[Leica] Bokeh and Lenses

[john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster)]

You have the 50mm Summicron APO asph?

john 

-----Original Message-----

I have that one so I'll try it, too.  I much prefer the bokeh in that photo!

Tina


On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 3:37 PM, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.co.nz> 
wrote:

> You take a different type of photograph to me Tina, two of the images 
> I showed the background disks are part of the shot. A straight shot 
> would not be worth showing and I like the fact I can create something 
> which the eye does not see ;-)
>
>  If you want a neutral background then the 50mm APO Summicron is the 
> best I have seen.....
> http://johnmcmaster.com/PAW/2014/31/content/L2005284_large.html
>
> john
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> I think you are right, Ted!  I'm not going to worry about bokeh any more!
>  From the examples posted here (and on Olympus and MUG) of "good" 
> bokeh, only a few look good to me and those are the ones where the 
> bokeh is not obvious.  If the first thing you see in a photo is the 
> bokeh, that is a bad thing!!  All of those hideous circles take your 
> eye away from whatever it is that you are trying to photograph in the 
> first place.  I just don't understand how that could possibly be 
> considered good.
>
> No more bokeh for me.  Just photos.
>
> Thanks for the reminder, Ted!
>
> Tina
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 11:39 PM, Ted Grant <tedgrant at shaw.ca> wrote:
>
> > TINA MANELY OFFERED AFTER READING: Mike Johnson's BOKEH article:
> > >> He also comments that bokeh gets more problematic:
> >
> > the larger the aperture
> > the closer the focus
> > the more distant the background
> > the more contrasty the background
> > No wonder I had problems.  My 3 photos included all of the 
> > problematic possibilities!<<<<<
> >
> > ====================================================================
> > ==
> > ======
> > ==============
> >
> > Hi CREW & TINA,
> > So once again Mike and his bokeh assessments and spooky stories 
> > about this lens phenomena raises it's so called ugly head and nearly 
> > everyone acquires wet pants of panic over it! Get over it! Simply 
> > because if you know nothing about it
> >
> > "" It don't matter! "IT's THE CONTENT THAT COUNTS!!! HOWEVER IT 
> > MATTERS TO THE OVER TECHIE PEOPLE!"" Good buddy Mike being one of them!
> :-)  Hi Mike!
> > ;-)
> >
> > OK here I go again.;-)
> > So please let me explain before some of you get wet pants ? ;-) I 
> > had been a working well published and paid professional photographer 
> > for I suppose 30 years or more and never knew such a lens phenomena 
> > existed.
> > Until one day shortly after joining the LUG and Mike Johnson came on 
> > with his spooky "bokeh -- BS!" Heck I had never read anything about 
> > this "HORRID LENS EFFECT" let alone it even existed. So OK I had 
> > nearly always used LEICA glass, whether it exists on LEICA lenses or 
> > not?  "PLEASE DON'T TELL IF IT DOES, SIMPLY BECAUSE, "WHAT I DON'T 
> > KNOW ISN'T GOING TO HURT MY PICTURES!"
> > :-)
> >
> > Besides it obviously wasn't a detrimental factor! As I was  being 
> > hired to fly about the world on "paying published assignments!"NEVER 
> > A WORD FROM SOME OF THE TOUGHEST-ASSED PHOTO EDITORS YOU NEVER WANT 
> > TO HAVE! KILLERS OF ONES FEELINGS!
> > So when it came up on the LUG screen and I read about it, my 
> > immediate re-action was "BUll-s-t!" STILL IS IN CAPITAL LETTERS!"
> >
> > Because if it were such a horrid picture spoiling effect? I'd 
> > certainly have been chastised to tears any number of times  in the 
> > past published 60 years!
> > But do you know what???? Not one peep about the "bokeh effect" in 
> > any of the over 300,000 images in the National Archives collection!
> >
> > OK folks, those who made it to the Leica Gallery New York? ........ 
> > "I didn't hear any comments about the horrid evil "BOKEH FACTOR" in 
> > any of the photos hanging on the walls?  Therefore? Is "BOKEH" as 
> > usual, just another techie bit of jabber-whookie needlessly wasting 
> > our picture taking time babbling about it? INSTEAD OF TAKING PICTURES?
> >
> > OK folks, "have a go at the old LAD!" :-) Whatever you do say, truly 
> > isn't going to change my mind about "THE BIG BAD BOOGIE BOKEHMAN!" 
> > :-) cheers, Dr. ted :-)the "big bad bokeh boogeyman":-)
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: LUG [mailto:lug-bounces+tedgrant=shaw.ca at leica-users.org] On 
> > Behalf Of Tina Manley
> > Sent: August-20-14 3:39 PM
> > To: MUGers at yahoogroups.com; Leica Users Group; paw; seephoto; 
> > Olympus Camera Discussion
> > Subject: [Leica] Bokeh and Lenses
> >
> > PESO:
> >
> > Mike Johnston (The Online Photographer) has written quite a bit 
> > about bokeh.  He has a pdf in which he rates many lenses for their bokeh.
> >
> > http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/files/bokehrankings5.pdf
> >
> > He also comments that bokeh gets more problematic:
> >
> > the larger the aperture
> > the closer the focus
> > the more distant the background
> > the more contrasty the background
> >
> > No wonder I had problems.  My 3 photos included all of the 
> > problematic possibilities!
> >
> > Guess I'll try again.   The Summicron does get a 10 in the lens ratings.
> >
> > Tina
> >
>