Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 22, 2006, 11:38 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

Kalypso wrote:
Quote:
I mentioned "bokeh" to a friend of mine who is a Pro. He's been using everything from $16,000 Plate View cameras to the best large format cameras & lenses for over 30 years. He's probably forgotten more about photography than I'll ever learn. When I mentioned "bokeh", he said something like "WTF is that"?

My point is, don't get so caught up in such tiny details that you forget to use your tools to improve your skills. If somebody is so concerned about how your background highlights aren't perfectly round, they need to find another hobby...

Amen!

:-)
rduve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2006, 11:39 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

Kalypso wrote:
Quote:
I mentioned "bokeh" to a friend of mine who is a Pro. He's been using everything from $16,000 Plate View cameras to the best large format cameras & lenses for over 30 years. He's probably forgotten more about photography than I'll ever learn. When I mentioned "bokeh", he said something like "WTF is that"?

My point is, don't get so caught up in such tiny details that you forget to use your tools to improve your skills. If somebody is so concerned about how your background highlights aren't perfectly round, they need to find another hobby...

I agree... before I knew what bokeh was, it didn't matter. Now that I know it still doesn't matter. Probably matters if you are in a contest and being judged by it or if you are getting paid to take pictures with great bokeh.
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2006, 11:40 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
cope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
Default

meanstreak wrote:
Quote:
Kalypso wrote:
Quote:
I mentioned "bokeh" to a friend of mine who is a Pro. He's been using everything from $16,000 Plate View cameras to the best large format cameras & lenses for over 30 years. He's probably forgotten more about photography than I'll ever learn. When I mentioned "bokeh", he said something like "WTF is that"?

My point is, don't get so caught up in such tiny details that you forget to use your tools to improve your skills. If somebody is so concerned about how your background highlights aren't perfectly round, they need to find another hobby...

I agree... before I knew what bokeh was, it didn't matter. Now that I know it still doesn't matter. Probably matters if you are in a contest and being judged by it or if you are getting paid to take pictures with great bokeh.
Bokeh to photography is line Japanese hand saws to woodworking. I think it's a trendy thing. If I want to see Bokeh, I'll take out of focus pictures of Batek fabric.
cope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2006, 3:21 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
Default

Well, I was hoping this crop would look interesting. I always thought far off hollow circles with sharp edges look bad in a photograph, but now I feel its considered ok. From what I've read in this thread it seems that bokeh is not so dependent on the lens, is that true? If I shoot at f/8 instead of f/2.8 it will definitely help but is that the only way to improve the background quality?


rduve wrote:
Quote:
Kalypso wrote:
Quote:
I mentioned "bokeh" to a friend of mine who is a Pro. He's been using everything from $16,000 Plate View cameras to the best large format cameras & lenses for over 30 years. He's probably forgotten more about photography than I'll ever learn. When I mentioned "bokeh", he said something like "WTF is that"?

My point is, don't get so caught up in such tiny details that you forget to use your tools to improve your skills. If somebody is so concerned about how your background highlights aren't perfectly round, they need to find another hobby...

Amen!

:-)
maxxum7d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2006, 5:01 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 2,274
Default

I'll give it a try.

From what I've read in this thread it seems that bokeh is not so dependent on the lens, is that true?

Not really. Every lens has a given maximum aperture such as f/1.4 f/2 f/2.8 and so on. You can get better bokeh with a aperture of f/1.4 than you can with a f/3.5 like the kit lens.

Another factor is how far away the background is from your subject.

You need to understand how aperture size works in relation to depth of field or (DOF).

Smaller f number or larger aperture equals shorter depth of focus. (better bokeh)

Larger f number smaller aperture equals longer depth of focus. (not so good bokeh)

Got it?

lomitamike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2006, 7:48 PM   #16
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It also depends on the quality of your lens and how many blades your aperture has. But, in the real world, who cares?
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2006, 11:46 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

You guys crack me up:lol:
nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2006, 10:11 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
Default

I think it should go without saying that someone who buys the 7D over Canon 350 or Nikon D70 knows something about 35mm cameras, including depth of field and motion blur. Got it?

My question was more on the side of controlling the quality of bokeh using aperture.

lomitamike wrote:
Quote:
I'll give it a try.

From what I've read in this thread it seems that bokeh is not so dependent on the lens, is that true?

Not really. Every lens has a given maximum aperture such as f/1.4 f/2 f/2.8 and so on. You can get better bokeh with a aperture of f/1.4 than you can with a f/3.5 like the kit lens.

Another factor is how far away the background is from your subject.

You need to understand how aperture size works in relation to depth of field or (DOF).

Smaller f number or larger aperture equals shorter depth of focus. (better bokeh)

Larger f number smaller aperture equals longer depth of focus. (not so good bokeh)

Got it?
maxxum7d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2006, 11:15 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 159
Default

lomitamike wrote:
Quote:
Smaller f number or larger aperture equals shorter depth of focus. (better bokeh)

Larger f number smaller aperture equals longer depth of focus. (not so good bokeh)

Shallower DOF doesn't necessarily equal to "better" bokeh, you'll have more pronounced bokeh for sure as the DOF is shallower and less of the picture is in focus, but how "pleasing" the bokeh may look has less to do with that. When Minoltasaid their lenseshave what they called a circularaparture, is to say that they are trying to make their lenses to produce what some considered as better bokeh. Some lenses produces bokeh that looks busy(the 28-75 for one seems to do that, and I think my 28 f2 does it too), while some just seems to melt into the background. IMO my 300 f4 when shot ata distance at f4with enough background depthproduces better bokeh than the 28 f2 at f2-f3.5. And then Minolta has the STF lens thats made to enhance that "out-of-focus-ness" in shots, in other words, a lens made to have better bokeh....



In Macro lens too, their bokeh I think is also particularly important as their foreground subject really needs to stand out....
RacingManiac is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:29 PM.