View Full Version : The ultimate Bokeh thread; pics please
Don't blame it on me, blame it on John, this thread was his idea :)
Quality of bokeh is clearly subjective - heck, even my perception has changed.
I used to search for "donuts" and "footballs" in the background of a shallow
DOF picture.
These days, I care less about that, and look at the 3d rendering that I feel
a lens provides.
So, please post example pictures, of what you think is good and bad bokeh,
which lens at which aperture you used, and why you like/dislike the lens'
OOF performance.
I'll start (the pic that triggered this):
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/225597489-XL.jpg
Summicron-C 40/2 wide open at min. distance. This is the Wayfarer's
chappel in LA, architected by F.L. Wright Jr. Even though there are
slight donuts and double lines in the background, I like what I feel is
a superb 3D quality to the way the lens rendered this picture.
In my experience the 35/2 and 40/1.4 behave similarly. Or do they ? :)
More please. Thanks,
Roland.
foto_fool
11-26-2007, 10:41
Roland - Now that you put it that way (dimensional rendering) I agree. The bokeh in the chapel shot is distracting, but the candle does really jump out of the frame.
I'll see you and raise you the 35mm Konica 35/2 UC-Hexanon (on R-D1):
http://images28.fotki.com/v997/photos/1/1126243/4871630/UC_Hex35_3-vi.jpg
(posted before).
The low angle lighting from the right of your frame contributes to the dimensionality of your shot. The coffeecup was lit from the right and from behind me. For me the geometric regularity of the OOF in my shot decreases my negative perception of the double lines - which in any case are relatively soft.
- John
John, thanks. What your picture also shows in my mind is that the type
of background and cropping is very important. I've seen double
lines created with the UC hex, and created them with my Hexar AF myself ....
OK, here is another one:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/175373321-L.jpg
Canon 50/1.4, wide open.
The couple liked the picture so there was that. But I don't.
Maybe because of the "footballs" ? Or because the coma-created
circles ? Note that I have only seen very few lenses that do not
do that with that type of background .... The Noctilux does it for
sure ....
Roland.
Todd.Hanz
11-26-2007, 11:17
some good posts here: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=686124#post686124
Todd
foto_fool
11-26-2007, 11:23
Cute couple but I completely agree about the footballs. Here's a series of shots with the ZM Sonnar C shot wide open (R-D1 again):
http://images31.fotki.com/v1055/photos/1/1126243/4871630/bokeZMC1-vi.jpg
OOF on the ceiling (no highlights) is pleasing to me. OOF on the trees outside the window is not bad - because of distance?
http://images32.fotki.com/v1048/photos/1/1126243/4871630/bokeZMC2-vi.jpg
The higlights behind the subjects are interesting - how do you describe this effect? In this shot it adds an element of humor for me.
http://images21.fotki.com/v839/photos/1/1126243/4871630/Emily_01_799-vi.jpg
Same venue as the prior shot - same lights. Completely different look. Pleasing - not distracting.
- John
Over time I've come to break all the rules but only respecting one: harmony.
This is an unfocused image. Noct-Nikkor wide open.
I'll post more as soon as I retrieve some new ones...
http://www.angelfire.com/ne2/nenadbojic/Studio-fb/Web-Lydia.jpg
Todd.Hanz
11-26-2007, 11:28
...in the mean time...
good bokeh:
Nikkor 105/2.5 MF on D200
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1202/1480888336_456aa58791_o.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1213/1480840344_0527be3e18_o.jpg
VC 75/2.5
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1283/1040395438_17ac3f45c4_o.jpg
Leica 50/1.4 Summilux (E-46 version)
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/216/473141693_14183b3e42_o.jpg
bokeh not so good:
Nikkor 50/1.2
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1029/867323522_b7040fadef_o.jpg
Todd
Good bokeh:
Pentax 77/1.8
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52338&stc=1&d=1196110150
Not so nice bokeh:
Pentax 50/1.7 A
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52339&stc=1&d=1196110289
Mr_Flibble
11-26-2007, 12:01
Posted this pic somewhere before......
http://www.flibweb.nl/flibweb/cpg143/albums/userpics/10001/ch070932.jpg
Elmar 90/4 on my Leica IIIa
steverett
11-26-2007, 14:20
Both with a Canon 7:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2089/2064333727_447dca5052.jpg
Canon 85/2 on Velvia
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1252/848698290_b3c4dbbdd3_o.jpg
Canon 50/1.8 on FP4+
I like this bokeh. Bessa R, Jupiter 8 @f/2
Can't remember if I posted this here before or not... If so it would've been a long time back.
Anyway, I did an experiment. What do you all think?
I'll come clean with the details in awhile.
The image was taken at around f4 . The background is composed of leaves and branches about 4 meters away from the clicking beatle.
http://www.timeprints.com/Code/Slike/IN014b.jpg
Pakmanpdx
11-26-2007, 20:16
Here's the Hektor 73mm on my IIIa. As Homer would say....mmm...Donuts! This was probably at f 2.2 although it was summertime in open shade. the background is a large bush with sunlight falling on it about 10 feet behind my daughter.
135 Elmarit @ f8 - I think. Mounted on IIIg + Viso II and extension ring
52370
Me too, me too: Minolta MC Rokkor 85/1.7 @ 1.7, Minolta X-500, Agfa APX 100
I really like the buttery-smooth bokeh of this lens
R3A plus 40mm Nokton wide open.
http://johnmcd.zenfolio.com/img/v0/p895179996.jpg
RD-1 and Nokton
http://johnmcd.zenfolio.com/img/v2/p825935156.jpg
Cheers,
John
My favorite of the moment (Porst/Tomioka 55/1.2):
http://abbazz.zenfolio.com/img/v2/p522291866.jpg
http://abbazz.zenfolio.com/img/v2/p407422416.jpg
http://abbazz.zenfolio.com/img/v2/p253221427.jpg
Cheers,
Abbazz
A little Beer with a Jupiter 8 on a Kiev II
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/240/450082300_ad25ef4f76_o.jpg
hofrench@mac.co
11-27-2007, 04:55
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/187/476538511_a8227d1e75_b.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1115/528089727_3f8771b4a2_b.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/205/495373749_484bd6aa8d_b.jpg
M8 with MM-Hexanon 50.http://farm1.static.flickr.com/205/495373749_484bd6aa8d_b.jpg
If all is well (i don't see it in the preview...), attached is a bokeh-ish image with the CV 40mm SC wide open. The highlights at the bottom are from parked bicycles.
Dirk
keithwms
11-27-2007, 11:46
Can MF/LF shooters play along?
A few shots from a cambo, a horseman VH, and an rb67.
What do these three have in common? They were all shot at f/8 ;)
titrisol
11-27-2007, 11:51
Good Bouquet?
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/117/289773490_4e8253ce31_s.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/89853469@N00/289773490/in/set-72157600687133322/)
Super-Takumar 50/1.4 at 1.4
Heres some from me, dust from the scanner included!
Minolta MC 50/1.4 wide open, XD-7, Reala.
Got the lens the same day in the mail, just wanted to see what would hapen when wide open! Not the easiest shot as there was a breeze and everything was moving! not overly pleased with the more obvious donuts to the upper right!
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2036/2069089019_fcfa3c4a24_o.jpg
Minolta MD 50/1.7, XD-7, FP4, unknown aperture but it was during the middle of the day so probably not wide open, but more dust :o First proper B&W film in over 20 years so wasn't trying for any effects, just wanted to test the XD-7 which had then recently come into my possesion!
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2151/2069916502_05dd64e37e_o.jpg
foto_fool
11-27-2007, 14:46
Some comments: 1) I like where this thread is going :D. 2) When you add pics, PLEASE tell everyone what lens/aperture/film/body you used, if you can recall. 3) Let's do more than just display bokeh - please describe what and why you like or dislike, and whay you think you got the result you did - some are and it keeps it interesting.
