Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 27 Jul 2013 (Saturday) 23:45
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Better bokeh lens

 
Mornnb
Goldmember
1,646 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Jul 29, 2013 05:12 |  #31

smorter wrote in post #16162239 (external link)
Check this out:

85L on left, 200L on right
QUOTED IMAGE

And this:

200L
QUOTED IMAGE

85L
QUOTED IMAGE


This is a good demonstration of the advantage of using telescopic lens for bokeh type shots, they are much sharper than a wide aperture lens like the 85mm 1.2. I must say I prefer the 200mm examples here, razor sharp with equally attractive bokeh.


Canon 5D Mark III - Leica M240
EF 16-35mm F/4 IS L - EF 14mm f/2.8 L II - - EF 17mm TS-E L - EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II - EF 70-200mm IS II f/2.8 L - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art - Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX
Voigtlander 15mm III - 28mm Elmarit-M ASPH - 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M FLE - 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Mackeral
Senior Member
Avatar
524 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Jul 29, 2013 05:47 |  #32
bannedPermanent ban

Outside of the norm? Minolta 58mm 1.2 is generally considered one of the best bokeh lenses ever.


"Complete quietness surrounded me as the dense fog smothered all sounds. As the sun rose, lifting the fog to reveal this majestic mountain, all my thoughts of the daily hustle and bustle were put away, allowing me to sit in solitude with nature."
-Utter Bull

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Revolverz
Member
223 posts
Likes: 40
Joined Sep 2012
     
Jul 29, 2013 07:06 |  #33

Mornnb wrote in post #16162766 (external link)
This is a good demonstration of the advantage of using telescopic lens for bokeh type shots is that they are much sharper than a wide aperture lens like the 85mm 1.2. I must say I prefer the 200mm examples here, razor sharp with equally attractive bokeh.

that`s a 8000 dollars lens - 200mm lens @ f/2 .....
Now if you do pro portrait work, you will find that too long.. + You won`t find a decent use inside. And yeah, it is 8k dollars and a very special lens but it is more than 1 stop slower for low light performance.


Website: www.cristian-popa.com (external link) ___Facebook: https://www.facebook.c​om/cristian.popa.art (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ZoneV
Goldmember
1,643 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 232
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Germany
     
Jul 29, 2013 08:47 |  #34

Mackeral wrote in post #16162800 (external link)
Outside of the norm? Minolta 58mm 1.2 is generally considered one of the best bokeh lenses ever.

In my opinon the Minolta 58mm/1.2 has still a very normal bokeh quality - but much quantity for a ~50mm lens.
Probably slightly better than normal current lenses. And probably very much better than lenses with aspherical elements with their usual onion ring bokeh in some situations.

Really smoother bokeh quality - this is not in every case better - provides the Minolta 135mm/2.8[4.5] STF lens with apodization filter (external link), or Nikon 105/2.0 DC and 135mm/2.0 DC Nikkor with spherical abberation control (external link).
All these lenses could give a way smoother bokeh than normal Canon EF lenses (not sure about EF 135/2.8 softfocus)!


DIY-Homepage (external link) - Image Gallery (external link) - Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mackeral
Senior Member
Avatar
524 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Jul 29, 2013 09:06 |  #35
bannedPermanent ban

ZoneV wrote in post #16163084 (external link)
In my opinon the Minolta 58mm/1.2 has still a very normal bokeh quality - but much quantity for a ~50mm lens.
Probably slightly better than normal current lenses. And probably very much better than lenses with aspherical elements with their usual onion ring bokeh in some situations.

Really smoother bokeh quality - this is not in every case better - provides the Minolta 135mm/2.8[4.5] STF lens with apodization filter (external link), or Nikon 105/2.0 DC and 135mm/2.0 DC Nikkor with spherical abberation control (external link).
All these lenses could give a way smoother bokeh than normal Canon EF lenses (not sure about EF 135/2.8 softfocus)!

You're in the minority.


"Complete quietness surrounded me as the dense fog smothered all sounds. As the sun rose, lifting the fog to reveal this majestic mountain, all my thoughts of the daily hustle and bustle were put away, allowing me to sit in solitude with nature."
-Utter Bull

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ICarumba
Member
143 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2013
     
Jul 29, 2013 09:13 as a reply to  @ Mackeral's post |  #36

which bokeh is better 200 2.8 or 135 2




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ZoneV
Goldmember
1,643 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 232
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Germany
     
Jul 29, 2013 09:16 |  #37

Mackeral wrote in post #16163144 (external link)
You're in the minority.

Have you seen the Sony/Minolta STF images, or some of the Nikkor DC images - this is outside the norm. I own and love my Minolta 58/1.2 - it is not bad, but the bokeh quality is still very close to the norm.

