My attempts at Depth Of Field

**boriscleto** · 12-30-2011, 10:38 AM

Get yourself a 50/1.4. Anything from the S-M-C Tak up to the FA. Non-autofocus will be considerably cheaper. The 1.4 has nicer bokeh than the 1.7 because it has 8 blades instead of 6.

Philoslothical · 12-30-2011, 10:47 AM

If you're going to start experimenting with manual lenses for bokeh, also look into old Russian glass, or any of the old preset teles. For Russian brands check, Tair, Helios, Jupiter, Industar, etc. For 135mm presets, the Tair 11a looks wonderful, and has a 20 blade aperture. I have an old Accura preset that has a nice 16 blade aperture, and nice bokeh even if it's not the sharpest lens. I think part of the reason for the difference in bokeh on these lenses is having the iris much farther forward in the lens, but that's conjecture. Many of these old lenses can be had very cheaply. They carry a high risk of LBA though.

RioRico · 12-30-2011, 10:53 AM

Just as a FYI, here are the general rules of DOF:

For thicker DOF, use a tighter aperture and/or shorter focal length and/or further lens-subject distance

For thinner DOF, use a wider aperture and/or longer focal length and/or closer lens-subject distance

Tricks can be played to manipulate DOF. Easiest, with only slight loss of IQ, is to use a strap-on adapter. A +1 dioptre meniscus, available in any cheap set of closeup adapters, will shorten the working distance to 50-95cm / 20-38in. This turns even the DA18-55 into a portrait lens. I can turn a not-too-fast 50/2 into a 75/2 portrait beast by adding a good (yet cheap) 1.5x front adapter -- Sony and Olympus are probably best. My Sony VCL-1546A cost all of US$4 shipped.

Bokeh depends (among other things) on number and shape of the iris blades; aperture size and placement; the lens' optical formula; and relation of background to subject, both distance and light. A brighter background emphasizes the bokeh. Few or uneven iris blades can give harsh bokeh and that's not always bad -- I like smooth bokeh with complex subjects, and busy bokeh with bland smooth subjects.

And preset-aperture lenses, where the iris is near the center of the lens, render bokeh differently than do similar auto-aperture lenses, with the iris near the back of the lens. Case in point: I have two CZJ Tessar 50/2.8s, one a little silver Exakta-mount preset with 12 iris blades, the other a big black M42 auto-aperture with 5 iris blades. Same maker, same formula, but quite different results. Or I'll compare two M42s, the Meyer Trioplan 100/2.8 (preset, long lens, 15 blades) vs the SuperTak 105/2.8 (auto, tele group, 6 blades). The SuperTak is nice. The Trioplan is a bokeh monster.

iatros · 12-31-2011, 01:24 AM

Quote:

Just as a FYI, here are the general rules of DOF:
For thicker DOF, use a tighter aperture and/or shorter focal length and/or further lens-subject distance

For thinner DOF, use a wider aperture and/or longer focal length and/or closer lens-subject distance

I like this software (it runs even on my old nokia

): it's free, fast and self-explaining and permits you to experiment different combinations of aperture and shutter:

Software | curved light photography

Happy New Year to everybody and keep your DOF thin!

Martin

dane.dawg · 01-01-2012, 07:52 AM - **1 Like**

Heres one with the 50-200mm, wide open..

Malfunction · 01-01-2012, 12:20 PM

If your looking for a good lens with AF Murgy 91 thats not going to put you back BIG £££ , take a look at the Pentax DA 35mm f2.4 AL,
its great value for the money, on sale at Jessops at the moment , check out the lens review on the forum.

Murgy91 · 01-03-2012, 01:50 AM

oh god there is so many choices! ha thanks for all u help! i may invest in the DA35mm f2.4 that malfunction linked.. reviews look good, not Overly expensive.. meanwhile ill still be browsing ebay for those bargains :P

Originally posted by dane.dawg

Heres one with the 50-200mm, wide open..

Love that shot!

Last edited by Murgy91; 01-03-2012 at 01:59 AM.