Some observations: 1) Ned's first post - where the whole thing is a bit OOF but the real OOF element that balances the pic is someone's sleeve (maybe?) in the foreground - got me thinking about whether and how lenses render foreground OOF different from background OOF. I can't recall seeing circles or donuts from OOF foreground highlights. But then I don't think I've seen many (any) shots that HAVE OOF foreground highlights - verboten in our brains? 2) My earlier comment about geometric regularity in the background helping smooth double-line bokeh - clearly refuted by Todd's last shot of the antique car - man, that's odd-looking. 3) keithwms - thanks for posting the LF shots at f8 - good to see subject isolation in something that is not shot at f1-2. 4) Swirly bokeh may be sometimes hard to look at, but it really does seem to go hand-in-glove with enhanced 3D rendering of the in-focus elements. 4) Is it just me, or does it look to others as though the Sonnar-design lenses are more prone than others to circle bokeh in background highlights?
- John
Thanks for all the pictures everybody. Abbazz, this second shot of yours is about the best shallow DOF application that I have seen so far !!!
John,
: : :
1) .... I can't recall seeing circles or donuts from OOF foreground highlights. But then I don't think I've seen many (any) shots that HAVE OOF foreground highlights - verboten in our brains?
4) Swirly bokeh may be sometimes hard to look at, but it really does seem to go hand-in-glove with enhanced 3D rendering of the in-focus elements.
5) Is it just me, or does it look to others as though the Sonnar-design lenses are more prone than others to circle bokeh in background highlights?
: : :
- John
4) I agree with that one.
5) Not sure. Some do and some don't. The Nikkor 50/1.4, 80/2 and Canon 50/1.5 do wide open, in my experience, the Nikkor 105/2.5 and the C-Sonnar do not. I think it has to do which how much they have been optimized for resolution.
1) These type of shots are very rare, indeed. There was a thread about this on RFF a while back. Here is an example with foreground OOF, same Canon lens as used in my bad bokeh example above, but producing really nice foreground OOF:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/106248437-L.jpg
I find "bad bokeh" more distracting in portraits, in general.
Here is another "good bokeh" example, that I simply like because I like
the subject :) Tele Elmarit wide open (M body with color negative,
don't remember which film):
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/195927863-L.jpg
Please keep the examples coming. And do remember to
include lens/aperture/film/body information.
Best,
Roland.
Harsh bokeh: (M4 + Summilux 50mm pre-ASPH @ f/1.4 Trix-X D76 10min):
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2221/2070291960_d01ac65e64.jpg
Hasselblad 500 C/M + CF 80mm T* @ f/2.8 Tri-X
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1109/1308538527_d6ffe7ccdb.jpg
monochromejrnl
11-27-2007, 17:56
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2054/2069840322_de677f7a1b_b.jpg
Zeiss-opton 50/1.5 Sonnar, Kodak Gold 100 @ f1.5, 1/25th sec
bankcheck
11-27-2007, 18:07
Noct + R-D1
Zeiss Biogon @ f2.0 (finally an RF image huh..)
http://www.chang-sang.com/photo/110507/crop0005.jpg
Dave
Dave, I missed the bokeh part of your photos b/c the eyes of every one of your subjects were so beautifully captured. Great work.
foto_fool
11-27-2007, 19:42
Roland - the swirly bokeh thing - is it a chicken and egg question? Do lenses that make swirly bokeh intrinsically render more dimensionality, or is it how we percieve the swirly that creates an illusion of 3D?
Thanks for the front OOF example. Here is my contribution (this was deliberate believe it or not):
http://images32.fotki.com/v1066/photos/1/1126243/4871630/Matthew-vi.jpg
ZM Sonnar C on R-D1 @f2.0. The highlights in my friend's glasses are really all I have to show, but they do seem smoother to me than background OOF with this lens.
Your second good bokeh example looks like Romanoff royalty :).
Gabriel - I like the hanging basket shot. It shows distracting (to me) bokeh in the trees, but then goes to the idea that the geometric regularity of the bricks seems to soften the effect. The Summilux shot - circles and footballs? I'm comparing this one to Maddoc's shots and it looks to me like the harsh bokeh effect is more pronounced when the lighting in the background is greater than that on the in-focus subjects. Dave's 4th shot seems show the opposite effect.
- John
Back in post 19, I attached an image which I can't re-post.
Here's the story. I for some reason a year or two ago wondered how the world would look through a lens with a very non circular iris... like a cat's eye.
So I tried it. I made a cardboard iris with a slit like a cat's pupil, and attached it to the front of an 85mm F/2 lens. The slit was about 3 mm wide at the middle, and about 40 mm tall.
The lens was an m42 version Jupiter 9 attached to a Pentax dslr.
http://matsumura.smugmug.com/gallery/3895228#225860682
Hexanon 50/2 at f2, because the green backlit foliage isn't a mess of bubbles.
and this one:
http://matsumura.smugmug.com/gallery/3767331#216875815
35/2 ASPH @ F2 because the bright background colors aren't blending as in lesser glass, but remaining discrete
foto_fool
11-27-2007, 20:54
Bryce - cool experiment and I love the image - very beautiful OOF. I'm no whiz at optics but AFAIK the aperture needs to be behind the front element at least - you have done something, but I don't think you captured the reality of a cat's vision. Might be worth taking a lens apart... ;)
Digitalintrigue - FINALLY someone posts a shot with "the king"! :D
- John
Here's an old demo of fg/bg bokeh. Lens is the exotic Zeiss Aposonnar 200/2 C/Y, wide open, minimum focus, mounted to a Canon DSLR (classic D30).
http://patternassociates.com/rico/contax/misc/as200a.jpg
Abbazz, this second shot of yours is about the best shallow DOF application that I have seen so far !!!
Thanks, Roland. As all 3 pictures were taken wide open at f/1.2, DOF was pretty thin indeed.
Cheers,
Abbazz
Dave, those were nice! The more I see of that Biogon 35 the more impressed I am. It seems to have all the good attributes of the pre-asph Leica lenses all the way down to f2.0...pretty cool!
mauro scacco
11-28-2007, 06:01
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/184/440089313_3981cf46a4_o.jpghttp://farm1.static.flickr.com/214/504232566_3601b31113_b.jpg
Dave, those were nice! The more I see of that Biogon 35 the more impressed I am. It seems to have all the good attributes of the pre-asph Leica lenses all the way down to f2.0...pretty cool!
Thanks Kev.
I've got Cindy Flood's ASPH cron waiting for me somewhere in Canada Posts coffers - hopefully *crosses fingers* I'll get it today.
I plan on doing a comparison b/w the ASPH and the ZM 35 - for the money's sake, I hope the ZM wins out but hey... who knows :D
Dave
mauro scacco
11-28-2007, 06:15
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/217/492687453_cdc70b2e9d_o.jpg
mauro scacco
11-28-2007, 06:19
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1429/559800549_1f78365253_o.jpg
chambrenoire
11-28-2007, 06:37
http://i1.tinypic.com/6ksrmtc.jpg
Mom
http://i10.tinypic.com/85apoom.jpg
Greens
Wow, Rico; that's a mighty cool lens. 200mm f/2 oh yeah.
Alright, since nobody's really caring for off-screen display and download-choking for others, I'll post some large photos too:
Gabriel,
:confused: :confused: :confused:
You're always making it a point to make a point about how people are posting large images so you decide to post large ones too so you can choke all the computers.
I don't see large images. They are all about 500x700 72dpi... which is very small.
Images that are 500x700 @ 72dpi (and as long as they were saved properly) can be pretty small....I've got a 600x900 pixel image that's only 68kb.
That said, I think Gabe is talking about dimensions and depending on your screen size.. a 600x900 image can be huge :D
I still try to ensure my website is available to those with 800x600 resolution...
Dave
Halloween bokeh, kind of ugly if you ask me:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/112319017-L.jpg
Canon 50/1.2, probably Superia 400.
Roland.
You've seen most of these before. I'm wondering. With all of the chatter about the v. 4 35mm Summicron being the "King of Bokeh", I reckon the 51.9 mm DR Summicron gives it a run for the title. All of these are at 1:2.0 or maybe 1:2.8. I hope the last one isn't too big for your monitor.
http://gallery.leica-users.org/d/95977-2/FH000002-1-1.jpg
http://gallery.leica-users.org/d/95980-2/FH000006-8-8.jpg
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=37096&d=1165083285
http://gallery.leica-users.org/d/96988-1/Day+Lilly+1.jpg
LChanyungco
11-28-2007, 09:06
where are the noctilux examples ? :)
Gabriel M.A.
