On 3/13/2012 12:35 AM, Dawid Loubser wrote:
>>> http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/072/b/4/water_lily_pond_1_by_philosomatographer-d4sm61s.jpg
>> Oops, here the bokeh has gone bad, OOF highlights hard edged and
>> moving to dark centered donuts at the back. A busy,
>> edgy effect out of sync with what seems to me to be the intent of
>> the shot.
> Moose, I have come to the conclusion that you judge bokeh compared to
> some theoretical lens!
Nope. As in my comments on "No on cares how hard you worked.", I am simply
viewing the images and noting how they look
to my eye. I prefer, and have always preferred, classic bokeh, where OOF
highlights show an Airy disk quality of bright
center slowly fading from that center to invisibility.
The water lily shot goes so far as to have actual donuts in the far right
background, like a mirror lens. It's fine if
you and others like that. I'm just passing on my own feelings about the images.
> Come now, you really can't ask for better in a fast, high-performance 90mm
> lens - every other one I know of will produce a much harsher background in
> this scenario!
I'm not asking for a lens. I'm commenting on what makes an image pleasing to
me. If there's no fast, 90 mm lens for FF
that will do that with this subject, that's OK. I just won't like images of the
subject from any of them. There are
innumerable subjects out there.
As I said, the 90/2 did an excellent bokeh job on the first, quite nice on the
second and passable on the fourth, with
only small ugly areas that could be fixed in post, and I assume, in printing.
Lots of fast, modern lenses have bokeh
issues at specific subject and background distances. The water lilies image
clearly illustrates this, as it gets worse
the further back it goes.
My most used lens, a 28-300 zoom, covers the whole gamut from beautiful, creamy
bokeh to really ugly, depending on many
factors I haven't got all figured out. If I don't like the results in a shot, I
either pass it by or work on it in post.
> I give up...
Why? Not everyone has my taste. Bob and others like the bokeh that I don't.
Make what pleases you. Then if you start
selling, notice what those willing to part with cash like, and do more of that.
:-)
> (until I can get a Cooke PS945 for my Linhof, *then* you'll have to agree
> with every image's bokeh!)
That is a mighty fine lens! So nice that when I look at samples, I briefly
consider LF. ;-) The combination of detail
with smoothness is just amazing, although no better than some older LF lenses,
I guess. A few months ago, I was looking
at the famous Karsh portrait of Churchill in a huge print, about 5' tall, that
I could walk right up to. The detail
retained without any edginess at all was wonderful. I'm not sure anything like
that can be done on FF.
Okey Bokey Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
