PDA

View Full Version : Bokeh at 85 (more or less) (images)


Tom W
28th of April 2005 (Thu), 18:54
OK, since the 50's worked out fairly well, the lights are still set up, and the weather is less than ideal, I decided to pull out the 85 mm lenses for bokeh testing. The test is similar to the one I used on the 50's, with some minor lens-to-lens adjustments made to accomodate the minimum focus distance of one of the lenses.

The lenses I used were the 85 mm f/1.8, the 70-200 f/2.8 IS, and the 28-105 f/3.5-4.5. Lighting was a combination of overhead general lighting, two diffused clamp lights, one direct reflector clamp light, and overcast outdoor light directed at the subject with vertical blinds.

The tests were done at f/4, with the exception of the 28-105 which was tested at f/4.5 due to maximum aperture limitations. Once again, the test is merely to get a good look at how the diffused OOF circles are rendered, as that has a relationship to the smoothness of the bokeh.

First, the test setup, taken with the 85mm at f/2:

http://www.pbase.com/photosbytom/image/42699652.jpg

Now the lenses - first, the durable 28-105, shot wide open at f/4.5:

http://www.pbase.com/photosbytom/image/42699653.jpg

Note the hard, bright ring at the periphery of each OOF circle. This contributes to choppy bokeh. Of course, this lens wasn't bought for its great bokeh. That's generally the territory for faster lenses anyway. Later, I'll post an image of how this lens performs at f/5.6.

The next lens is the 70-200 f/2.8 IS zoom, tested again at f/4 and 85 mm. I had to move things back a bit with this lens, since the close focus distance isn't as tight as it is on the other two lenses (this is at the shorter end of this lenses' zoom range). Anyway, note that the bokeh is considerably smoother than the consumer zoom. There is a very slight bright ring on some of the OOF circles, but it is much less noticeable compared to the 28-105. The boundaries are still well-defined (well, it is f/4) but blending is much smoother.

http://www.pbase.com/photosbytom/image/42699654.jpg

Finally, we test the 85/1.8 at f/4. Here, you can see the outline of the aperture blades, since the lens is stopped down a ways, but the out-of-focus circles have no harsh ring around their circumferance. They blend nicely, again providing a smooth mix.

http://www.pbase.com/photosbytom/image/42699655.jpg

Once again, the prime appears to have the potential of having the smoothest bokeh, followed closely by the "L" zoom. The relatively inexpensive consumer zoom places back a ways, though it certainly wasn't designed with bokeh as its primary characteristic.

Here's a couple more images at f/2.8, first with the 70-200 L:

http://www.pbase.com/photosbytom/image/42699656.jpg

And the 85 prime:

http://www.pbase.com/photosbytom/image/42699657.jpg

Both images at f/2.8 again show the value of larger apertures. The OOF circles in both cases are larger and more diffuse, with an even less sharp defining border.

Finally, here's the odd shot - the 28-105 at f/5.6:

http://www.pbase.com/photosbytom/image/42699658.jpg

The good news is that stopped down a bit, the harsh bright rings are much less prominent on the out-of-focus circles. The bad news is that at f/5.6, the background in most cases will not be sufficiently blurred. It can be used, but only when the background is sufficiently far from the subject to allow the smaller OOF disks to blend.

OK, that's enough for now. Time to put a dent in that Chivas bottle that I've been staring at for the last hour. :)

J Rabin
28th of April 2005 (Thu), 20:41
Thanks for sharing. Useful. I never liked my 50 f/1.4 and sold it. There may be a 85 f/1.8 in my future.

roanjohn
28th of April 2005 (Thu), 22:10
WOW!!! Excellent bokeh observations!!! The two 85s in the Canon lineup provides the creamiest, butteriest, smoothiest bokeh............This just proves that point again..........Thanks for doing this.

Ro1

Tom W
28th of April 2005 (Thu), 22:33
I regret that I don't have access to the 85/1.2 - that has to be incredible.

Next tests up are 24 mm lenses, and maybe 135 mm lenses (only 2 choices there). I know that the 24/1.4 offers some background smoothness, but being such a short lens, a lot of that smoothness is lost in most images.

roanjohn
28th of April 2005 (Thu), 22:36
I regret that I don't have access to the 85/1.2 - that has to be incredible.

.

Whenever I don't feel lazy, I will do some test with mine. :confused::confused:

Soon......

Ro1

rdenney
29th of April 2005 (Fri), 13:41
I regret that I don't have access to the 85/1.2 - that has to be incredible.

Next tests up are 24 mm lenses, and maybe 135 mm lenses (only 2 choices there). I know that the 24/1.4 offers some background smoothness, but being such a short lens, a lot of that smoothness is lost in most images.

Tom, I just posted a thread on 135 bokeh. I didn't take quite the same approach as you, and found that smoothness isn't necessarily directly related to bright-edge issue, but it's close. Interesting results.

The 85/1.8 looks very nice. I was also impressed by the 70-200/4L in my test.

Rick "who stayed up half the night but who is having fun anyway" Denney

karusel
29th of April 2005 (Fri), 14:50
All this disappoints me... in a way, I guess. The L zoom is a prime killer. The differences are miniscule... I think I'll still go with the primes first, then maybe get the zoom.

Tom W
29th of April 2005 (Fri), 14:55
All this disappoints me... in a way, I guess. The L zoom is a prime killer. The differences are miniscule... I think I'll still go with the primes first, then maybe get the zoom.

Well, its not a prime killer below f/2.8 - that's for sure. And I'm not sure that it would win the sharpness race at f/2.8 either, but will probably come fairly close, depending on which prime and at what focal length its tested.

karusel
29th of April 2005 (Fri), 15:03
I realize that... The primes within that range are: 85 1.8, 100mm 2.0, 135 2.0L and 200 2.8L. Obviously the first three have edge in wider aperture, after that it's nitpicking, and show it at an exhibition and no one would ever say; those photographs, sir, are lacking in quality, you haven't shot those with a zoom lens, have you? Even at side-by-side comparisons it's difficult to tell which one is better. Oh, I don't know anymore.. :?

Tom W
29th of April 2005 (Fri), 15:58
I realize that... The primes within that range are: 85 1.8, 100mm 2.0, 135 2.0L and 200 2.8L. Obviously the first three have edge in wider aperture, after that it's nitpicking, and show it at an exhibition and no one would ever say; those photographs, sir, are lacking in quality, you haven't shot those with a zoom lens, have you? Even at side-by-side comparisons it's difficult to tell which one is better. Oh, I don't know anymore.. :?

I agree - the double-blind test would be difficult. But this is probably Canon's sharpest zoom range - the trio of 70-200L lenses are all excellent.

The main reason I carry the 85 around a lot is that it gives me a nice portable longish lens to carry with the 24-70. I occasionally shoot parties and such. While the 24-70 is very valuable with and without flash, the 85 just reaches out a little farther to touch someone. Plus it can do available light quite well.