11-28-2007, 09:08
Gabriel,
<snip>
You're always making it a point to make a point about how people are posting large images
<snip>
I don't see large images. They are all about 500x700 72dpi... which is very small.
You always make it a point to think that everybody has the same setup as your own.
foto_fool
11-28-2007, 10:49
Technical note - following Dave's, Gabe's and Ned's comments (and suggested best practices for the forum) all the photos we post in-thread should be 800 px wide or less for readability. Also those of us with fast cable and DSL do tend to take it for granted, and forget that some folks are still on dial-up but that's a reality that's unlikely to change.
There are some really great images showing up here!
Rico - very cool rig, and great illustrative shots. The Aposonnar does seem to render near-field and far-field OOF differently (and nice Zeiss circles in the background highlights). Trivially this may be because the near field is shallow and the far field could go to infinity, but someone with real knowledge of optics may have a deeper explanation (surely including uncorrected spherical abberations, point sources and circles of confusion).
Gabriel - the the bokeh of 50mm Summilux shot with the digital p&s is pure cream. Love the irony as well. And again it looks to me that the background geometry in the healer and parking plot shots is smoothing what would be otherwise harsh bokeh.
Mauro & Chambrenoire - where have you guys been? Thanks for some really great contributions. Mauro I am challenged by the old lady in the church. The bokeh effect of the candelabras in the background is a little harsh, but not swirly - and really seems to push her toward the viewer's eye.
Roland, that's some scary Bokeh (Sonnar footballs?) in the Halloween shot. Maybe those are the shades of all our dead shots coming to haunt your jack-o-lantern.
Erik, that Canon 0.95 is such a bad lens it does not know how to put a circle around a background highlight. What's up with that? :D And that may be the smoothest background I have ever seen from the CV 50/1.5 - nice.
Wayne - that Summicron paints beautifully, except for the trees. So far from the shots in this thread it looks like it would be a good idea to avoid trees in the background when shooting any Summicron at wide apertures. Unless you like that sort of thing.
- John
hans voralberg
11-28-2007, 16:32
OM 50/1.4 @ 1.4
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2315/1506284716_045993117e.jpg
Nikkor 35/2 @ f2
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2311/1955553432_5f050314d5.jpg
All taken with a Canon 85mm f1.2 shot at 1.2:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2106/2073260740_5f16352080_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2335/2072467581_9416c03aef_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2009/2072467459_8b9239366a_o.jpg
SteveM(PA)
11-28-2007, 21:53
Here come the $30 slobs (slobkeh?)...
Fed 50 3.5...
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52453&d=1196319162
Jupiter 3 (Brianski)
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52454&d=1196319204
Halloween bokeh, kind of ugly if you ask me:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/112319017-L.jpg
Canon 50/1.2, probably Superia 400.
Roland.
NO! You didn't carve a Leica pumpkin! The attention to detail is frightening. I think I see a soft release!! :D
OM 50/1.4 @ 1.4
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2315/1506284716_045993117e.jpg
I like the framing/crop!
Wow, Rico; that's a mighty cool lens. 200mm f/2 oh yeah.
Alright, since nobody's really caring for off-screen display and download-choking for others, I'll post some large photos too:
OK I'll stop quoting images, too! But the image that would have been in the above quote is very nice! :)
.
Bessa R2S - Nikkor -P.C 8.5cm f2 @2 - Fuji 160c
Nikon S - Nikkor 5cm f1.4 (uncoated) @1.4 - Kodak BW 400
Gabriel M.A.
11-29-2007, 09:26
Example of good or bad bokeh, Gabriel ? Always wondered about the Summitar.
It's special bokeh. ;)
It's like mint chocolate: I can't stand it, but others love it. It's good if you love it, bad if you hate it.
I guess bokeh is like a box of chocolates... :bang:
hans voralberg
11-29-2007, 09:26
I like the framing/crop!
Thanks it's original, no crop. It was a 1920s French villa in Vietnam :
@ Gabriel: I like the OOF of that summitar, alot. Shame about the highlight balls though, very weird and distracting
It's special bokeh. ;)
It's like mint chocolate: I can't stand it, but others love it. It's good if you love it, bad if you hate it.
I guess bokeh is like a box of chocolates... :bang:
I have to look at it After Eight then ...
After Master Todd ;) , some about the Summitar:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2158/1817362857_51cbd525e1_o.jpg
http://i.pbase.com/g3/83/699683/2/66886957.7zQM0FYk.jpg
http://i.pbase.com/g6/83/699683/2/72375119.8r5n81HV.jpg
After Master Tood ;) , some about the Summitar:
Thats a shocking case of Bokeh donuts!!! :)
Great pics guys. I assume if you don't post a comment, it means you like
the lens' bokeh ? Please comment ...
Canon 50/1.5 wide open:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/51007490-L.jpg
I like all Sonnars and this one in particular !
steverett
11-29-2007, 17:51
Wow nemo, those shots look great. I think the Noctilux has the most apparent 3D effect I've seen -- your subject seem to pop out of my screen. I also quite enjoyed raid's shot with the 35/1.5. I've seen more and more of this lens recently, and it's all been good.
Luxon 50mm/2.0 LTM @2.0 (originally for braun paxette):
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t261/raidamin/RFFLuxonat20.jpg
Canon 85mm/1.9 @1.9:
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t261/raidamin/RFFCanon85mm19wideopen.jpg
The Luxon is difficult to find on sale, and it is maybe the only copy out there in LTM. The swirling effect gets more pronounced as I open up the aperture.
The Canon 85mm/1.9 is an underappreciated lens, in my opinion. People praise its more expensive cousin, the Canon 85mm/1.8.
The bokeh of the 85/1.9 is very creamy. Maybe I am just lucky.
David Goldfarb
11-29-2007, 18:49
The good--
Voigtlander Bessa II (6x9), 105/4.5 Heliar around f:8 (the separation between sharp and unsharp here is the signature characteristic of classic Heliars)--
http://www.echonyc.com/~goldfarb/temp/N2004.jpg
The bad--
Soligor 500/8 compact mirror lens--
http://www.echonyc.com/~goldfarb/temp/doublelinebokeh.jpg
And the ugly--
Carl Zeiss Jena 1950s 58/2 Biotar, probably around f:8--
http://www.echonyc.com/~goldfarb/temp/Nina,Biotar58f2.jpg
I don't have a lot of bokeh shots, but I kinda like this one (Canon 50/1.8):
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2211/2075387414_69b2b2f255.jpg?v=0
And this one, too (Canon 50/1.5):
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2002/2061291812_8e976a50bd.jpg?v=0
Roland, is the beautiful shot above w/ your Canon 50/1.5 keeper?
enochRoot
11-29-2007, 21:59
mamiya 6mf + 75mm lens. i really love the bokeh on this lens because it is smooooth. it renders scenes very well in 3d, but doesn't really call attention to its bokeh.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1438/1479590365_513039cfb6_o.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1125/1479590867_cc5ded49e5_o.jpg
P C Headland
11-30-2007, 00:57
Super Ikonta 532/16 @ f4
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2032/2051625705_20f983ffae.jpg
Roland, is the beautiful shot above w/ your Canon 50/1.5 keeper?
Steve, I think that was taken with your lens, actually :) Thanks !
Mackinaw
11-30-2007, 05:49
The bokeh of the 85/1.9 is very creamy. Maybe I am just lucky.
Raid------Is that the old Canon 85mm I sold you a few years back? If so, it's serving you well!
Jim B.
Mackinaw
11-30-2007, 06:02
Canon LTM 50mm F1.4 @ F1.4. Efke 25 in Rodinal.
http://gallery.leica-users.org/d/109579-1/Canon+50mm1_4_1_4.jpg
enoch, those are really sharp, and I agree about the the background. P C, excellent framing and the delicate background works well in this context.
From last pre-asph Summilux 50/1.4 (exposure unrecorded):
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2057/1809057755_55602f685d_o.jpg
Todd.Hanz
11-30-2007, 06:20
I really like the smoothness from the Mamiya lenses for the MF rangefinders.
Mamiya 7II
80/4 at f4
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/100/250932455_97a1ed54d7_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/120/250932463_5cbeb800fd_o.jpg
Todd
foto_fool
11-30-2007, 07:17
That's it, I'm loading up the GW690 with Tmax 100 this weekend and seeing what that lens can do at f3.5. More MF shots!
