|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,893
|
![]()
Supa Lao wrote:
Quote:
You are right. Like what dawg said, too many permutation. Lao, They all came from A300mmF4 Daniel, Toronto |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
|
![]()
I think those are very nice for a f/4 lens. Were they taken wide open, since that is when my 300 f/4.5 does it's best bokeh.
Tom |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California USA
Posts: 5,206
|
![]()
danielchtong wrote:
Quote:
There used to be pocket-sized booklets with DOF tables that you could carry around with you, and that gave you the DOF for various combinations of distance, focal length,and aperture, which determine the DOF (bokeh of course results from DOF shallower than the objects in the background - the more out of focus they are, the "better" the bokeh). Shutter speed and ISO have no direct influence, except thatthey caninfluence aperture determination. DOF varies directly with the distance (the greater the distance, the greater the DOF, and the poorer the bokeh), and inversely with the aperture (the larger the aperture, the less the DOF, and the better the bokeh). The only control you have over bokeh is in your choice of lenses, aperture selection, camera to subject distance, and framing to use the background to the best advantage. Some rules of thumb would be: 1) Photographing at theminimum distance with the widest aperture allows the best bokeh. 2) Shooting wide open gives the best bokeh possible forany distance. 3) Larger aperture lenses are capable of delivering better bokeh than those with smaller maximum apertures. 4) The greater the separation between the subject and the background, the better the bokeh. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,893
|
![]()
penolta wrote:
Quote:
Wow got to memorize this rule of thumb. Sounds right as far as I can see. I have been searching for this rule of thumb for sometime. Good work and thanks for summarising/simplifying it for us. ennacac wrote: Quote:
I looked at those pict again and the last one at F5 of a 300mm fits the good bokeh definition above (summarised by penolta) Daniel, Toronto |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,893
|
![]()
Monza76 wrote:
Quote:
But one still has to reckon the days when MF will be out of fashion if the trend (for fast electrons like D300 or D30) continues. Also Pentax newer dslr may not even support older lens. Already K10d has persistent problem with metering for older lens. I have been eyeing a 200mm as I have nothing between 135mm & 300mm. But the F or FA version of 200mm is just insanely priced. Or I just have to wait for the DA*200mm which is expected to be pricey. Daniel , Toronto |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,154
|
![]()
danielchtong wrote:
Quote:
Ira |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lake Placid Florida USA
Posts: 2,689
|
![]()
Those are some great BIF shots Daniel, you are really doing great with your MF lens.
Tim |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|