85L and "chopped bokeh"

I would say the visual appreciation of bokeh is subjective to the viewer. I've seen posts from lensed here on POTN where others thought the bokeh was wonderful and I didn't, at other times someone complained about the bokeh of a lens and I really liked the look. In that way I would conclude it is subjective but who cares, we buy what we like anyway. The 85L is my most important lens, my most used lens, the lens I'll try to make do with even when another lens might work the shot better simply because I love the look of this lens so much.

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #8525354
Bokeh is not subjective, there's a very easy way to describe and predict how a background looks based on how the COCs are rendered.

Yup, but good bokeh vs bad bokeh is subjective...well kind of...sort of...
I think many people wouldn't know that there are parameters of "nice" bokeh, that ugly bokeh fails to meet...unless it was pointed out to them...

And from what I've read on various forums, there are many people who don't even know what bokeh is...thinking it is ALL the out of focus elements in the background, and not the reflected/refracted out of focus source-points of light....

tkbslc wrote in post #8525752
I disagree. Go visit the mflenses forum and watch all those guys swoon over the hideous swirly cateye bokeh of the Helios 40! There are also those that love the donut bokeh from mirrored lenses.

There is a definition for good bokeh, but there's still a subjective factor.

The 85L does have smooth bokeh. It has the reputation of having buttery bokeh because it does have it, not because everyone though it would. On top of that, the "chopped" bokeh give it one of the qualities that make it so desireable, even though it isn't technically perfect. That doesn't mean it has to perform perfectly at any setting in any situation. You can make a Sigma 50 (technically perfect bokeh) look bad the same way you can make a Canon 50 look good.

kitacanon wrote in post #8526460
And from what I've read on various forums, there are many people who don't even know what bokey is...thinking it is ALL the out of focus elements in the background, and not the reflected/refracted out of focus source-points of light....

Bokeh applies to anything out-of-focus, foreground or background, highlight or object.

toxic wrote in post #8526661
On top of that, the "chopped" bokeh give it one of the qualities that make it so desireable, even though it isn't technically perfect.

I don't understand.
Do you think that an 85L without "chopped" bokeh would render generic backgrounds (no highlights) in a different, less desirable way ?
If so, how could it be ?

CheshireCat wrote in post #8527235
I don't understand.
Do you think that an 85L without "chopped" bokeh would render generic backgrounds (no highlights) in a different, less desirable way ?
If so, how could it be ?

Not really less desireable, it's just that the bokeh is unique, which makes it more appealing in some way.

toxic wrote in post #8526661
Bokeh applies to anything out-of-focus, foreground or background, highlight or object.

Sorry but from what I learned about bokeh in Japan from Japanese photographers, no...not just anything...not the object itself but the highlights of and off the object....not the darker out of focus parts of the object...
Many people think otherwise, and I guess maybe the accepted definition has changed to include what they think.

tkbslc wrote in post #8525752
I disagree. Go visit the mflenses forum and watch all those guys swoon over the hideous swirly cateye bokeh of the Helios 40! There are also those that love the donut bokeh from mirrored lenses.

I think in the case of the 85L, though, someone is paying top dollar for buttery bokeh, and it looks like the lens is not delivering 100%

My statement isn't false because a bunch of people on mflenses forum don't understand what bokeh is.

kitacanon wrote in post #8527707
Sorry but from what I learned about bokeh in Japan from Japanese photographers, no...not just anything...not the object itself but the highlights of and off the object....not the darker out of focus parts of the object...
Many people think otherwise, and I guess maybe the accepted definition has changed to include what they think.

Well, if double-lines are used to judge bokeh, it can't simply be the highlights...

It's known as the Cat's eye effect, a type of "optical vignetting", and is fully explained here: http://toothwalker.org​/optics/vignetting.htm​l

If it had been due to the mirror box or sensor size, it would be mechanical vignetting, but it actually happens because light that enters the lens at an angle get partially cropped off by the edge of the lens barrel, but is still capable of entering the aperture due to it's large size.

It's something unique to lenses with unusually large apertures, and is simply a matter of fact. The only way to get rid of it is to stop down.

More explanation is provided a third of the way down this page: http://toothwalker.org​/optics/bokeh.html

Kolor-Pikker wrote in post #8528206
It's known as the Cat's eye effect, a type of "optical vignetting", and is fully explained here: http://toothwalker.org​/optics/vignetting.htm​l

If it had been due to the mirror box or sensor size, it would be mechanical vignetting, but it actually happens because light that enters the lens at an angle get partially cropped off by the edge of the lens barrel, but is still capable of entering the aperture due to it's large size.

There is no way to crop with a straight line with optical vignetting. It must be the mirror box. And sensor size cannot be because all the pixels are there !
"CheshireCat's eye" effect ? [look at my avatar !]

...Ok, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/Vignetting

Optical vignetting

This type of vignetting is caused by the physical dimensions of a multiple element lens. Rear elements are shaded by elements in front of them, which reduces the effective lens opening for off-axis incident light. The result is a gradual decrease of the light intensity towards the image periphery. Optical vignetting is sensitive to the aperture and can be completely cured by increasing the aperture of the lens by 2-3 stops.

I don't think the problem is totally clear.
Check below my avatar shot with the 85L, you see that ?
It's the mirror box !

And this is another test shot of my avatar, this time with the 50 1.8.
Notice the pentagonal bokeh, lack of contrast and nasty flare (upper right corner).
But the chopped bokeh has gone away !

Oh, and finally another test shot with the 24-105L at 24mm.
Notice the negative bokeh (overcorrected), the high distortion and vignetting at 24 (wide open), and huge amount of chromatic aberration (red/cyan fringe).
Check also the 100% crop.

Great examples CC, very informative. LMAO.