Here's my contribution for today:
http://images31.fotki.com/v1051/photos/1/1126243/4871630/Emma071125-vi.jpg
Zeiss Ikon, 75mm Summilux @ f2, HP5+ in Ilfosol-S
I really love this lens. This is my idea of perfect bokeh - abstract smooth dimensionality without distraction. I'm looking for shots I made with this lens that have point light sources in the background - haven't found any yet - may have to make some.
- John
Out of focus trees/foliage:
Given what the earlier lenses do to foliage backgrounds (Summitar, Luxon 50/2.0 and my Nikkor 50/1.4), I'll take my 51.9mm DR Summicron or Canon 50/1.4 S.S.C. lenses any day.
Todd.Hanz could take a Holga, replace the "lens" with the bottom from a Coke bottle, load it with 50 year old Verichrome Pan, develop with vitamin pills, stale Starbuck's espresso and the Coke from the bottle he used for a lens, fix in vinegar and wash in pond water and still come up with great photographs.
Gabriel M.A. has great models/subjects for his portraits.
Great work everyone. Keep them coming.
hans voralberg
11-30-2007, 08:33
Ferider, lovely pic with that Canon
Sorry about the duplicate posts last night. I've deleted them. Temperamental internet connection it seems.
Todd.Hanz could take a Holga, replace the "lens" with the bottom from a Coke bottle, load it with 50 year old Verichrome Pan, develop with vitamin pills, stale Starbuck's espresso and the Coke from the bottle he used for a lens, fix in vinegar and wash in pond water and still come up with great photographs.
I agree completely w/ Wayne. Fabulous work, Todd!
CV Nokton Classic 40mm f/1.4 SC
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2257/1500084472_ffaa75cf59.jpg
Things I've learned from this thread:
1. We have some really good photographers here
2. There are some really nice images posted here
3. Take care when shooting wide open with trees, woods, forests, etc. as a background
:)
Things I've learned from this thread:
1. We have some really good photographers here
2. There are some really nice images posted here
3. Take care when shooting wide open with trees, woods, forests, etc. as a background
:)
Agree on all counts! In general, busy backgrounds will produce busy bokeh (duh!), but foliage will exacerbate 'bad' bokeh because you often find backlit areas, in relation to the foreground, just beyond the foliage.
I remember in another photo board reading complaints about a particular lens's awful bokeh, when in acutality no lens could have handled the foliage + back-lighting.
Agree on all counts! In general, busy backgrounds will produce busy bokeh (duh!), but foliage will exacerbate 'bad' bokeh because you often find backlit areas, in relation to the foreground, just beyond the foliage.
I remember in another photo board reading complaints about a particular lens's awful bokeh, when in acutality no lens could have handled the foliage + back-lighting.
yup! and that's the point. I've seen highly regarded lenses produce some vertigo-inducing bokeh! Tough conditions for shooting wide open.
David Goldfarb
11-30-2007, 11:08
I use light filtered through trees as my usual bokeh test, because there aren't many lenses that handle it well.
I'm getting out of RF territory, but bad bokeh is a real killer in bird photography, since foliage is the norm, not to mention highlights on rippling water, and backlighting isn't too unusual. These are with the Canon FD 600/4.5, which has pretty nice bokeh--
http://www.echonyc.com/~goldfarb/photo/gfinch.jpg
http://www.echonyc.com/~goldfarb/photo/esowl.jpg
http://www.echonyc.com/~goldfarb/photo/hgull.jpg
Raid------Is that the old Canon 85mm I sold you a few years back? If so, it's serving you well!
Jim B.
Jim,
Yes, it is. I cannot bring myself to sell it even though I have many 85mm-90mm lenses. I love how portraits come out with this lens.
I use light filtered through trees as my usual bokeh test, because there aren't many lenses that handle it well.
I'm getting out of RF territory, but bad bokeh is a real killer in bird photography, since foliage is the norm, not to mention highlights on rippling water, and backlighting isn't too unusual. These are with the Canon FD 600/4.5, which has pretty nice bokeh--
Ahh, birds ...
Which reminds me, my "Bokeh Queen" is the Zuiko 180/2.8, here
wide open:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/121358526-L.jpg
Nothing beats a good fast long lens ....
Roland.
Things I've learned from this thread:
1. We have some really good photographers here
2. There are some really nice images posted here
3. Take care when shooting wide open with trees, woods, forests, etc. as a background
:)
4. If you want a smooth background, longer focal length and a larger format negative help.
4. If you want a smooth background, longer focal length and a larger format negative help.
Ugly bokeh, for me: Tokina ATX 100-300/4 at 300 wide open:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/172651788-L.jpg
I said helps! I said helps! :)
Xenotar
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52519&d=1196459751
IGMeanwell
11-30-2007, 12:57
Since there has been a decent amount of Minolta Lenses posted ... I'll add to those
Both Wide open
Minolta Rokkor PG MC 58mm 1.2:
http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52517&stc=1&d=1196459376
and again the 58mm 1.2:
http://pjnphotography.smugmug.com/photos/200287238-L-2.jpg
Then my the old Rokkor 50mm 1.7 MD:
http://pjnphotography.smugmug.com/photos/196114700-L-2.jpg
The really interesting thing about this thread is--as someone said--the photos ALL outweigh the bokeh. So--it looks to me like if the subject is interesting--well--where's the bokeh thing? A really good photo just seems to be a really good photo, no matter what....and there are some great ones here.
Thanks to all!
Paul
I said helps! I said helps! :)
Xenotar
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52519&d=1196459751
So nice. To me, this is bokeh. An area of OOF just blurred enough to bring up the main subject. Which xenotar is it? Rollei?
Thanks
Hi Letien,
Yup, Rolleiflex 2.8C. If I had to have only once camera, it would be my Rollei with Xenotar. I just love the lens. I'm with you, just enough so that the other areas are not too distracting. Too much swirly stuff, odd looking (to me) bright-ringed donuts, double lines, I find noticeable in a photo. It's nice when that stuff isn't noticeable.
Edit: 2.8E
Nikkor-S.C 5.0 cm 1:1.4 @ 1.6 or 1.8
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=44566&d=1178127083
Nikkor 85/2.0 wide open and minimum focusing distance.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=48722&d=1187750607
Gabriel M.A.
11-30-2007, 15:54
My most cherished wine:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/112/304626593_c81b78248f.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/304626593/)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 Mark-I @ f/1.8 (on a 300D)
Gabriel M.A.
11-30-2007, 15:57
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/71/187743059_de31906b77.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/187743059/)
50mm f/1.4 Summilux first version @ f/1.4 (on M6)
Fisheye lenses are not conducive to selective focus, but the Canon EF 15/2.8 has an appealing point-spread function. The five-bladed aperture, on the other hand...
http://patternassociates.com/rico/d30/misc/penny3.jpg
40mm/2.0 Summicron-C:
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t261/raidamin/summicronc.jpg
Rolleiflex 2.8D Planar: (XP2 @ 2.8; Dana one day old)
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t261/raidamin/planar80mm28TLR.jpg
Gabriel M.A.
12-01-2007, 06:10
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/44/161385531_bf950c5ff0.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/161385531/)
Rolleiflex Automat IV, 75mm f/3.5 Schneider-Kreutznach Xenar @ f/3.5
Gabriel M.A.
12-01-2007, 06:13
And a sample that shows that even some of the "best bokeh" lens can find themselves streched beyond their limit (raising fist like Col. Klink: "tree foliage!")
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/78/198560935_6744133ae9.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/198560935/)
Canon 50mm f/1.5 LTM @f/1.5 (on M6)
crawdiddy
12-01-2007, 10:20
Fisheye lenses are not conducive to selective focus, but the Canon EF 15/2.8 has an appealing point-spread function. The five-bladed aperture, on the other hand...
http://patternassociates.com/rico/d30/misc/penny3.jpg
Rico, That's a great cat photo. I agree, the bokeh in this case could be said to be distracting. OTOH, it seems more like an additional element to me, and I think it works. The subject's very prominent (and shiny) eyes, and the OOF highlights complement each other.
crawdiddy
12-01-2007, 10:28
http://www.angelfire.com/ne2/nenadbojic/2007/Web-Montreal2007-1.jpg
Creamy background with edgy foreground. I can only assume it's the Noctilux, although I know it's not the only tool in your arsenal, Ned.
Rico, That's a great cat photo. I agree, the bokeh in this case could be said to be distracting. OTOH, it seems more like an additional element to me, and I think it works. The subject's very prominent (and shiny) eyes, and the OOF highlights complement each other.
I agree. This "distracting" bokeh actually adds some sparkle. Maybe a slight crop would balance things, but otherwise, it seems to work!
Gabriel M.A.
12-01-2007, 12:08
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2336/2077335480_732822f2e4.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/2077335480/)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM @ f/1.4 (on 5D)
Gabriel M.A.
12-01-2007, 12:09
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/53/137593558_5b90bd07a7.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/137593558/)
Leica 50mm f/1.4 Summilux pre-asph E46 @ f/1.4 (on M6)
hans voralberg
12-01-2007, 12:09
Now that is bokeh overload. Very nice gold tone
Gabriel M.A.
12-01-2007, 12:17
Now that is bokeh overload. Very nice gold tone
Thanks, Hans. I thought the setup would produce an interesting result at the time.
mich8261
12-01-2007, 14:31
here's a good example of bad bokeh.
Taken with Canon dRebel with 70-300mm DO (Difractive Optics). This lens tends to render a buzzy background as a blurry buzzy background. Very distracting.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2055/2079328196_e8257acfd2_o.jpg
M-Rokkor 40/2:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2390/2079025037_5a99c4be5c.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2055/2080180373_762aa0bf69_o.jpg
pentax *ist d and helios-40 85/1.5
http://www.sikaheimo.com/kuvat/valokuvia/pallurat700raamit.jpg
pentax *ist d and m50/1.4
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2122/1506547687_4bca7c0077_o.jpg
yashica d
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1101/752037103_dcad7388bc_o.jpg
pentax *ist d and k35/2
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/141/380793748_e6a07676ee_o.jpg
mamiya m645 and 80/1.9
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/117/306760605_7890a16ff2_o.jpg
homemade camera and fujinon-tv 110/0.95
The good stuff here keeps on getting better !
Thanks for all the great photos.
Mackinaw
12-02-2007, 08:13
Canon LTM 50/1.2 at F1.6. Delta 100 in Rodinal.
http://gallery.leica-users.org/d/109667-2/Max+in+Pool.jpg
IGMeanwell
12-02-2007, 14:47
pentax *ist d and helios-40 85/1.5
]
Wow that is a crazy picture.... I love it
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/117/306760605_7890a16ff2_o.jpg
Wow I love this shot!
Give us more info on your home-made camera, please...
is this real bokeh? it almost looks like PS blur tool. so soft!!
Since my rangefinder lenses aren’t very good with bokeh, here are couple
with my all time favorite Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm F2.8 on a Kiev 60.
Please mention if you are using filters. Not sure if it has much effect, but I'm seeing stuff here that I don't think should be seen with "proper" lens usage...
xayraa33
12-02-2007, 20:45
Canon 50mm f1.5 lens used here.
M3 / Summilux 50mm pre-ASPH (@ f/1.4) Tri-X:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2207/2082821108_c0cd5c016b.jpg
sienarot
12-02-2007, 22:08
pentax *ist d and helios-40 85/1.5
Heh heh heh, I was wondering whtn the Helios 85/1.5 would make an appearance in this thread :D
Epimetheus
12-02-2007, 23:46
is this real bokeh? it almost looks like PS blur tool. so soft!!
It's real. Only slight curves adjustement made in PS. It's a great lens.
M8 + Noctilux:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2043/2083020197_d0fde3e013_b.jpg
GRRRRRRRRRRRRR! Roland, I don't get it. I've used the same lens and the same film. I get Pooh-Pooh and you get caviar. Not fair!
owenreading
12-03-2007, 13:25
A few photos from recent scannings that display some nice bokeh, all from a Canonet G-III QL17, most likely @ f/1.7 or very close.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52655&stc=1&d=1196720566
At the fireworks, HP5@800
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52656&stc=1&d=1196720600
Magdalen College playing fields, Oxford, HP5@800
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52657&stc=1&d=1196720621
Christ Church Meadow, Oxford, Jessops Pan 100 (which I believe is Ilford made).
Mackinaw
12-03-2007, 14:09
Mamiya C220 w/Mamiya 135mm F4.5. TMax 400 in Xtol.
http://gallery.leica-users.org/d/110328-2/Johnny+Reb.jpg
foto_fool
12-03-2007, 20:48
Nikkor 50/1.4 @ f2.0 on Leica IIIf, APX 400 in Ilfotec DD-X
http://images31.fotki.com/v1057/photos/1/1126243/4871630/07111104sm-vi.jpg
Bokeh is better without highlights.
- John
SteveM(PA)
12-04-2007, 10:22
The Zuiko "common as rocks" 50 1.8, nasty drugstore film and scanning...
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52722&d=1196796142
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52723&d=1196796851
digitalintrigue
12-04-2007, 20:02
Thanks Erik...wish I could say I took them. :)
Really like what that Canon 0.95 can do...
Those Kodachrome shots are really nice Robert.
This is rather odd bokeh. A boring shot (a bus shelter - spare me!) but it was only taken to test the sharpness of a 40 year old 300 mm Takumar. Sharpness is OK and no chromatic aberation but rather odd, slightly harsh, bokeh.
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o251/peterm1_bucket/P1020068_resized.jpg
Peter in Cairns Qld
12-05-2007, 01:32
Good or bad, here it comes:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2369/2047400495_f9210a4399.jpg
Great Photo!, Just love the translucent, "radioactive" colours against the Bokeh.\Kind regards
Peter
M8 + Noctilux:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2043/2083020197_d0fde3e013_b.jpg
That's a killing bokeh :D Seriously it's fantastic.
Gabriel M.A.
12-05-2007, 09:45
Holey muffler of jeebuz! I agree with Marc-A.
I also agree with Marc and Gabriel on the impact. This is a great bokeh photo.
I love the combination of sharp and soft that you can get with the bokeh of larger formats. This is the 110/2 planar...I love the look of it:
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/woodpile6.jpg
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/rob-love-billy.jpg
Or the 35/1.4 ASPH which is superb...
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/malcolm-trail.jpg
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/rob-mongoloid.jpg
(that last photo is a joke by the way...he was trying to look...well...challenged.
The 75 lux which is probably the best of all, along with the 110...
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/omikuji-rack.jpg
And your regular 80mm planar:
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/m7-coffee.jpg
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/xp2-aki.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/117/306760605_7890a16ff2_o.jpg
homemade camera and fujinon-tv 110/0.95
I don't want to quote all your images, but I just want to say that I think your photography is fantastic. Both here and on flickr...
dougiec29
12-06-2007, 06:57
Stuart - very nice pictures, I particularly like the first pair. Also did a double take on your M for a second, looks very classy (and classic).
Gabriel M.A. you just keep getting better and better. :)
dacaccia
12-06-2007, 10:33
52843
M6, 2/75 asph., XP2
le vrai rdu
12-06-2007, 11:22
:) hello ! I sarted to take pictures last week with ranfinder last week :)
Jupiter 8 @ f2 trix
http://www.cyrillerabiller.net//photos/noir%20et%20blanc/photo/novembre/trix%20kiev%204%207min%20rodinal%201+25/kiev-4002.jpg
Got a few light leaks but now it should be okay :)
I hope my english is not too bad !:o
john neal
12-06-2007, 11:33
Not sure this is the ultimate in bokeh, but it is somewhat unusual.
Summitar wide open on Leica III.
lawrence
12-06-2007, 11:34
Nikon 24mm f2.0 [at f2.8 I believe]
le vrai rdu
12-06-2007, 15:36
C'est pas grave. Ici on communique a travers des images, et la votre est tres bien,
Bienvenue en RFF !!!
thank you :)
carl zeiss planar 50 mm 1.7 @ 1.7 (i really like this lense)
http://www.cyrillerabiller.net/photos/noir%20et%20blanc/photo/novembre/panf%20%203%20novembre%202007/refait3novembre2007-panf021.jpg
SMC pentax 50 mm 1.7 @ 1.7 I like this lense, very good and compact, very smooth rings
http://www.cyrillerabiller.net/photos/couleur/novembre2007/sup%e9ria%20200/sup%e9ria-200059.jpg
I had a pentacon 50 mm 1.8 but I didn't really liked the bokeh
Todd.Hanz
12-06-2007, 15:46
Oly Pen FT
Zuiko 40/1.4
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2102/2092424960_ea99e50568_o.jpg
Todd
Ok, a few more from oldentimes when I just started out:
Canon 85/1.2L (FD) yeah, an SLR...sorry...I took it before I had a rangefinder!
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/beeandlavender.jpg
Hexar AF
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/photoshop-girl.jpg
75 lux again
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/sunflower-75lux.jpg
50 asph
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/rusty-red-fence-and-flowers.jpg
I just realized that they are almost all flowers. How boring! But I guess when I get close up is when the bokeh happens most dramatically...I am not an in your face photographer, so when I am close, it is usually to something that's not moving!
SteveM(PA)
12-06-2007, 18:10
Great shots, Mr. President :)
Hanging on my wall, my daughter's blurry green shirt actually glows in the dark, it's become my current fav...
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1207/1338842431_fac8537d91.jpg?v=0
om1, 50 1.4
This was made with a Petri that I owned in the 1960s, on Tri-X film. Wish I still had it.
Jim N.
Good Boke, Quality Boke have nothing to do with the amount of Boke.
I see too many pictures just ruined because they have too much boke.
I don't think a background has to vanish in order to be good. Quite the contrary!
Shooting wide open at daylight just for the sake of it isn't good photography practice, IMO.
SteveM(PA)
12-06-2007, 18:47
I focused on the second chain, I still think it's creepy how the first swing appears to sway a little bit.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/123/362613759_b0178c7e79_o.jpg
leica iiif rdst/canon 135 chrome (I forget what the film was)
I focused on the second chain, I still think it's creepy how the first swing appears to sway a little bit.
Indeed!
Quite a shot!
Very nice Stuart, but please, no more 75mm summilux images, my wallet can't take it these days......
Very pretty Ned.
1. Canon 85mm/1.2L
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t261/raidamin/bokehrff3.jpg
2. Canon 50mm/0.95
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t261/raidamin/bokehrff7.jpg
3. Noctilux 50mm/1.0
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t261/raidamin/bokehrff5.jpg
4. Noctilux 50mm/1.0
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t261/raidamin/bokehrff6.jpg
6. Canon 80mm-200mm/4.0L
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t261/raidamin/bokehrff2.jpg
SteveM(PA)
12-07-2007, 11:44
Good Boke, Quality Boke have nothing to do with the amount of Boke.
I see too many pictures just ruined because they have too much boke.
I don't think a background has to vanish in order to be good. Quite the contrary!
Shooting wide open at daylight just for the sake of it isn't good photography practice, IMO.
You're right. More just for the sake of More just isn't smart. I have to be more conscious of that.
crawdiddy
12-07-2007, 11:46
http://www.angelfire.com/ne2/nenadbojic/2007/Web-Montreal2007-8.jpg
I love this shot. The Noctilux, I presume?
IGMeanwell
12-07-2007, 13:15
Here is one to add ... haven't seen it yet in this thread
Zeiss 35mm 3.5 T* from the Yashica T4
http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52907&stc=1&d=1197065701
There is also something to be said for large format where you can tilt and arrange the bokeh in different parts of the frame, while keeping others sharp...
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/glacial-blur.jpg
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/ebony-n3rd1.jpg
That said, there is no good reason I tilted the standards on those photos...I was just messing around. Nevertheless, it can be an interesting effect.
I'll toss an old shot in here at last. The picture is of no interest except as a test of the same lens and camera, the CZJ 80/2.8 Tessar on a Reflex Korelle, that Mael used to very good effect in post #196. Not much bokeh in square mm, but what there is, seems nice to me. This was the only properly-exposed picture on the test roll I shot after modifying the (old, smaller-mount-size) Korelle to take the Tessar, but Mael's shots are making me think I should try to get the balky shutter on the Korelle working.
David Goldfarb
12-07-2007, 17:36
This was made with a Petri that I owned in the 1960s, on Tri-X film. Wish I still had it.
Jim N.
You know, I love Tri-X, but the 1950s/60s version just has some kind of moxie that the current version lacks (even if the grain is finer than it used to be). Maybe it was the film, maybe it was the prints on Velox, probably both.
I will submit the humble GA645... second shot against light filtering through trees.
http://www.beyondthematrix.com/nora1208/noragrin.jpg
http://www.beyondthematrix.com/nora1208/norasmile.jpg
dougiec29
12-08-2007, 18:35
Taken in Venice.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2222/2096275775_fb76a90c96_o.jpg
50 summilux asph wide open (and some vingetting added in PS)
foto_fool
12-08-2007, 19:09
Dougie - I love the shot - it makes me homesick from a previous life. Is that in Accademia, around the corner from Cantinone Storico and Hotel Americano? I know - every canal in Venice looks like this, but...
- John
edhohoho
12-08-2007, 23:54
Okay, this is the first time I've posted pictures on RFF despite years of lurking and learning from more prolific members.
All these were shot using an Epson R-D1 with a Leica 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH at f1.4. The only post processing done was white balance and image size.
52952
52954
52955
dougiec29
12-09-2007, 00:48
Is that in Accademia, around the corner from Cantinone Storico and Hotel Americano? I know - every canal in Venice looks like this, but...
- John
Sorry, I don't remember where it was, other than I was standing in front of a smallish restaurant/cafe. I didn't even attempt to navigate, just took pictures and tried not to let my friends get to far ahead.
And another one from Venice:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2177/2097557482_b0c63871f7.jpg
Same lens, reduced the saturation on the woman in PS.
Great that this thread is still moving on ... :)
Pretty much perfect 35mm RF bokeh to the eyes of Yours Truly:
90/2.8 M-Hexanon:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/175620393-L.jpg
C-Sonnar:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/193666529-L.jpg
Best,
Roland.
lawrence
12-09-2007, 07:50
I will submit the humble GA645... second shot against light filtering through trees.
Not the best bokeh, in my opinion, but far better than the 80mm on the Mamiya 645 I once owned. That was truly nasty.
lawrence
12-09-2007, 07:55
Summicron 50/f2 rigid @f2.
The rigid is optically wonderful, no doubt about it. Nice photo too.
Mackinaw
12-09-2007, 08:08
Summicron 35mm ASPH at F2.0. Leica MP.
http://gallery.leica-users.org/d/109409-2/Times+Square.jpg
foto_fool
12-09-2007, 08:14
Dang it, Roland - that Hexanon is a sharp lens! Great OOF too - I think this thread has shown pretty conclusively that the longer FL's give some of the better backgrounds (duh).
Here is some "perfect" boke to my eye: creamy, with lots of dimensionality.
http://images32.fotki.com/v1059/photos/1/1126243/4871630/07112216sm-vi.jpg
Leica IIIf, Zeiss Jena 50/1.5 Sonnar T (1946 - maybe) @ f1.5, Delta 3200 in DDX
- John
This coulda been a nice photograph. If I woulda had faster film. I shoulda had a better scanner. First attempt at indoor available light candid portraits too.
Trudy. 1969. Worms, Germany. First roll with the Nikkor 10.5cm/2.5 lens on Nikon F Photomic. Ektachrome. That "Sonnar" look.
Wayne, you wouldn't happen to have some Sonnar MF shots of Trudy ? :)
Ok, I'll jump in. M8 with CV75/2.5 wide open. Not a challenging background, but nice.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/gallery/1632/U1632I1178488340.SEQ.0.jpg
Cheers,
Kirk
Darth Vader in DC. Canon 40D, 85 1.2L II, f1.6. The lens handles this pretty well, except for whatever that awful thing is at the edge of the frame above his head.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/data/7216/medium/20071121-_MG_0656.jpg
Cheers,
Kirk
The old Canon 50mm f/1.2L FD...
