Bokeh 50mm?

bdery · 03-30-2010, 06:06 AM

Just for the records, every lens creates bokeh. What people sometimes intend to say is that some lenses produce more beautiful bokeh than others. To some people "bokeh" means "good bokeh", or "pleasing bokeh".

I think we can all agree that pleasing bokeh is achieved when the background goes smoothly from sharp at the focus point, to completely and uniformly blurred away from the focus point. Good bokeh will isolate the subject from the background. A lens delivering good bokeh will show a pleasing out of focus blur even when the background is busy (think a branch isolated from the rest of the tree).

Now that we're done with definitions (hopefully

we can say that, in general, most 50 lenses are quite good optically, and their fast apertures will deliver pleasing bokeh, when compared wth other types of lenses.

sjwoo · 03-30-2010, 06:36 AM

Originally posted by bdery

Just for the records, every lens creates bokeh. What people sometimes intend to say is that some lenses produce more beautiful bokeh than others. To some people "bokeh" means "good bokeh", or "pleasing bokeh".

And just for the record, I think it's safe to say that some PEOPLE create more beautiful bokeh than others...

Here's another page with various shots of bokeh for comparison:

Nikon Lens Bokeh Comparison

All but the last one were shot at f5.6. I like the last one best, since it is the least distracting of the bunch, but for some people, it still might not be good enough.

Or check out this one:

What is bokeh and DOF tips and photo examples

The photographer created that buttery background by holding the fallen jade vine against the bunch of other flowers. He also stepped a decent distance away.

- Sung

tokyoso · 03-30-2010, 06:48 AM

Thanks for sharing those links, Sung... one from our favorite Ken Rockwell. nice set of lenses there!

sjwoo · 03-30-2010, 07:14 AM

Originally posted by tokyoso

Thanks for sharing those links, Sung... one from our favorite Ken Rockwell. nice set of lenses there!

I love his site, too, especially his How-To section.

As much as I admire perfectly smooth bokeh, for me it can go too far, rendering the background into a bland mush. That's the toughest part -- giving some personality to the background without having it distract the object in focus.

- Sung

shim · 03-30-2010, 07:36 AM

So this isn't the F/64 Club

Is it?

The first time I noticed bokeh as opposed to OOF areas was on Henri Cartier-Bresson's original print of the couple on the train at an exhibition about 35 years ago. It's the area of the mans trousers in the foreground, which sadly doesn't show up on small prints, for me it was what actually made the photograph and I can't say I've noticed it anywhere since. Friends at the time thought I'd gone mad.

Wish I knew what lens he used, obviously wide open.

link to a poor copy ot the photo, but you can see that the man's trouser legs are different

shim

axl · 03-30-2010, 10:03 AM

Here is one from me:
Taken with K55/1.8 wide open:

richard64 · 03-30-2010, 01:16 PM

Bokeh like this?

Pentax-A 50/1.7 at f1.7

twokatmew · 03-30-2010, 01:24 PM

Originally posted by JeffJS

Move the rear objects further back to get a better idea. With Bokeh you really shouldn't be able to determine with the OOF objects are, though in many cases, it's obvious (lights, vegetation, etc). The definition seems to vary wildly though.

Yes, after reading some of the posts last night, I was thinking about good bokeh depending (at least in part) on the distant objects being further away.

Although this is not as blurred as some photos in this thread, does this qualify as bokeh? (DA70 @ F5.6)

JeffJS · 03-30-2010, 02:01 PM

Originally posted by twokatmew

Yes, after reading some of the posts last night, I was thinking about good bokeh depending (at least in part) on the distant objects being further away.

Although this is not as blurred as some photos in this thread, does this qualify as bokeh? (DA70 @ F5.6)

The very background, I would say so. Have to look through all the twigs to see it though

.

axl · 03-30-2010, 03:20 PM

and this one is from F50/1.7 wide open too:

twokatmew · 03-30-2010, 03:34 PM

Originally posted by JeffJS

The very background, I would say so. Have to look through all the twigs to see it though

.

Thanks. Pretty much what I thought. I think I've got it now!

holance · 03-30-2010, 06:19 PM

Took by my pentax-m 50 F1.7

tokyoso · 03-30-2010, 08:39 PM

Originally posted by sjwoo

I love his site, too, especially his How-To section.

As much as I admire perfectly smooth bokeh, for me it can go too far, rendering the background into a bland mush. That's the toughest part -- giving some personality to the background without having it distract the object in focus.

- Sung

Yes, it certainly is an excellent site.

I think some people enjoy the bokeh more than the subjects themselves. It's like some people like to spread a little butter on their bagels, some enjoy it with a thick layer of soured cream.

twokatmew · 04-05-2010, 09:00 PM

Anyone know what these plants are?

FA50, F2.8, 1/2000s, ISO400:

FA50, F1.4, 1/1000s, ISO400:

JeffJS · 04-05-2010, 09:03 PM

Nope but it looks like you've achieved Bokeh!!

