Too much Bokeh?

[jagsiva]

Just got the 105. Will post some pics once I have the lens trimmed and the kids agree to pose So far looks great, if not a little plasticky. These are my favourite "blurry" lenses for Nikon. Included the Coastal Optics, its f4, but a macro and does a great job on blurring backgrounds close up.

 

[Swissblad]

Nice collection - especially the 200mm f2.0!

:thumbs:

 

[jagsiva]

Nice collection - especially the 200mm f2.0!

:thumbs:

Yes it is, but my limited time with the 105 is making me think it makes a very close alternative to the 200/F2, with a level of portability that far exceeds the 200.

 

[Swissblad]

You'll love the 105 - it is a great lens - and a firm favourite of mine.

 

[Vivek]

If you want to let go of the slow lens, drop me a line.

 

[Jack]

I just need to chime in here with my own particular nit on the subject of "bokeh" ...

To me, bokeh is not just shallow DOF -- it's more in how the depth of focus tapers off, or the transition between what's in focus and what's not. In this, slower optical lenses can have great bokeh, and many do; conversely, very fast optics all certainly render shallow DOF but not all of them necessarily render good bokeh. So at some p[oint it comes down to a certain "je ne sais quoi" character of the lens that invites me into the image...

That is all, carry on...

 

[Shashin]

Jack, I agree--bokeh is not shallow depth of field. Bokeh is the quality of the out of focus area in an image, regardless of how much depth of field there is...

 

[MGrayson]

:lecture:Interestingly, DoF and Bokeh are unrelated in another way. To a good approximation, the DoF of, say, a head shot only depends on the f/stop and not the focal length of the taking lens. A wider angle lens puts you closer to the subject, and DoF narrows accordingly.

However! The size of the distant OOF highlights depend only on the actual aperture, and so a 100/2.8 portrait will have twice as large distant light blobs as a 50/2.8 portrait taken from half the distance.

I am, of course, ignoring the character of the OOF region, which is very important, but the amount of blur is the first thing people notice.
/:lecture:

--Matt

 

[GrahamWelland]

All I know is that I still want a Leica 50/0.95 with its beautifully smooth transition in & out of focus. Something that I think that some classic MF lenses do so well.

 

[MGrayson]

Oh, and for equivalence fans, all the factors cancel out and the longer lens bigger sensor will be stopped down to exactly the same physical aperture, so you can’t use bokeh to determine sensor size.

—Matt

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

What Matt and Jack said, +1 :thumbup:

There are a thousand different factors that come into play, and a lens that shows beautiful bokeh under some circumstances, can be ugly as f***k under others. The 50mm f/1.2 springs to my mind. What Jack says about transitions maybe the only trustworthy constant. One lens (that I haven't owned) that seems to do it all is the 58mm f/1.4 AF-S. There's a 287 page thread over at FM dedicated to that lens. Unfortunately, its reputation on the F6 isn't very good. Something about AF