Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Birds, Bokeh, and DZes

Subject: Re: [OM] Birds, Bokeh, and DZes
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2009 13:51:57 -0500
One of the most interesting articles I've encountered on bokeh (or, 
according to the Wiki article, "boke" as it used to be spelled before 
Mike Johnston popularized the spelling with an h.)
<http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/bokeh.shtml>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh>

Chuck Norcutt

Joel Wilcox wrote:
> "Looks fine" is good enough for me!  To the degree that bokeh can be
> managed, I have always thought it is somewhat an illusory quality --
> something that happens under some circumstances and then is attributed
> to this or that lens.  The fact that it happens more with some lenses
> than others, especially in the 100mm range, suggests it is managed
> more readily in that range than that the lenses have a special
> characteristic.  But then I saw a demonstration of C.H. Ling's photos
> of his youngster's bear in which the Z 50-250 clearly rendered a more
> jittery background than others.  That convinced me at least that there
> is an "anti-bokeh" quality to some lenses at some focal lengths.
> 
> Because DOF just works differently in 4/3 to what we are used to with
> regular Zs, I find myself always trying to re-learn how to get the
> blur that I want with the E-system.  I've been off and on with this
> list lately, but I don't recall a good discussion about how to manage
> bokeh with DZ lenses given the fact that while the rules of DOF are
> changed, DOF is shifted around somewhat.  We start from the
> assumption, or the hope, that a DZ lens in the range of one of our
> favorite film lenses will produce precisely the same effects in the
> E-system, but when you think about it, with a sensor 1/4 the area of a
> 35mm film strip, this doesn't really make any sense.   But I risk
> venturing beyond my depth (and probably already have) ...
> 
> Cheers,
> Joel W.
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Chris Barker <ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I'm not sure that I find that bokeh pleasing or annoying, Joel: it
>> looks just fine.  But then I have not thought ill of the "bad" bokeh
>> that various members of the List have presented for inspection from
>> time to time.
>>
>> I really like some of those Grand Canyon images (it looks like GC to
>> me), particularly the monochrome ones.  I suppose that I've only every
>> seen sunset shots from others before, but those look very good.
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> Thanks, Joel, I enjoyed the stroll through those shots.
>> On 4 Jan 2009, at 23:18, Joel Wilcox wrote:
>>
>>> I've been looking among recent photos for images that show the bokeh
>>> qualities I like when working with the DZ 50-200.  Here's one that's
>>> possibly serviceable:
>>>
>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/99378213@N00/with/3168574152/
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz