I've come to 3 conclusions about bokeh after looking at lot of images
and reading lots about it:.
1. It is indeed significant in how a picture looks.
2. Different people sometimes have different ideas about what is good
and what is bad bokeh. I have heard the bokeh praised on a posted pic
that I think has awful bokeh.
3. Focal length, diaphram location within the lens, diaphram shape,
shooting aperture and the focal distance to both the in-focus subject
and the OOF objects all affect bokeh.
All those factors make general statements about the bokeh of a
particular lens tough to deal with. So yeah, the bokeh in "birds.jpg"
isn't particularly attractive to me On the other hand, I've seen a lot
worse and the bokeh with subject and background at different differences
might be better or worse. I've also seen examples of bad bokeh from
lenses that are frequently praised as having excellent bokeh. It's just
not simple, unfortunately, so bokeh testing any particular lens would
take a lot of shots and analysis.
You can sometimes get an idea about the bokeh you will get using the DOF
preview button.
Moose
Siddiq wrote:
>off topic, but just me or does the 200/4 have terrible bokeh?
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|