Re: [Leica] JB, filters, flames and technique

[pchefurka@plaintree.com]

This discussion of Nikkors is getting more than a little off 
topic, but when has that ever stopped us? I'd like to throw in my 
nickel's worth while the pot's still boiling.

I recently traded in a bunch of Nikkors to finance the purchase 
of a 35 Summicron ASPH.  The ones I kept were the 55/2.8 Micro, 
the 180 AF and my wife's favorite, the 85/2.0.  The comment I 
want to make is about the 55's bokeh.

Now, I really like this lens.  It's handy, sharp and contrasty.  
But the bokeh sucks.  I'm sitting here looking at a hand-held 
portrait of a dragonfly, blown up to 16x20.  The sharp bits are 
incredibly sharp. The contrast is Clintonesque (i.e. 
unimpeachable).  The photo overall is one of my best.  But there 
is a problem when you look closely at the image. All those tiny 
veins in the dragonfly's wings start off perfectly sharp. Then, 
as they go out of focus, each line splits in two, forming a web 
of doubled lines that increases in spacing as the wing goes 
further out of the plane of focus.  It's classic "ni-sen bokeh" 
as described in the seminal PT article.

A similar effect shows up in a shot my wife took of me in the 
woods, with small sun-dapple highlights in the background.  Each 
highlight is doughnut-shaped, as if she'd used a 55mm mirror 
lens.

From a distance, or to the uninitiated, these effects are 
minimal, or not important.  But once you know they're there, they 
are hard to ignore (like so much in life :-)

The 180 shows no such tendency.  Nor, of course, do any of the 
Leica lenses I've owned so far.


______________________ Reply Separator _________________________
Subject: Re: [Leica] JB, filters, flames and technique
Author:  <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > at internet
Date:    11/24/98 11:57 AM

[snip]

The 55/2.8 Micro is indeed the best of Nikon's many, many 50's 
and the latest 180 is a lens to die for, and at about $800 new, 
perhaps the best bargain on the planet.