If everything is sharp, there is no bokeh. Its something you get with wider
apertures.
People who claim to not see a difference between lenses or who say bokeh is
a stupid thing to think about are usually people who shoot like Ansel Adams,
everything stopped way down so nothing is out of focus. Or they're blind.
LOL
--
Chris Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana
260-486-2581
http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com My portfolio
http://blog.chriscrawfordphoto.com My latest work!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Christopher-Crawford/48229272798
Become a fan on Facebook
On 1/16/11 8:25 PM, "George Themelis" <george@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I have a question about bokeh.
>
> My understanding is that refers to how the out-of-focus areas of the image
> look. But in stereo photography was are trying to have everything in focus
> (by using smaller apertures, avoiding long lenses, etc).
>
> Can you talk about bokeh in a picture where everything is in focus?
>
> George
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Crawford
> Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 12:02 PM
> To: Olympus Camera Discussion
> Subject: Re: [OM] OM Macro 50 f2 vs 50 f3.5
>
> Yeah the 50/ macro has much nicer bokeh than any of the other 50mm Olympus
> lenses. That's one of the reasons I used it for that portrait.
>
> Here's a photo at f5 that shows the bokeh as well as the wide-open sharpness
> well.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/marysbar18
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|