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 03 Aug 2013 (Saturday) 09:57
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

What's the best BOKEH for the buck?

 
genjurok
Senior Member
537 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Aug 04, 2013 10:04 |  #16

Under $500, I'll vote for Sigma 50 , Canon 85 f/1.8 and Canon 100 f/2.


6D
Canon 17-40mm f/4L | Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 | Canon 100mm f/2
580 EX | 430 EX | Pixel King Pro wireless radio trigger and receiver (x2)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
NotBlake
Member
Avatar
212 posts
Joined Mar 2012
     
Aug 04, 2013 11:20 |  #17

Aressem wrote in post #16177736 (external link)
Just like the title states, which lens produces the best BOKEH for the buck? At first, I was just going to leave it at that, but then I figured the question was far too vague. Lets hear your opinions. Which lens produces the best bokeh under $500, $1000, $2500?

Under $500: 85 f/1.8
Under $1000: 200mm f/2.8 L
Under $2500: 85mm f/1.2 L




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
taemo
Goldmember
1,243 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Calgary, AB
     
Aug 04, 2013 12:17 |  #18

NotBlake wrote in post #16180240 (external link)
Under $500: 85 f/1.8
Under $1000: 200mm f/2.8 L
Under $2500: 85mm f/1.2 L


for me under $1000 would be the 135L mainly because it's a more versatile focal length than the 200 2.8L

under $500, either the Sigma 50 or 85 1.8


earldieta.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - tumblr (external link) - gear/feedback
the spirit is willing but the body is sore and squishy
4 digital cameras | 14 film cameras

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NotBlake
Member
Avatar
212 posts
Joined Mar 2012
     
Aug 04, 2013 12:21 |  #19

taemo wrote in post #16180353 (external link)
for me under $1000 would be the 135L mainly because it's a more versatile focal length than the 200 2.8L

under $500, either the Sigma 50 or 85 1.8


I prefer the more compressed bokeh of the 200mm personally and the 200mm's diaphragm is slightly larger (71mm vs 67mm). I've owned both and kept the 200. But then again my prime setup is 28, 50, 100, 200 so it's a perfect bookend to my lens lineup.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gasrocks
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,431 posts
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Portage, Wisconsin USA
     
Aug 04, 2013 12:32 |  #20

I really wonder if any poster here, including the OP, actually knows what the term bokeh means? It is not shallow DOF, it is not smooth backgrounds. Look at my gear list. Most lenses are there for their different bokehs. Some cost me as little as $15.


GEAR LIST
_______________

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Natural ­ Light
Member
32 posts
Joined Jul 2013
     
Aug 04, 2013 13:06 |  #21

My favorites:

Under 500: 85 1.8
Under 1000: 135L
Under 2500: 85 1.2L
All time favorite: 200 2.0

gasrocks wrote in post #16180374 (external link)
I really wonder if any poster here, including the OP, actually knows what the term bokeh means? It is not shallow DOF, it is not smooth backgrounds.

Why do you feel the need to go into every thread mentioning bokeh and post this? You knew what OP meant...why be an ass?

When I joined up here you did the same with me. Felt the need to correct me, even though you knew exactly what I meant, while contributing nothing positive to help me in my actual question.

I guess if you actually took the time to explain the correct definition, it'd be one thing, but I've never seen you actually do that. Rather, just talk down to people. It's really not cool.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mackeral
Senior Member
Avatar
524 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Aug 04, 2013 13:10 |  #22
bannedPermanent ban

Natural Light wrote in post #16180440 (external link)
Why do you feel the need to go into every thread mentioning bokeh and post this? You knew what OP meant...why be an ass?

When I joined up here you did the same with me. Felt the need to correct me, even though you knew exactly what I meant, while contributing nothing positive to help me in my actual question.

spot-on.

I wonder if he knows he's being douchy?


"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
bespoke
Senior Member
Avatar
710 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 7
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Toronto
     
Aug 04, 2013 13:15 |  #23

bokeh has turned into such an annoying word


Toronto Fashion Photographer (external link)
5D3 & 5D2s | 24 TS-E II, 24-70 II, 85L II, 100L, 70-200L II, 35 & 85 Zeiss ZE, Samyang 14, Sigma 50
Hasselblads + Leaf Aptus MFDB, Fuji X100, Epson 3880/9890

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidmtml
Senior Member
Avatar
848 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 385
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Montana
     
Aug 04, 2013 13:16 |  #24

Natural Light wrote in post #16180440 (external link)
Why do you feel the need to go into every thread mentioning bokeh and post this? You knew what OP meant...why be an ass?

When I joined up here you did the same with me. Felt the need to correct me, even though you knew exactly what I meant, while contributing nothing positive to help me in my actual question.

I guess if you actually took the time to explain the correct definition, it'd be one thing, but I've never seen you actually do that. Rather, just talk down to people. It's really not cool.

Seriously. Every single thread that is about bokeh, he feels the need to come in and tell everybody that they don't know what it really means. It's like the d-bags that come into every thread about the 5D classic just to say that that it is just the 5D, and there is no such thing as the 5D classic.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,483 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 577
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Aug 04, 2013 13:37 |  #25

davidmtml wrote in post #16180462 (external link)
Seriously. Every single thread that is about bokeh, he feels the need to come in and tell everybody that they don't know what it really means.

I do get the sense that different people are talking different things in this thread. Some people are using the word 'bokeh' to simply mean 'blur' while others are not.

All lenses can blur a background, but faster lenses can create more blur. The term 'bokeh' is most commonly used to refer to the aesthetic appearance of the background blur, which is a nice use for this foreign word as it compresses an otherwise unwieldy phrase in English.

Sticking with that definition, lenses do have different bokeh. Even two lenses used at the same focal length and same aperture may render the background quite differently.

In general when we say a lens has 'good' bokeh we mean that it makes a smooth transition in areas of high contrast. This tends to make backgrounds quite smooth looking. In contrast, lenses with 'bad' bokeh make for hard bright rings and lines which can make some backgrounds busy looking.

And for all that, keep in mind that this is all an aesthetic and some folks may just like a busy or swirly background which is technically 'bad' bokeh.

Lower cost Canon EOS lenses known for having pretty good bokeh are the 85/1.8, 135L, 200/2.8L, 100/2....

And for sure not all fast lenses that can make a lot of blur have good bokeh. The 50/1.4 and 50/1.8 are both known to make very hard edged bright rings. The 24-105L is another Canon lens that comes to mind with 'bad' bokeh.

It's like the d-bags that come into every thread about the 5D classic just to say that that it is just the 5D, and there is no such thing as the 5D classic

For what it's worth, the moniker 'classic' was first applied to the 1D after the 1D Mark II was released. To me it's smart to have this type of naming since otherwise when someone says "I have a 5D" we are left wondering if they really meant the first 5D or if they just left off typing "5D Mark II" or "5D Mark III".


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ZoneV
Goldmember
1,643 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 232
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Germany
     
Aug 04, 2013 16:11 as a reply to  @ JeffreyG's post |  #26

Under USD500: Meyer Trioplan 100mm f/2.8 (external link) - special bokeh - my favorite bokeh lens. But not smooth bokeh :-)
Under USD1000: Nikon 135mm f/2.0 DC Nikkor (in case too expensive take the 105mm/2.0 DC)
Under USD2500: Sony SAL 135mm f/2.8[4.5] STF

First lens has a very pronounced background bokeh, second lens has option to change background bokeh from smooth to pronounced.
Foreground bokeh is for each of this two lenses the counterpart (smooth <-> pronounced).
Third lens has both fore-and background bokeh smooth.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gasrocks
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,431 posts
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Portage, Wisconsin USA
     
Aug 04, 2013 16:14 |  #27

I'm only trying to help. Using the worng term(s) is not helping all those who read such. When I see people using the wrong terms, I do feel the need often to advise. I doubt this forum would be a better place if one could use any term they wanted and have the readers guess what they really meant.


GEAR LIST
_______________

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mackeral
Senior Member
Avatar
524 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Aug 04, 2013 16:22 |  #28
bannedPermanent ban

gasrocks wrote in post #16180825 (external link)
I'm only trying to help. Using the worng term(s) is not helping all those who read such. When I see people using the wrong terms, I do feel the need often to advise. I doubt this forum would be a better place if one could use any term they wanted and have the readers guess what they really meant.

If you were trying to help you would've explained what it means instead of implying you know better than the OP and everyone in the thread without explaining. Of course you get that you weren't really trying to help but I'm just spelling it out in case you missed that douchy post you wrote.


"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
GunnarOlafsson
Junior Member
Avatar
20 posts
Joined Jul 2013
Location: London, England
     
Aug 04, 2013 16:50 as a reply to  @ post 16180024 |  #29

What about a vintage Helios 58mm?


Gunnar Olafsson
Canon 60D, EFS 17-55mm f/2.8, EF 50mm f/1.8, Helios 44M-4 f/2, EF 85mm f/1,8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
smallpotatoes
Senior Member
Avatar
863 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 109
Joined May 2007
Location: Washington
     
Aug 04, 2013 16:53 |  #30

bespoke wrote in post #16180460 (external link)
bokeh has turned into such an annoying word

bw!


Jaci

XTi, Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro, 55-250 IS, 50mm f/1.8, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, 430EX, Raynox DCR 150

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

19,130 views & 0 likes for this thread
What's the best BOKEH for the buck?
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 Jakesbird
697 guests, 217 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.