![]() ![]() ![]() As you get in close, the internal shifting of elements that corrects for the near range performance can often cause harsh bokeh. I find the bokeh to be variable based on the CRC function. This was not a test, just something that I saw over and over again, so I picked two similar shots and posted them to show the smoothness of the Leica lens compared to the more geometric highlights from the Nikkor. Tim, I have a side by side comparison of a Leica 90mm and the Nikkor 105mm from a shoot where it was evident that the number of blades was showing up in the highlights. If the lens had a 7 or 9 blade aperture, the shape of the spot is the only thing which would change. You can easily see the lens has 6 aperture blades. Scroll down to the first picture, you can see a bright light in the background near the woman's ear. These point sources of light take the shape of the aperture and are easy to see in the image. The number of blades is noticable only if there are bright point sources of light in the foreground or background - city lights, sunlight filtering through foliage, reflections off chrome etc. Wish others could provide sample images with the 7 and 9 blades to see the effect of the out of focus highlights. Bokeh is less important for wide angle lenses - due to the greater depth of field most of the background is more or less in focus anyway. Of the AF lenses, the AF 85/1.4, 105/2DC, 135/2DC, 70-200/2.8VR are all noted for their good bokeh, but these are expensive. #35MM TEXTURED BOKEH LENS MANUAL#Nikkors noted for their good bokeh include the manual focus 45/2.8P, 85/1.8, 105/2.5 and 180/2.8. It seems the Nikon philosphy was for sharpness and high contrast at the expense of bokeh. Unfortunately Nikkors are not generally noted for there good bokeh, although there are exceptions. So trying to assemble more quality examples of the Nikkors. I do know that with my Leica lenses there is almost a painterly quality to the backgrounds, smooth and little recognition to aperture blades (most have 10 or so blades in the lenses I have had.) But Leica is too costly for me to keep up. I like a smooth quality, others prefer a more textured look. Unlike resolution which you can measure in lines/mm, bokeh is a subjective quality. I am not sure there is a definitive answer to what makes good bokeh. I have seen where the # of aperture blades do have an affect to where they do not, to where abberations (corrected to uncorrected) have an effect, etc. Lenses made since abount 2000 have the the super-integrated coating which is a slight improvement over earlier multicoating - not a difference worth worrying about. The build quality of all these lenses is excellent. The coated lenses perhaps have slightly more contrast than the 35/1.4 but the bokeh is not as smooth. The coated versions (Nikkor-O.C, AI, AIS) do much better. Early single coated (Nikkor-O) were prone to flare due to the large front element. It's a good to excellent lens depending on the sample. The manual focus 35/2 has pretty much the same optics since it was first launched in the 60s. The number of aperture blades Only affects the shape of out of focus highlights - do you prefer 7-sided or 9-sided polygons? The number of blades has nothing to do with the smoothness of the background - that is a function of the optics. From that point of view, the bokeh will be the same (which is pretty good). As far as I know, all the 35/1.4 versions have the same optical formula (that's why they are all grouped together on my list). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |