I bet you are correct about the spherical aberration, Dawid. I find
your example more pleasant and a nice shot BTW. In lenses with very
highly corrected spherical aberration/flat field like the Z. 50/3.5
the bokeh can get funky too. Complex recent vintage zooms seem to
suffer the same fate as explained by AG (AKA Dr. Bokeh?)
I am glad Chuck questioned the species of flower--I'll keep an eye out
for Spider Lilies--quite attractive.
I have seen Moose quite closely duplicate (perhaps perfectly) nice
smooth bokeh in a "pick a blur" post, but it is difficult to duplicate.
I have seen some PS instructions applying a gradient to "lens blur" or
Gaussian blur to closely simulate a lens with nice bokeh.
For now, given skill, time contraints, I'd rather have the lens do it
if possible.
Mike
Same Here, that is a bit rough. Isn't this sort of thing caused by
extreme
spherical abberation in the out-of-focus areas?
A Yashica TLR I used to use had this, but just enough to be pleasant
(see, for example,
this photo: (80mm, f/3.5 wide open)
http://fc04.deviantart.com/fs47/f/2009/194/d/b/Graswiel_by_philosomatographer.jpg
But in the extreme measures exhibited by the link provided, yes -
"yikes", that's
really distracting.
On 01 Aug 2009, at 3:39 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> Yikes, I was getting seasick from the "bokeh".
--
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
