I remember why I haven't use flash in these photo sessions, as you have to
shoot through the crowd and sometimes need to stand on the toes I always use
very high shutter speeds so normal flash sync is not possible.
I have used F2.8 throughout the session, even some images are having a
little busy background but the bokeh are still fine. With the 180 in
previous years I use F2.8-4 depends on the subject distance (tend to use
larger aperture for the more distance one).
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: <usher99@xxxxxxx>
>
>
> Beautiful CH, thanks again for posting. Really make those Zuikos sing
> with images of flowers of all sorts. I think 279 is my fave too.
> IIRC, CH may have used fill flash for previous sessions.
>
> With distant background, thought the 100/2 was the
> portrait bokeh champ. The bokeh in many seems just fine, but less so
> in others. So with same FOV adjusted for format
> at equivalent dof apertures does the degree of blur vary by changing
> the format (sensor/film size). The answer is NO--see Nasse
> pg 29. (FOV--FF 180mm vs 100mmX2=200mm equivalent---likely close
> enough) Wonder what apertures CH used this year and last year.
>
> http://www.zeiss.com/c12567a8003b8b6f/embedtitelintern/cln_35_bokeh_en/$file/cln35_bokeh_en.pdf
>
> This assumes the subject to background distances are the same as last
> year and he was able to use an equivalent dof aperture on MFT---can be
> tough to have fast enough glass. However, the QUALITY of the blur is
> also a function of residual aberrations. So, is there an interaction
> with the
> format? I think the empiric evidence argues that the answer is yes.
>
> Bokeh bonkers, Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|