03-30-2010, 06:36 AM	#32
sjwoo Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 70	Originally posted by bdery Just for the records, every lens creates bokeh. What people sometimes intend to say is that some lenses produce more beautiful bokeh than others. To some people "bokeh" means "good bokeh", or "pleasing bokeh". And just for the record, I think it's safe to say that some PEOPLE create more beautiful bokeh than others... Here's another page with various shots of bokeh for comparison: Nikon Lens Bokeh Comparison All but the last one were shot at f5.6. I like the last one best, since it is the least distracting of the bunch, but for some people, it still might not be good enough. Or check out this one: What is bokeh and DOF tips and photo examples The photographer created that buttery background by holding the fallen jade vine against the bunch of other flowers. He also stepped a decent distance away. - Sung Last edited by sjwoo; 03-30-2010 at 06:58 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Difference in bokeh 50mm SMC-A	pyra_ohms	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	07-27-2010 01:39 PM
Bokeh Experiments - 50mm f1.7 Manual	Mark Morb	Post Your Photos!	2	06-14-2009 06:28 AM
50mm 2.8 Bokeh	bwield	Post Your Photos!	0	07-27-2008 06:24 PM
bokeh! FA 50mm 1.4	darthku	Post Your Photos!	6	04-14-2008 08:32 PM
FA 50mm f/1.4 bokeh and sharpness - an accidental study	m8o	Post Your Photos!	3	02-11-2008 05:15 AM

03-30-2010, 06:06 AM	#31
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,362	Just for the records, every lens creates bokeh. What people sometimes intend to say is that some lenses produce more beautiful bokeh than others. To some people "bokeh" means "good bokeh", or "pleasing bokeh". I think we can all agree that pleasing bokeh is achieved when the background goes smoothly from sharp at the focus point, to completely and uniformly blurred away from the focus point. Good bokeh will isolate the subject from the background. A lens delivering good bokeh will show a pleasing out of focus blur even when the background is busy (think a branch isolated from the rest of the tree). Now that we're done with definitions (hopefully we can say that, in general, most 50 lenses are quite good optically, and their fast apertures will deliver pleasing bokeh, when compared wth other types of lenses.

03-30-2010, 06:48 AM	#33
tokyoso Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Tokyo Photos: Albums Posts: 723	Thanks for sharing those links, Sung... one from our favorite Ken Rockwell. nice set of lenses there!

03-30-2010, 07:14 AM	#34
sjwoo Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 70	Originally posted by tokyoso Thanks for sharing those links, Sung... one from our favorite Ken Rockwell. nice set of lenses there! I love his site, too, especially his How-To section. As much as I admire perfectly smooth bokeh, for me it can go too far, rendering the background into a bland mush. That's the toughest part -- giving some personality to the background without having it distract the object in focus. - Sung

03-30-2010, 07:36 AM	#35
shim Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Merseyside UK Posts: 34	So this isn't the F/64 Club Is it? The first time I noticed bokeh as opposed to OOF areas was on Henri Cartier-Bresson's original print of the couple on the train at an exhibition about 35 years ago. It's the area of the mans trousers in the foreground, which sadly doesn't show up on small prints, for me it was what actually made the photograph and I can't say I've noticed it anywhere since. Friends at the time thought I'd gone mad. Wish I knew what lens he used, obviously wide open. link to a poor copy ot the photo, but you can see that the man's trouser legs are different shim

03-30-2010, 10:03 AM	#36
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	Here is one from me: Taken with K55/1.8 wide open:

03-30-2010, 01:16 PM	#37
richard64 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: England Posts: 309	Bokeh like this? Pentax-A 50/1.7 at f1.7

03-30-2010, 01:24 PM	#38
twokatmew Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Lansing, MI Photos: Albums Posts: 509	Originally posted by JeffJS Move the rear objects further back to get a better idea. With Bokeh you really shouldn't be able to determine with the OOF objects are, though in many cases, it's obvious (lights, vegetation, etc). The definition seems to vary wildly though. Yes, after reading some of the posts last night, I was thinking about good bokeh depending (at least in part) on the distant objects being further away. Although this is not as blurred as some photos in this thread, does this qualify as bokeh? (DA70 @ F5.6)

03-30-2010, 02:01 PM	#39
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by twokatmew Yes, after reading some of the posts last night, I was thinking about good bokeh depending (at least in part) on the distant objects being further away. Although this is not as blurred as some photos in this thread, does this qualify as bokeh? (DA70 @ F5.6) The very background, I would say so. Have to look through all the twigs to see it though .

03-30-2010, 03:20 PM	#40
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	and this one is from F50/1.7 wide open too:

03-30-2010, 03:34 PM	#41
twokatmew Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Lansing, MI Photos: Albums Posts: 509	Originally posted by JeffJS The very background, I would say so. Have to look through all the twigs to see it though . Thanks. Pretty much what I thought. I think I've got it now!

03-30-2010, 06:19 PM	#42
holance New Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Chicago Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 21	Took by my pentax-m 50 F1.7

03-30-2010, 08:39 PM	#43
tokyoso Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Tokyo Photos: Albums Posts: 723	Originally posted by sjwoo I love his site, too, especially his How-To section. As much as I admire perfectly smooth bokeh, for me it can go too far, rendering the background into a bland mush. That's the toughest part -- giving some personality to the background without having it distract the object in focus. - Sung Yes, it certainly is an excellent site. I think some people enjoy the bokeh more than the subjects themselves. It's like some people like to spread a little butter on their bagels, some enjoy it with a thick layer of soured cream.

04-05-2010, 09:00 PM	#44
twokatmew Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Lansing, MI Photos: Albums Posts: 509	Anyone know what these plants are? FA50, F2.8, 1/2000s, ISO400: FA50, F1.4, 1/1000s, ISO400:

04-05-2010, 09:03 PM	#45
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Nope but it looks like you've achieved Bokeh!!