Here a nice bokeh comparison of ~50mm lenses (external link). Not much special about the Rokkor, exept of size and lack of onion rings.


DIY-Homepage (external link) - Image Gallery (external link) - Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Jul 29, 2013 09:32 |  #38
bannedPermanent ban

ICarumba wrote in post #16163166 (external link)
which bokeh is better 200 2.8 or 135 2

135 2!!


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,422 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 341
Joined Sep 2011
     
Jul 29, 2013 11:33 |  #39

Wilt wrote in post #16162643 (external link)
Sorry but if you read:

Zeiss http://www.zeiss.com …/$File/CLN35_Bo​keh_en.pdf (external link)

Harold Merklinger, Photo Techniques magazine March/April 1997, republished here...
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/b​okeh.shtml (external link)

Oren Grad, (who according to Mike Johnston publisher of Photo Techniques and other photo magazines, Grad holds eight Master's degrees, three Ph.D.s, and an M.D., and who evidently taught himself Japanese so he could read Japanese photo magazines, wrote in “The Terminology of Bokeh”, Photo Techniques, March/April 1997


Some of the salient points and terminology from Oren Grad‘s article:

* bokeh refers to the rendition of the out of focus areas of a photograph, and may be classified as good or bad bokeh.

* good bokeh softens the objects in front of the plane of focus (mae-boke).

* Out-of-focus background objects (ushiro-bokeh) lose detail but maintain their basis shapes and tones.

You would see that all have agreement about how the term is properly used in photography.
And in Japanese, plain old 'boke' refers to fuzzy thinking, not related to photography in that context.

BTW, I know Mike Johnston...he invited me to write articles for his magazines.

http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=yl6F1nR4w1Q (external link)


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mornnb
Goldmember
1,646 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Jul 29, 2013 17:15 |  #40

Revolverz wrote in post #16162896 (external link)
that`s a 8000 dollars lens - 200mm lens @ f/2 .....
Now if you do pro portrait work, you will find that too long.. + You won`t find a decent use inside. And yeah, it is 8k dollars and a very special lens but it is more than 1 stop slower for low light performance.

The 135mm f2 and 200mm 2.8 have similar advantages in terms of bokeh quality yet extreme sharpness wide open.


Canon 5D Mark III - Leica M240
EF 16-35mm F/4 IS L - EF 14mm f/2.8 L II - - EF 17mm TS-E L - EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II - EF 70-200mm IS II f/2.8 L - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art - Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX
Voigtlander 15mm III - 28mm Elmarit-M ASPH - 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M FLE - 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Jul 29, 2013 17:19 |  #41

135L has the best bokeh out of any lens I had ever used... The 85L is close, but is a bit more "dreamy". Not bad, just different. I prefer how the 135L renders more :D


-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ICarumba
Member
143 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2013
     
Jul 29, 2013 21:28 |  #42

Invertalon wrote in post #16164474 (external link)
135L has the best bokeh out of any lens I had ever used... The 85L is close, but is a bit more "dreamy". Not bad, just different. I prefer how the 135L renders more :D

How do you rate your 135L compared with the 70-200 ?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cdang
Senior Member
263 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Dec 2011
     
Jul 29, 2013 21:58 |  #43

For me the 85L is more dreamy whereas the 135L renders like a painting (If that makes sense).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Jul 29, 2013 22:19 |  #44

ICarumba wrote in post #16165122 (external link)
How do you rate your 135L compared with the 70-200 ?

The 135L is quite a bit better... The 70-200 II bokeh is not nearly as nice and with busy backgrounds can look a bit ugly. But

Not exactly the best example, but here is an idea of what I am talking about. I have had much more "busy" examples that look just dizzying with the 70-200 II... The 135L with the same scene can really smooth the background quite a bit more.

70-200 top, 135 bottom... I know not really that comparable, but showing the general idea I am talking about.

IMAGE: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5136/5426441009_000c9262a6_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/invertalon/5426​441009/  (external link)
IMG_3249.jpg (external link) by invertalon (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7194/7107717799_96302ff1cd_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/invertalon/7107​717799/  (external link)
6M3C3323 (external link) by invertalon (external link), on Flickr


The 70-200 can delivery buttery backgrounds as well, but in some challenging situations it can be ugly. So while it has the ability to look amazing (plenty of those) I do have a few oddballs that are an eye-sore in terms of the bokeh.

This is just nit-picking though, and both are excellent. The 135L just does it better.

-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
smorter
Goldmember
Avatar
4,506 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jul 29, 2013 23:11 |  #45

Whilst the above 2 shots are totally incomparable, that second shot is amazing!


Wedding Photography Melbourneexternal link
Reviews: 85LII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,508 views & 0 likes for this thread
Better bokeh lens
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is HamPhoto
866 guests, 314 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.