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/epj800-woman-street.jpg
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/cappuccino.jpg
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/nijoichiba.jpg
Wayne, you wouldn't happen to have some Sonnar MF shots of Trudy ? :)
Wish I did. I have never owned a real MF Sonnar lens. All I have are these terrible old Ektachromes. That night I was trying out the Nikon gear prior to purchasing. I bought it. Sold it. Bummer.
wide open on our *istDL2:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52981&stc=1&d=1197222856
foto_fool
12-09-2007, 09:21
In case anyone has any doubt that the 75mm Summilux is a fairly decent boke machine...
http://images31.fotki.com/v1053/photos/1/1126243/4871630/07111610sm-vi.jpg
Zeiss Ikon, 75mm Summilux @ f1.4, Tmax 400 in Ilfosol-S
- John
lawrence
12-09-2007, 10:15
Ok, I'll jump in. M8 with CV75/2.5 wide open. Not a challenging background, but nice.
I think the CV 75mm always looks great. This is with the SLR (Nikon) version:
http://www.lawrenceimpey.com/photos/SLM/ronan_big.jpg
M5 | 35mm/F2.0 UC-Hexanon | 1:2.0, 0.9 meters | Agfa 400
http://gallery.leica-users.org/d/89724-2/Wet+Window-000011.jpg
3 different kinds of camera/lens
Again some Summitar 50/2 (repost)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1096/748139551_8caab832d2_o.jpg
Planar 75/3.5 (Rolleiflex)
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52988&stc=1&d=1197229709
Pentax SMC-M 50/1.7
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=48758&d=1187857505
enochRoot
12-11-2007, 07:00
90mm summicron:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2102/2094418138_a3f6ca2fb9_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2323/2093643593_0707101e4f_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2024/2094198758_258b471ca7_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2150/2093686147_fd8754dce3_o.jpg
enochRoot
12-11-2007, 07:02
150mm lens on mamiya 6:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2391/2090348984_52bd8bf6da_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2089/2090349236_fdc1ce2030_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2312/2090349506_954c4f653d_o.jpg
150mm lens on mamiya 6: Wow. I don't know about the bokeh, but you don't get tonality like that in 35mm!
Another from my first roll with the Canon 50/1.2. Fuji NPZ. This is at f2.0.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=53077&d=1197392459
Nice Kevin. I can see why people like Fuji NPZ.
Nice Ryan!
I have a 150mm lens & a 6x7 body and some Fuji 120 NPZ. I need to get my act together and use all 3. At the same time even.
edhohoho
12-11-2007, 17:20
Konica 50/1.2 M-Hexanon Limited at f/1.2
53106
53107
53108
etrigan63
12-11-2007, 18:57
One for the Holidays...
M8 + 75mm Color-Heliar, 1/45 s, f/2.5, ISO 640
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2066/2099705628_cae92bef92_b.jpg
enochRoot
12-11-2007, 19:24
thanks guys.
and yes wayne, you do! :D
I went up to the Sierra foothills last Saturday to try to catch some holiday spirit, and wound up in a candy store... Canon 50/1.5, Portra400NC:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2068/2104520545_e51f4f9ea4.jpg?v=0
hans voralberg
12-12-2007, 06:23
Canon 50/1.8 @ 1.8
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1050/525875351_a9c851d7a0.jpg
Leica R9 and APO 70-180mm/f2.8. Shot with Fujifilm Pro400H at 1/500s and wide open f2.8.
Developed and scanned in Costco. Please ignore the mark on the flim (what the...)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2311/2028722794_70df28996f_b.jpg
Here is an example of not so good bokeh. I shot this (boring) shot simply to test the sharpness of a Takumar 300mm mounted on a Panasonic L1 with an adapter. Its sharp enough but I do not like the rather odd slightly harsh bokeh which has a kind of vertical linearity to it. Shot at around f 5.6 or f8.
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o251/peterm1_bucket/P1020068_resized.jpg
photorat
12-13-2007, 03:31
What a start! Your first shot is wonderful, and the second has a... I'm not sure what to call it, a sort of monumental quality, with the view from below, the three-dimensional effect, and the marvelous pose you've captured.
Thanks, mjf! I really like the second shot, too. Like most of my good pics, I guess it was a bit of a fluke. But then, there's so much out of our control when taking pictures, I guess all good shots are.
Take care but above all, film, wherever you go!
Cheers,
Jeremy
I've discovered that the only way you can get bokeh on a 15mm Heliar is to shoot at minimum distance wide open ... which is only f4.5 ... even then with the depth of field this thing has you don't get much OOF! :p
Try having the background a bit further away. Here is one that is also close focus wide open with the Heliar. Please forgive the dust spots...I took this when at the Maine Workshops and their lab did the developing...it is like they dumped the vacuum cleaner's dust bag into the developer.
http://www.stuartrichardson.com/cleat-15mm.jpg
Johann Espiritu
12-13-2007, 04:22
I'll bite. Here are a couple with the CV 35/1.2:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2124/2107844187_7878c271f2_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2130/2099686065_5888b05ea0_b.jpg
robster180
12-13-2007, 05:00
here are the results from my 1st rolls with my 1st Leica on a recent holiday in Hong Kong. All taken on an M6+35/2 Biogon+Velvia
http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=53166&stc=1&d=1197553808
I particularly like the smokey reflections from the table surface in the foreground 1s/f2
http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=53165&stc=1&d=1197553661
Bokeh balls and rendered OoF colours tick my boxes 60/f4
http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=53167&stc=1&d=1197554304
30/f4
and some OoF colours 1s/f2
hans voralberg
12-13-2007, 05:56
I like the OOF one very much robster, fabulous pic
john neal
12-13-2007, 06:20
What Hans said - great pic.
Glad you finally figured it out :)
robster180
12-13-2007, 07:01
Hans - thanks, love your B&W window frame!
John Neal - Yes I'm Mac based so resorted to a Firefox browser and finally got it to work, thanks for your expertise and kind words!
Elmar 50/f2.8
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2323/2108601521_8275cf62bc.jpg
Canonet QL17GIII
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/209/500064196_b94e822146_o.jpg
Canonet QL17GIII
Hahaha, that is awesome! I love this shot! So hillarious! Seriously this is amazing. Haha. I would love to have a copy of this. haha.
Nasty Zuiko 50mm f1.8
Looks alright to me and better than many here. I personally *hate* the Zuiko 50mm f1.4.
hans voralberg
12-15-2007, 01:14
Why ? Zuiko 50/1.4 is nice enough for me I think
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2251/1505422661_dfd103c204.jpg
I see a challenge! My Canon 50/1.4 S.S.C. for comparison.
Think I'll drag out all my stuff and play around the house while it's decorated for Christmas.
Canon Elan 7NE Kodak Ektrachrome 100VS, Tamron 28-105
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb228/taylor210eman/Queenweb.jpg?t=1197744948
Pentax K10d, SMC-M 50mm f2
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb228/taylor210eman/NakitaWeb.jpg?t=1197745060
Canon 50/1.5 wide open. Me like :)
http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/106240256-O.jpg
Bump.
Ron (Netherlands)
12-17-2007, 11:36
Canonet QL17GIII
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/209/500064196_b94e822146_o.jpg
I fully agree with Jbf, although this is no voting thread, I vote for this one!
Leica Summilux 50mm f.14 ASPH @ 1.4
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/147/413799526_6edc56bf90_o.jpg
I personally like circular bokeh. The little chief photo is headed that way.
jsuominen
12-17-2007, 23:28
Contax RTS II and Carl Zeiss Planar T* 50mm/1.4 at f/1.4:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2017/1713530967_8563bc9f9f.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/1713530967/in/set-72157594228790366)
Contax RTS II and Carl Zeiss Planar T* 50mm/1.4 at f/1.4:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2251/2005066984_e3bfbfafd3.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/2005066984/in/set-72157594228790366)
Voigtländer Bessa R2S and Millenium Nikkor-S 50mm/1.4 at f/1.4:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2154/2056979701_5525d6a020.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/2056979701/in/set-72157594228790366)
Voigtländer Bessa R2S and vintage Nikkor-S 5cm/1.4 at f/1.4:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1247/579323523_4cfa99823f.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/579323523/in/set-72157594228790366)
Contax IIa with Zeiss-Opton T Sonnar 50mm/1.5 at f/2:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1187/748496945_0f29466142.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/748496945/)
Canon 50/1.2
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=53408&d=1197990870
foto_fool
12-18-2007, 07:02
Boke for boke's sake...
http://images34.fotki.com/v1080/photos/1/1126243/4871630/_EPS4975sm-vi.jpg
Epson R-D1, Konica 35mm/f2.0 UC-Hexanon @f2.0, ISO 1600
Roland - nice engine shot - what is it? And how did you get the Canon to focus so close?
