Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/01/01

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Bokeh - proven myth ?
From: "David Kieltyka" <dkieltyka@csi.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 23:02:10 -0500
References: <20020102014435.73204.qmail@web14007.mail.yahoo.com>

Henry Ting <henryting10@yahoo.com> wrote (edited):

> This is going to be controversial.
> I read about a lot of Leica lens offering a distinct
> "Bokeh" image that's missing from lens of other makes.
> I was confused as to how could this be possible,
> unless outside of physics' existentialism, Leica lens
> have a metaphysical spirit that the likes of Nikon or
> Zeiss lack.
>
> To prove my point, I did some experiment.
> I used my Leica M6 with the 35 Summicron and a Nikon
> F2 with a 35mm lens. I set them up both on tripods
> with the same camera to object distance in shooting my
> car head on at a range of only 5 feet. The background
> was a cul-de-sac of our neighborhood with florals and
> houses and images that I am familiar with.
>
> The result?   No differences whatsoever. I think the
> reverse is true. If both lens are of the same focal
> length, the graduality from sharpness to blurryness
> should not be different at all. Based on the law of
> physics this should apply to every lens.
> I for once proved to myself there is no difference and
> for anyone that claim there is a "Bokeh" difference
> between Leica and Nikon lens, my only comment from
> here onwards is "More power to them".

Henry, you would need to take a series of photos with each lens--at various
apertures and focused at various distances with a wide range of different
objects at various distances in front of and behind the plane of focus--to
really prove anything one way or the other. Personally I'm far too lazy to
bother. :-) "Good bokeh" is something I usually don't notice, which IMO is
as it should be. But I do take note of photos containing unpleasant
out-of-focus areas.

In my admittedly brief experience with an early 35mm f/2 Nikkor (non-AI
version with knurled focusing ring) I found the lens to have pleasant,
unobtrusive bokeh. Not as sharp as my old 35 Summicron however. OTOH the 35
f/1.4 Nikkor, which I own, is capable of harsh, ugly out-of-focus areas
under the wrong circumstances, in particular in photos taken wide open and
up close with detailed, contrasty objects just behind the plane-of-focus.
It's also a very sharp lens. I use it almost exclusively for landscapes,
stopped down and bokeh-less where it excels, so its OOF characteristics are
of little importance to me.

When I want lenses that perform well wide open and up close, combining
sharpness with nice blur, I go with my 35, 50 and 90 Summicrons or 50 and 85
Zeiss Sonnars. (Or the 105 f/2.5 Nikkor, second SLR optical formula, if I'm
using a Nikon.) This is just an empirical thing, a result of using all the
gear I own over time in various situations.

- -Dave-


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from Henry Ting <henryting10@yahoo.com> ([Leica] Bokeh - proven myth ?)