Murgy91 · 01-03-2012, 01:54 AM

i posted this in the noobies pics as well, but these r the type of shots I'm after, not sure if its classed as really bokeh, but i think its by one of my best shots so far

and i even know how i did it! no auto!

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1764153-post534.html

**baro-nite** · 01-03-2012, 05:57 AM

Originally posted by Murgy91

i posted this in the noobies pics as well, but these r the type of shots I'm after, not sure if its classed as really bokeh, but i think its by one of my best shots so far

and i even know how i did it! no auto!

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1764153-post534.html

Well done! Lens wide open and you are close to the subject, giving you nice shallow depth of field. But more importantly you captured an unscripted moment, priceless expression, and managed to do this while creating a compelling composition with a lot of energy that suits the scene.

Murgy91 · 01-03-2012, 06:29 AM

i think it helped she was bladdered :P

The light was rubbish thigh so pretty chuffed with how the picture came out

amazing the difference a proper camera makes !

Sagitta · 01-03-2012, 06:38 AM

Echoing whats been said about everything so far. A good way of knowing to expect bokeh (good or bad) is really just to know when the lens you're using is going to hit infinity focus and what you're minimum point is in order to be able to start focusing. The farther you are from infinity (and closer to minimum), the more bokeh you'll get. Lenses that have a huge throw before they hit infinity will give lots of play in between, and your aperture won't factor in as much.

Example: 300mm at f/16, and the bird was just about at the absolute minimal distance for me to get focus on it. This means that despite having an unnecessarily huge f/stop set (hey, I was still figuring all this DSLR stuff out at the time!) I still managed to get some nice bokeh in the shot which helped to isolate the chickadee and make it 'pop' for me.

12-30-2011, 10:53 AM	#18
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Just as a FYI, here are the general rules of DOF: For thicker DOF, use a tighter aperture and/or shorter focal length and/or further lens-subject distance For thinner DOF, use a wider aperture and/or longer focal length and/or closer lens-subject distance Tricks can be played to manipulate DOF. Easiest, with only slight loss of IQ, is to use a strap-on adapter. A +1 dioptre meniscus, available in any cheap set of closeup adapters, will shorten the working distance to 50-95cm / 20-38in. This turns even the DA18-55 into a portrait lens. I can turn a not-too-fast 50/2 into a 75/2 portrait beast by adding a good (yet cheap) 1.5x front adapter -- Sony and Olympus are probably best. My Sony VCL-1546A cost all of US$4 shipped. Bokeh depends (among other things) on number and shape of the iris blades; aperture size and placement; the lens' optical formula; and relation of background to subject, both distance and light. A brighter background emphasizes the bokeh. Few or uneven iris blades can give harsh bokeh and that's not always bad -- I like smooth bokeh with complex subjects, and busy bokeh with bland smooth subjects. And preset-aperture lenses, where the iris is near the center of the lens, render bokeh differently than do similar auto-aperture lenses, with the iris near the back of the lens. Case in point: I have two CZJ Tessar 50/2.8s, one a little silver Exakta-mount preset with 12 iris blades, the other a big black M42 auto-aperture with 5 iris blades. Same maker, same formula, but quite different results. Or I'll compare two M42s, the Meyer Trioplan 100/2.8 (preset, long lens, 15 blades) vs the SuperTak 105/2.8 (auto, tele group, 6 blades). The SuperTak is nice. The Trioplan is a bokeh monster. Last edited by RioRico; 12-30-2011 at 11:01 AM.

12-31-2011, 01:24 AM	#19
iatros New Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Switzerland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 16	Photographer's screwdriver Quote: Just as a FYI, here are the general rules of DOF: For thicker DOF, use a tighter aperture and/or shorter focal length and/or further lens-subject distance For thinner DOF, use a wider aperture and/or longer focal length and/or closer lens-subject distance I like this software (it runs even on my old nokia ): it's free, fast and self-explaining and permits you to experiment different combinations of aperture and shutter: Software \| curved light photography Happy New Year to everybody and keep your DOF thin! Martin