- John
enochRoot
12-18-2007, 12:05
since this seems to be nothing about rangefinders, and all about bokeh. here are two w/ the 105/2.5 ais nikkor on nikon f3:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1429/1450307731_82ff62c951_o.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1227/1451176668_21b5ec61f6_o.jpg
Nuthin but Bokeh!
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2081/2121398682_b3be45c885_o.jpg
Canon Serenar 50/1.8
foto_fool
12-18-2007, 19:35
since this seems to be nothing about rangefinders, and all about bokeh.
Now hold on a minute, pilgrim....
Wait! you may be RIGHT! Evil SLR shot below, posted before.
http://images28.fotki.com/v999/photos/1/1126243/4871630/Emma06_798-vi.jpg
Olympus OM-1 (honorary rangefinder), 50mm/f1.2 @ f1.2, Superia 800
- John
enochRoot
12-18-2007, 19:46
hehehe...actually i didn't think of that. i use the screen in the F3 that has a rangefinder spot in the middle of the ground glass, and i always use that to focus. so it is *kinda* a rangefinder :D
Now hold on a minute, pilgrim....
Wait! you may be RIGHT! Evil SLR shot below, posted before.
Olympus OM-1 (honorary rangefinder), 50mm/f1.2 @ f1.2, Superia 800
- John
Here's one from the ultimate bokeh machine: Zeiss C Sonnar 50/1.5 @1.5
benmacphoto
12-23-2007, 13:41
Not a RF, but an image from my Kiev 88 with an MC Volna-3 f2.8.
Not a RF, but an image from my Kiev 88 with an MC Volna-3 f2.8.I like it! Mysterious and exotic...
"Backwards Bokeh"
Fuji GS645s, close focus, wide open (f/4).
Looking at the smashed remains of a 100 year old hotel/ cathouse in a ghost town in North Eastern Washington State.
Cropped to about 24x36; would've been better served by a 35mm camera that day!
Thus far I haven't attempted to take a photo to show bad bokeh. If it looks awful in the VF then I need to work around it. In a real-life situation, I think that bokeh can add or subtract to the image depending on how it is used.
There aren't any bokeh monsters in my closet, but some of the pleasing ones are:
Voigtlander 125mm f/2.5SL APO Lanthar Macro (two photos):
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/s1ckpuppy/Hoverfly-1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/s1ckpuppy/Australia-TemplestoweMapleLeaf.jpg
Canon 70-200mm f/4 (one photo):
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/s1ckpuppy/NationalDogWalkJackRusselWalk.jpg
Canon 50mm f/1.8 II (one photo):
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/s1ckpuppy/326V9529.jpg
Not a RF, but an image from my Kiev 88 with an MC Volna-3 f2.8.
Wonderful!
benmacphoto
12-23-2007, 18:12
Why thank you Doug and NB23. That is my favorite image I took of her, though she likes this one more.
zoom2zoom
12-23-2007, 18:20
here are some taken with 35 f1.4L and 85 f1.2L ..shot wide open in very dim lighting.. sorry not rangefinder
hans voralberg
12-24-2007, 05:36
Nikkor 50/1.8 on Fuji S5
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2379/2132701253_75ec37bfc2.jpg
RayPA, those are nice. The CV 35/1.2 looks very similar to the 35/1.4 Aspherical Summilux: clean without being sterile. Lovely.
...The CV 35/1.2 looks very similar to the 35/1.4 Aspherical Summilux: clean without being sterile. Lovely.
I agree, Kevin. I think that comes out especially with the color.
only bokeh. FM2n + Nikkor 35 f/2 pre Ai @ f/2 + LuckySHD100 [0.7$ b/w negs]
this is my friend, Ivan
oh yes, im a butt photographer :D
The Crooner aka Leica 50mm f/2 Summitar
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1098/1414648307_0b50f2403e.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/fgsemedo/1414648307/)
Front bokeh from the Crooner aka Leica 50mm f/2 Summitar
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1237/1165157211_7bfa4dd546.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/fgsemedo/1165157211/)
I fully agree with Jbf, although this is no voting thread, I vote for this one!
Thanks, one more in the same direction...
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/215/500110961_2d52127de8_o.jpg
(Canonet QL17GIII)
Some miscellaneous pics taken during the last few days with the Canon 50/0.95 mounted on a Bessa-R3M:
http://abbazz.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p27335255.jpg
http://abbazz.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p259844777.jpg
http://abbazz.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p304642304.jpg
http://abbazz.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p414435419.jpg
http://abbazz.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p101275821.jpg
http://abbazz.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p180553398.jpg
http://abbazz.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p482514184.jpg
http://abbazz.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p519890019.jpg
Cheers!
Abbazz
Some miscellaneous pics taken during the last few days with the Canon 50/0.95 mounted on a Bessa-R3M:
Cheers!
Abbazz
It's interesting, I didn't know you could get a swirly bokeh with that lens.
Rokkor 40 CLE f2.8ish
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=53764&stc=1&d=1198788456
It's interesting, I didn't know you could get a swirly bokeh with that lens.
It's easy. In the wrong place at the wrong time, the Nikkor-S.C 50/1.4 does the same thing.
In the wrong place at the wrong time...
How true! I always thought 'swirly' bokeh was something to avoid. :D
I like the bokeh in my Rolleiflex (Zeiss Planar 75mm f/3.5)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v650/moppitukka/jussi-1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v650/moppitukka/roope.jpg
Summilux 50 Pre-ASPH @ f1.4
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=53985&stc=1&d=1199216892
M8; Noctlilux wide-open
http://mtanga.com/shank2.jpg
hans voralberg
01-01-2008, 14:17
Summicron DR @ f2 with goggle
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2343/2156358406_847831d8f9.jpg
what a great shot!
Thank you !
Thank you !
Yes, a great shot. Your previous photographs on this thread were also superb. Thank you for sharing.
Cheers!
Abbazz
Taken with a Summilux 75mm:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2017/2153696541_31bfff7bee_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2249/2146618810_5fd2e1385d_o.jpg
le vrai rdu
01-05-2008, 04:09
pentax 50 mm 1.4 wide open
http://www.cyrillerabiller.net/photos/noir%20et%20blanc/photo/janvier2008/trix%20pentax%2050%20mm%201.4%20%20rod%201+25%20%2 07minutes/trix-rod-1+25-7m-50-1,4001.jpg
hans voralberg
01-05-2008, 14:38
Zuiko OM 50mm f2 Macro wide open of course. On Fuji NPZ800
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2190/2168335479_7fdf74f7ee.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2260/2169128354_1f0efe584c.jpg
le vrai rdu
01-06-2008, 14:06
pentax 50 mm 1.4 smc
http://www.cyrillerabiller.net/photos/noir%20et%20blanc/photo/janvier2008/p30%20trix%2050%20mm%201,4%20et%201,7/P30trix-rod007.jpg
http://www.cyrillerabiller.net/photos/noir%20et%20blanc/photo/janvier2008/p30%20trix%2050%20mm%201,4%20et%201,7/P30trix-rod013.jpg
foto_fool
01-06-2008, 19:08
I'm not all that into the macro look, but sometimes I get a satisfying image. Love the bokeh in this one.
Mamiya C3, Sekor 180mm Super @ f4.5, Provia 100:
http://images33.fotki.com/v1067/photos/1/1126243/4871630/img052sm-vi.jpg
- John
While I did not get the main subject quite as sharp as I would like (focus point the nearest top edge of the glass) I love the soft bokeh of the box in the background. Not shot with a rangefinder this time but with a Pentax SMC 85mm F1.8 shot wide open mounted on a Panasonic L1. The limited DOF is shown by the fact that already the back edge of the glass rim and the stem of the glass are both well out of focus.
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o251/peterm1_bucket/_1000421_resized.jpg
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.