Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/07/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]True, but "ugly" bokeh (CV 50mm 1.1?) can be seen and I think all/most Leica lenses have good bokeh. I think the new 50mm APO-Summicron asph was designed to have good bokeh amongst other criteria. There are a few people on the web who say that asph bokeh is ugly and not as good as pre-asph.... There again, as you say, bokeh is a newish thought. A good (sharp) lens has always had a sharper cut-off from in focus to out of focus but once you have gone there then it how the out of focus bits look (if there are any) which adds to the shot - that is what I take as bokeh ;-) john ________________________________________ And one would think that a cutting edge modern optic fresh out of Leica compared to an old classic deserves to be looked at in more involved and complete optical terms than just bokeh. One is going to spend 5 grand instead of 1 grand became of creamier backgrounds? Bokeh is mainly just a reflection of good optical design. Sure they can also put more blades in and have them curved but its mainly just that. A better lens is going to not just resolve what's IN focus in a better way but what's not in focus in a better way. It went from being a new quirky concept from Japanese photographers using German glass to the be all and end all of a lens. There just is a whole lot more to it than that. A lens review is not just a discussion of its bokeh. But that is getting to be more and more what you're reading on the internet. A new lens is just out? What does the bokeh look like? Mark William Rabiner Photography http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > > This forum ain't big enough to discuss all of the aspects of bokeh ;-) > > Cheers, > Geoff > > On 19 July 2012 07:30, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote: > >> There is no doubt the asph will be better for that, I was just surprised >> that at various distances and apertures that there was no real difference >> in bokeh between the pre-asph and asph. >> >> john >> ________________________________________ >> >> Risking the wrath of Ted (but he's resting right now!) I would add for >> this >> particular comparison a focus shift comparison might be instructive too. >> Shoot one with each wide open in close, then stop down to say f/4. >> >> Cheers, >> Geoff >> >> On 19 July 2012 07:20, George Lottermoser <imagist3 at mac.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jul 18, 2012, at 1:02 AM, John McMaster wrote: >>> >>>> 24 hours and no replies, I guess nobody saw much difference in bokeh? >>> There >>>> were some where, side by side, the pre-asph was preferable but others >>> where >>>> that was reversed... >>> >>> This was the point I was alluding to a week or two ago. >>> Each scene (subject / light) will be rendered slightly (or not so >>> slightly) differently >>> by each lens/sensor/film combination. >>> >>> And we can't have them all (at least I can't). >>> So we get to know the gear we have; >>> and make educated use of it to achieve our aesthetic goals. >>> >>> Regards, >>> George Lottermoser >>