blades and an essentially round iris opening.At least something to understand. * Those reviewers LOVE the older manual and preset aperture lenses with their high blade counts. ![]() I think my Jupiter-9 has 15 blades and an essentially round iris opening. Ultra wides and fisheyes should not be evaluated for bokeh. ![]() Some very sharp lenses fail here (how do we spell X-R R-I-K-E-N-O-N?).Wide angle lenses originally designed for 35mm film often stink (tend to be nervous or busy).Some excel in this regard (I have three "bokeh queens").Most lenses (including zooms) have pretty good bokeh.Many reviewers are obsessed with the outline of the OOF highlights and will down grade even very acceptable blur if the blade count is not high.* Eight-sided is better than six which is better than the wretched five and please save us from the abominable four!!! It is not a problem for me in that specular highlights are not a prominent feature of most background blur. The key is in the smoothness and grace of the blurred tonal transitions. Could you please tell me how can you evaluate test bokeh of that lens?I don't know about "creamy", but I do know about :
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |