W/NW: Bokeh Shot

[olivier_reichenbach]

And now a Zeiss bokeh. Planar 50/1.4.<div></div>

[christoph_hammann]

Bokeh in the foreground, for a change.<div></div>

[Ian Taylor]

<center><img src="http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=3245951&size=lg"></center>

[milbrua]

<center>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/milbrua/10339823/" title="Photo Sharing"><img

src="http://photos5.flickr.com/10339823_3efc8ecbfa_o.jpg" width="640" height="427"

alt="050331-1753" /></a>

</center>

[charles.]

<center><img src=http://www.thesecretsharer.net/tss/05/040205_1.jpg></center>

[icuneko]

It's good to have a posting that shows a variety of different bokeh patterns, both fore- and background, and that doesn't degenerate into rants about the word itself and/or whether bokeh even matters in an image. To those for whom it matters, bOKeh. To those for whom it doesn't, OOF!

[furcafe]

<center>

 

<img src="http://photos8.flickr.com/9855739_3b88bed53b_o.jpg">

 

</center>

[nikos peri]

Pardon the cheesy content<br>

<img src="http://photos.photosig.com/photos/82/32/1263282-471f51276a18da1e.jpg" width="400" height="320"><p>

and the non Leica glass... Nikon 50mm f/1.4

[nikos peri]

That is a great photo - well done.

[stephen_jones4]

I love the summilux bokeh on both the "pugilism" shot and the portraits. Despite the

swirling effect at max aperture, it's low contrast and "stays back". The summicron is

calmer but a bit dull. The planar's good too. The 90 elmarit looks a bit harsh (i.e. high

contrast in oof) - was it shot into the sun? I don't remember mine being like that.

FWIW, I think bokeh is best tested when shapes in the background are still intended as

distinguishable - ie. at mid-apertures - and when the background actually forms part of

the subject matter (not just washed into a background). All lenses can blur backgounds

out completely at max aperture and up-close. What is not so clever is if you shoot, say

with a Nikkor 35-70 2.8 afd (my personal bete noir) at c.f4 and you find the ni-sen

bokeh'd background taking precedence over the main subject - giving a kind of perverse,

concave 3-d effect. My 90 SAA M gives poor "front bokeh" which means you don't want to

have focus just on the eyes of a portrait (the forehead and nose go funny). Other than that

it's faultless.

[r s]

Some shots with a Canon 50/1.8 lens from the late 50's - all taken around f 1.8.

<br>

<br><center>

<img src="http://www.pbase.com/rsilfverberg/image/42272684.jpg">

<br><br>

<img src="http://www.pbase.com/rsilfverberg/image/42319394.jpg">

<br><br>

<img src="http://www.pbase.com/rsilfverberg/image/42359248.jpg">

<br><br>

</center>

[Uhooru]

Here's just a mid apeture blur maybe 5.6 or so

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/2977350-lg.jpg">

[Uhooru]

last Pre-asph cron 35 or 50 prob 50

[rgeorge911]

Here's mine.<div></div>

[fjords]

noctilux f1.2 @ 1.2 - boke with shutter pin holes!<div></div>