New 20mm f1.8 (Bokeh)

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by regie_de_rueda, Sep 28, 2014.

  1. Just got my Nikon 20mm f1.8 and to those of you interested to see how the bokeh looks like, here are some samples. Unedited shots from a D600. Resized only for web, nothing else is done on CS6. All shots f1.8 and focused about 12" from the sensor's plane.
  2. One more pic. (Funny this didn't show up at my previous post?)
  3. It is impressive that this lens provides this kind of performance. Personally, when utilizing wide angle lenses, I'm not thinking in terms of any out of focus portions of a scene, no Bokeh required. Wide angles include too much information in the scene to detract from the subject, regardless of the Bokeh. There are other tools in the lens box to emphasize a subject with impact. Wides to me are for inclusiveness, and maximum DOF. IMO. Certainly this lenses abilities would come in handy somehow, somewhere, that's the way of Photography.
  4. +1 What Don said, and also encouragement to try out this lens where it will really shine: interior shots slightly stopped down, and landscapes in the f/8- f/11 range, emphasizing relationships between near and far objects.
  5. The Bokeh looks pleasant enough to me, but surely it would be better, compositionally, to avoid those distracting white blobs altogether. Or if they're unavoidable, deal with them in post by erasing them or toning them down.
    You've obviously deliberately chosen to include "blobby" backgrounds, Regie, just to show off the bokeh, with no regard to any pictorial merit. So I have to agree with Don that the quality of bokeh probably isn't the first thing that most people look for in a fast super-wide. The edge and corner performance at wide apertures would grab my attention mostly, as would flare resistance, vignetting, coma and overall IQ. How does the lens handle in-focus lights at night, for example?
  6. Impressive for a 20mm f1.8 lens. It is on my shopping list now.
  7. Well, I for one am glad to see this shots. To me, the main point of interest in this lens is its wide aperture - the combination of a very wide angle, shallow DoF close-up work interests me more in a wide angle than landscape shots. Wide angles aren't necessarily for "getting it all in".
    Most people will not look at the bokeh or its wide-aperture performance, true, but well, then there are cheaper very good alternatives already, doing pretty much the same thing (AF-S 18-35 comes to mind). It's hard to find a lens these days that doesn't perform just fine at f/8-f/11, so in my view, those results aren't all that interesting anyway. If that's what you need, just get the most versatile lens on your budget.
    It's too early to say where this new lens will really shine: not all wide angles are optimised for infinity or near infinity (my 20 f/3.5 comes to mind - much sharper up close), nor are all optimised for f/8-f/11 either. And in fact, I hope this lens is a different thing, and excels at wide aperture close work - because that's something the Nikon catalog lacks more than 'f/8-f/11 max DoF excellent wide angles'.
    So, count me as one of those quirks that is happy with the shots in this OP. Looks pretty good, for a wide angle the bokeh isn't bad really (but I did not have high hopes to start with :). If it's reasonably flare resistant, I might get extremely tempted.
  8. Wouter, the 24/1.4 is superb at close distances and wide apertures, so I disagree that the catalog misses this. However, the 20mm is more affordable and wider.
  9. Good point, I blocked the 24 f/1.4 from my memory because I'd love to have it and it's well above budget, so I refrain from thinking about it :)
  10. this lens is definitely on my short list, but not because of bokeh. the results are about what i expected, although i've seen worse. i'd think you'd get a little bit more aesthetically-pleasing OOF rendering stopped down a squeench, like f/2-2.8. i'm more pleased with the sharpness wide open, TTYTT.
  11. As I have stated, all these sample pics are UNedited. Straight out of the camera except for resizing. And it's only to show how the 'bokeh' of this particular lens looks like. Nothing more. If I wanted creamy bokeh, I'll use my 85mmf1.4g. If I like sharpness all over, I will use my 24-70mm f2.8g. BUT, IMHO, this 20mm with it's less than 8" minimum focusing distance and a fast f1.8 aperture is definitely a keeper. I could set it at f1.8 to isolate my subject or I can set my aperture to f8-11 to be "all inclusive" :)
    The lens definitely needs more testing to determine what situation it will be of best use to me. Have a good day!
  12. RJ: "...The Bokeh looks pleasant enough to me, but surely it would be better, compositionally, to avoid those distracting white blobs altogether..."
    To give me a quick and dirty idea of the point spread function of a lens, I prefer a frame brimming over with in- and OOF Christmas lights, but personally, instead of waiting for Christmas to roll around, LOL, I'm quite happy that the OP found the best thing easily available right now, light filtering through leaves.
    BTW, not to derail this thread, but FWIW, I bought the new 28/1.8 a couple of weeks ago and have been absolutely delighted with it.
    Tom M
  13. Iā€™m waiting on how well the 20mm/1.8 does at really real infinity, that is astrophotography. I wonder how much coma and chromatic aberrations that it will show wide open to f/2.8 for the stars
  14. Inspired by Tom's suggestion of an OOF Christmas light, here's a 100% crop (center) of OOF Christmas lights! What do y'all think? Pretty? Ugly?

    Sorry, i can't make the pic to post . Just click on the link if you wanna see it.
  15. [​IMG]
    There it is! I'm still trying to figure out this "link to flickr" thingy. :)
    Nikon 20mm f1.8g
  16. I wouldn't call it pretty, but certainly not ugly either. For a wide angle (most of them having pretty poor bokeh), this certainly really doesn't look bad to me, quite the opposite.
    The Nikon f/1.8G primes really are a very desirable piece of kit. This one seems to continue this new tradition. Not sure my funds will be happy with it, but good days for the prime-shooter.
  17. Yup, wide angle lens "usually" are not designed to give shallow DOF. It is easier to get very deep DOF using one. Maybe because of the close focusing distance and a 1.8 aperture? I wonder how the Sigma 20mm f1.8 handles such scenes?
    Just to compare, I attached a capture of the same scene using a Nikon 85mm f1.4g
    Nikon 85mm f1.4g
  18. I bought the 20mm 1.8 last Saturday, and did some shot with it in daylight on Sunday.
    I am very impressed by its overal performance and particular in the corners. i had the Sigma 20mm 1.8 and my first impression is that the new Nikon is a league better.
    Did not include pictures because these were just test shots, nothing artistic.

Share This Page