01-01-2012, 07:52 AM - 1 Like	#20
dane.dawg Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,436	Heres one with the 50-200mm, wide open.. Last edited by dane.dawg; 01-01-2012 at 07:58 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K7 depth of field settings	arche	Pentax DSLR Discussion	9	08-31-2011 04:33 AM
Depth of Field etc	bros	Pentax K-r	13	07-29-2011 10:22 AM
Depth of field preview	Paleki	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	7	01-26-2011 08:35 PM
Shallow Depth of Field	sjwoo	Photographic Technique	34	04-07-2010 11:24 PM
K10D and depth of field	rimofheaven	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	7	01-04-2010 09:21 PM

12-30-2011, 10:38 AM	#16
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,476	Get yourself a 50/1.4. Anything from the S-M-C Tak up to the FA. Non-autofocus will be considerably cheaper. The 1.4 has nicer bokeh than the 1.7 because it has 8 blades instead of 6.

12-30-2011, 10:47 AM	#17
Philoslothical Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 1,889	If you're going to start experimenting with manual lenses for bokeh, also look into old Russian glass, or any of the old preset teles. For Russian brands check, Tair, Helios, Jupiter, Industar, etc. For 135mm presets, the Tair 11a looks wonderful, and has a 20 blade aperture. I have an old Accura preset that has a nice 16 blade aperture, and nice bokeh even if it's not the sharpest lens. I think part of the reason for the difference in bokeh on these lenses is having the iris much farther forward in the lens, but that's conjecture. Many of these old lenses can be had very cheaply. They carry a high risk of LBA though.

01-01-2012, 12:20 PM	#21
Malfunction Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Tyneside Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 69	If your looking for a good lens with AF Murgy 91 thats not going to put you back BIG £££ , take a look at the Pentax DA 35mm f2.4 AL, its great value for the money, on sale at Jessops at the moment , check out the lens review on the forum.

01-03-2012, 01:50 AM	#22
Murgy91 Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 30 Original Poster	oh god there is so many choices! ha thanks for all u help! i may invest in the DA35mm f2.4 that malfunction linked.. reviews look good, not Overly expensive.. meanwhile ill still be browsing ebay for those bargains :P Originally posted by dane.dawg Heres one with the 50-200mm, wide open.. Love that shot! Last edited by Murgy91; 01-03-2012 at 01:59 AM.

01-03-2012, 01:54 AM	#23
Murgy91 Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 30 Original Poster	i posted this in the noobies pics as well, but these r the type of shots I'm after, not sure if its classed as really bokeh, but i think its by one of my best shots so far and i even know how i did it! no auto! https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1764153-post534.html

01-03-2012, 05:57 AM	#24
baro-nite Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: North Carolina, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,295	Originally posted by Murgy91 i posted this in the noobies pics as well, but these r the type of shots I'm after, not sure if its classed as really bokeh, but i think its by one of my best shots so far and i even know how i did it! no auto! https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1764153-post534.html Well done! Lens wide open and you are close to the subject, giving you nice shallow depth of field. But more importantly you captured an unscripted moment, priceless expression, and managed to do this while creating a compelling composition with a lot of energy that suits the scene.

01-03-2012, 06:29 AM	#25
Murgy91 Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 30 Original Poster	i think it helped she was bladdered :P The light was rubbish thigh so pretty chuffed with how the picture came out amazing the difference a proper camera makes !

01-03-2012, 06:38 AM	#26
Sagitta Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Maine Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,081	Echoing whats been said about everything so far. A good way of knowing to expect bokeh (good or bad) is really just to know when the lens you're using is going to hit infinity focus and what you're minimum point is in order to be able to start focusing. The farther you are from infinity (and closer to minimum), the more bokeh you'll get. Lenses that have a huge throw before they hit infinity will give lots of play in between, and your aperture won't factor in as much. Example: 300mm at f/16, and the bird was just about at the absolute minimal distance for me to get focus on it. This means that despite having an unnecessarily huge f/stop set (hey, I was still figuring all this DSLR stuff out at the time!) I still managed to get some nice bokeh in the shot which helped to isolate the chickadee and make it 'pop' for me.