Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Re: bokeh

Subject: Re: [OM] Re: bokeh
From: David Irisarri <div2000@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 21:22:18 +0100
Hi John,
        Excellent work, but one question.

What scanner are you using? Colours are excellent,
and unsharp mask is very accurate for that resolution!!!
Specially Kodak Royal Gold 100, truly superb scanning.
If your lab has proccesed these prints, please tell me
the address. I think you must have scanned it with
slide scanner, haven´t you?
Great work,

Dave

"John A. Lind" wrote:
> 
> At 18:30 1/15/01, Lex Jenkins wrote:
> >Here's a good example of bad bokeh.  I can say that 'cause it's my photo.
> >;)
> >
> >http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1005538&a=7400079&p=38140898&Sequence=0&res=high
> >
> >CPC 28mm f/2.8 with six-bladed diaphragm.  Macro-focusing, good resolution
> >and little distortion - but *ugly* bokeh.  The caption explains it, but to
> >sum up it's the best/worst example of cross-eyed bokeh I've seen.
> 
> Here are some others with various lenses:
> 35-105/3.5~4.5 Zuiko:
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/oly/gallery/om18.html
> 50/1.2 Zuiko:
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/oly/gallery/om19.html
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/oly/gallery/om20.html
> 135/2.8 Zuiko:
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/oly/gallery/om48.html
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/oly/gallery/om49.html
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/oly/gallery/om73.html
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/oly/gallery/om74.html
> 200/4 Zuiko:
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/oly/gallery/om50.html
> 300/4.5 F.Zuiko:
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/oly/gallery/om51.html
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/tope04.html
> 40/2.8 Rollei Sonnar HFT:
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/rollei/gallery/rollei12.html
> 50/1.5 CZ Sonnar
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/zi/gallery/contax09.html
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/zi/gallery/contax10.html
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/zi/gallery/contax11.html
>    http://johnlind.tripod.com/zi/gallery/contax12.html
> 
> Of the 35-105/3.5~4.5, 50/1.2, 135/2.8, 200/4 and 300/4.5 Zuiko's, I
> consider the 135/2.8 the best with bokeh behind the DOF.  Wish I had a scan
> of one done with the 85/2 because it's excellent also.  The 35-105/3.5~4.5
> image doesn't show it dramatically, but it's bokeh is pretty good also. The
> second image for the 300/4.5 shows bokeh in front of the DOF (focus was at
> infinity).  The 50/1.2 does well until you get very bright, distinct,
> pinpoint specular highlights when it picks up the aperture shape (the
> octagons are how I know it was this lens).  The 40/2.8 Sonnar and 50/1.5
> Sonnar both have beautiful bokeh, especially the latter with 13 aperture
> blades that have curved edges, although it doesn't show of as well in
> these, which are the only scans I have showing DOF control.
> 
> Here's proof you _can_ get DOF control out of _any_ lens, except perhaps
> the 8/2.8 Fisheye.  Did this one for the bokeh TOPE with the 18/3.5 Zuiko
> rectilinear stacked on a 7mm Auto Extension Tube.  Not great composition;
> did it as an experiment just to see what it would look like.  Not the best
> bokeh either, but not too bad.  In fairness to Olympus, I don't think
> designing this lens for smooth bokeh was uppermost in their minds:
>      http://johnlind.tripod.com/tope03.html
> 
> -- John
> 
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Unofficial Olympus web page
http://victorian.fortunecity.com/byzantium/656/index.html
Unofficial Olympus Gallery
http://www.taiga.ca/~gallery/subpages/irissari/irissari.html
------------------------------------------------------------

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


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