1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Where we are now: The site is back up and running! The character set encoding issue has been fixed so old posts should now look ok. I am currently working on themes/skins etc and I will be deleting the temporary green skin very soon as it has many issues. I will do a very quick variation on the stock blue skin first just to get a light-grey background and san-serif font, and I will set this as default. Later this week I will hopefully add a professional third-party skin in pfm colours (life is way too short to do this crap myself, and I've found one I really like than needs next to no tweaking). We are getting there slowly...
    Dismiss Notice
  3. May I please request people check and update their email address if it is out if date. I ask as I’m getting countless bounce errors as the server fails to send notifications through etc. I’ll eventually figure out how to send these to a black hole somewhere, but it makes sense to address it at source as quite a few folk are obviously not getting the thread and conversations notifications they have set in their preferences.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

Rate My Bokeh

Discussion in 'photo' started by matthewr, Mar 15, 2006.

  1. joel

    joel mojo working

    Just a little note on this astonishingly middle-aged thread that the word "boke" other than meaning blurred, also means daft. so "rate my bokeh", would translate back into Japanese as "Tell me how stupid I am" :)
    XXX

    joel
     
  2. nodrog

    nodrog Member

    Pedantic note: "boke" doesn't mean daft, just senile as in 'boke-rojin', which means 'senile old person' Quite apt for a 'middle-aged thread' though.

    Peter
     
  3. joel

    joel mojo working

    The general implication is a kind haziness, for sure. But it's a word not reserved solely for senile old boys. In a fit of eye-popping anger, one's boss may scream something like: omae, atama boketeru janaeika...
    ALC's take on boke
     
  4. matthewr

    matthewr spɹɐʍʞɔɐq spɹoɔǝɹ ɹnoʎ sʎɐld

    The Japanese have a word for "excessive vine growth"? Crikey.
     
  5. Martin D

    Martin D Libertarian Division

    [​IMG]some more:
    50mm f2 cron
     
  6. Martin D

    Martin D Libertarian Division

    [​IMG]50mm ASPH f1.4

    from the leica forum, its a strange thing this bokeh
     
  7. vuk

    vuk \o/ choose anarchy

    that seems very odd. the summicron shouldn't have crap bokeh like that.
     
  8. garyi

    garyi leave blank

    I don't know they all look quite good to me.

    Some times it helps to be a plank I think.
     
  9. ErikL

    ErikL pfm Member

    The background is blurry to my eyes. Still probably better than anything I could muster, and I like the dog.
     
  10. Mike Sae

    Mike Sae Infinitely Baffled

    Is this bokeh any good?

    [​IMG]
     
  11. Joe P

    Joe P certified Buffologist / mod

    Yeah, that's not impressive bokeh. Maybe the latest Leica designs don't have the best bokeh ever, but that's disappointing for a $2700 US lens -- http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...585&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

    It's also a crap picture, proving that however good the glass may be, the photographer matters most -- oh, and that some people shouldn't own $2700 lenses. Honestly, that ***really*** is a crap picture, but the dog's OK, as is the stuffed animal.

    Joe

    P.S. For comparison, here's the crap bokeh of the 55mm f/1.2 Nikkor, bought secondhand for a hundred clams --

    [​IMG]
     
  12. garyi

    garyi leave blank

    Is that bad bokeh Joe, I am so confused with all this double talk?
     
  13. Joe P

    Joe P certified Buffologist / mod

    That's my point, Gary. Leica is supposed to have amazing bokeh and Nikon crap bokeh, but the picture Martin posted has so-so bokeh and the one I posted has, in my opinion, passable bokeh.

    Joe
     
  14. AlexG

    AlexG ...

    *** tries to find a link to the winners of this years Guardian Photography competition to see if Joe is as unimpressed as I am ***
     
  15. vuk

    vuk \o/ choose anarchy

    igary.

    those leica pictures are third-hand postings. we can't be sure it's leica, we don't know how the film was processed and whether the digital scans came from film or print and what device was used. we also don't know what image processing software and techniques were applied to the jpeg resizing.

    all i can tell you is that the 3 leica lenses i own never, ever produce anything but top quality bokeh. in fact, even my non-leica lenses (all carefully chosen) never let me down in this regard, with the exception of the tamron 90mm macro. another horrible performer was a nikon lens i borrowed a few years ago.

    if you wish to satisfy your curiosity, go rent a leica for a day and do you own comparison. better yet, just buy one ebay and play with it for a year--you will recover every penny if you choose to sell it. that's actually what i did, except i was so impressed, i bought a superior leica camera once the experiment was over.

    lots of people yack and yack about this and that on the internet forums, but hardly any of them actually try out the competition and they all invariably quote "specs" (the way someone would talk about aplifier watts) to justify their opinions. i have a canon, a minolta (TLR), a contax, 2 leicas (rangefinder and SLR), a zorki, a pentax and just recently acquired a bessa. if you go back a few years, i owned the olympus e-10 digital. i even shot a session with a nikon digital a few weeks ago as a favour to a friend. hence, most of my impressions are to do with first-hand experience and i have to say it's the only way for an obsessive-compulsive to avoid having questions of quality hanging over him for ever.

    vuk.
     
  16. vuk

    vuk \o/ choose anarchy

    mike.

    your bokeh is not particularly offensive, but the image is so simple that the potential to annoy has been severly limited. from what it there, i can see that you're getting a doubling of highlights (which can sometimes actually work) and a fair degree of clumpiness (that i usually see in digital captures) in the mid-tones.

    vuk.
     
  17. Joe P

    Joe P certified Buffologist / mod

    Vuk,

    If the crap Nikkor you're referring to is the 55mm f/2.8 Micro, I agree completely. Macro lenses, with few exceptions, have terrible bokeh because they're optimized for all sorts of optical parameters other than smooth OOF regions.

    I also admit that Nikkor is not the best choice in glass for smooth bokeh, but not every Nikkor is crap. In fact, I have three Nikkors I think you'd give a pass to because their bokeh is decent and they do the 3D thing reasonably well -- 35mm f/1.4, 45mm f/2.8 and the 105mm f/2. They don't do tonality exceptionally, but that appears to be something that no lens other than a Leica seems to get right.

    (I don't know if he still thinks so, but back in the day Ian quite liked the 35mm f/1.4.)

    Joe
     
  18. vuk

    vuk \o/ choose anarchy

    here are those pics i shot for a friend (with her nikon d200) a few weeks ago:

    http://www.qstatistic.com/foto/hrm/

    the pictures turned out alright, but the markings in the finder were so excessive it nearly drove me crazy.

    i also don't understand why the camera has to be so f*cking big--it's not as if they put a nice big viewfinder in there.

    vuk.

    p.s. joe, yes it was the 55mm macro i used. took the 3rd and 4th shots in this set with it:
    http://www.dynavector.co.jp/english/photo/photo_vk.html

    that was in my digital days, when i had to borrow a decent film camera ;-)
     
  19. Joe P

    Joe P certified Buffologist / mod

    What lens(es) did you use? Pics look good, but not up to your usual colour standards. (But I dunno, maybe that's a film/digital difference I'm seeing.)



    I suspect you'd like the D2H's finder -- apart from the 3500 focusing brackets -- but the thing is so massive it makes the D200 feel like a pocketable camera. (Still smaller than my F4, though.)



    Did you apply a bit of Gaussian blur here and there, as its bokeh doesn't look as bad as what I get with that lens.

    Joe
     
  20. vuk

    vuk \o/ choose anarchy

    joe.

    i'm off to the racetrack--will answer later...

    vuk.
     

Share This Page