Subject: | Re: [OM] Good bokah, bad bokah? |
---|---|
From: | Skip Williams <om@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Fri, 2 May 2003 09:29:55 -0500 |
On this I respectfully disagree. But that's just my opinion. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Please reply to [skipwilliams at pobox.com] Direct responses to the email address on the header may get lost -----------------------------------------------------------------> >Subject: Re: [OM] Good bokah, bad bokah? > From: "C.H.Ling" <chling@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 09:40:00 +0800 > To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >Yes it is nice but you cannot use it to judge the lens has good bokeh >or not, because the out of focus is much more then the shot Gary >shown. In your case I guarantee all lenses can produce this kind of >bokeh. > >C.H.Ling > >Skip Williams wrote: >> >> The flower is nice, but the background bokeh is pretty jarring. Was it >> sharpened? >> >> To my eyes, this is good bokeh: >> http://www.skipwilliams.adahost.com/data/grass-tamron-80-200-600fram.jpg >> >> Skip >> >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > |
Previous by Date: | Re: [OM] A few macro shots of my own, Joel Wilcox |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [OM] re:OT anti-Spam software, Garth Wood |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [OM] Good bokah, bad bokah?, Chris Barker |
Next by Thread: | Re: [OM] Good bokah, bad bokah?, C.H.Ling |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |