Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] 90/2.0 Macro + Pan F = Smile

Subject: Re: [OM] 90/2.0 Macro + Pan F = Smile
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 02:11:28 -0700
On 3/13/2012 12:35 AM, Dawid Loubser wrote:
>>> http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/072/b/4/water_lily_pond_1_by_philosomatographer-d4sm61s.jpg
>> Oops, here the bokeh has gone bad, OOF highlights hard edged and
>> moving to dark centered donuts at the back. A busy,
>> edgy effect out of sync with what seems to me to be the intent of
>> the shot.
> Moose, I have come to the conclusion that you judge bokeh compared to
> some theoretical lens!

Nope. As in my comments on "No on cares how hard you worked.", I am simply 
viewing the images and noting how they look 
to my eye. I prefer, and have always preferred, classic bokeh, where OOF 
highlights show an Airy disk quality of bright 
center slowly fading  from that center to invisibility.

The water lily shot goes so far as to have actual donuts in the far right 
background, like a mirror lens. It's fine if 
you and others like that. I'm just passing on my own feelings about the images.

> Come now, you really can't ask for better in a fast, high-performance 90mm 
> lens - every other one I know of will produce a much harsher background in 
> this scenario!

I'm not asking for a lens. I'm commenting on what makes an image pleasing to 
me. If there's no fast, 90 mm lens for FF 
that will do that with this subject, that's OK. I just won't like images of the 
subject from any of them. There are 
innumerable subjects out there.

As I said, the 90/2 did an excellent bokeh job on the first, quite nice on the 
second and passable on the fourth, with 
only small ugly areas that could be fixed in post, and I assume, in printing. 
Lots of fast, modern lenses have bokeh 
issues at specific subject and background distances. The water lilies image 
clearly illustrates this, as it gets worse 
the further back it goes.

My most used lens, a 28-300 zoom, covers the whole gamut from beautiful, creamy 
bokeh to really ugly, depending on many 
factors I haven't got all figured out. If I don't like the results in a shot, I 
either pass it by or work on it in post.

> I give up...

Why? Not everyone has my taste. Bob and others like the bokeh that I don't. 
Make what pleases you. Then if you start 
selling, notice what those willing to part with cash like, and do more of that. 
:-)

> (until I can get a Cooke PS945 for my Linhof, *then* you'll have to agree 
> with every image's bokeh!)

That is a mighty fine lens! So nice that when I look at samples, I briefly 
consider LF. ;-)   The combination of detail 
with smoothness is just amazing, although no better than some older LF lenses, 
I guess. A few months ago, I was looking 
at the famous Karsh portrait of Churchill in a huge print, about 5' tall, that 
I could walk right up to. The detail 
retained without any edginess at all was wonderful. I'm not sure anything like 
that can be done on FF.

Okey Bokey Moose

-- 
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
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