Ranchu
Veteran
You are correct! My error, I tracked the article down and it was in '97.
"The English spelling bokeh was popularized in 1997 in Photo Techniques magazine, when Mike Johnston, the editor at the time, commissioned three papers on the topic for the March/April 1997 issue; "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh
Sorry for the confusion, and thank you for catching that, Roger! I have to admit, I was pretty stoned for most of the 90's...
Last edited:
sepiareverb
genius and moron
This is one of the most beautiful images I've seen this year.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
It's not an "image". It is a photograph that has been uploaded via digitisation.
Turtle
Veteran
Not all asphs are equal... my understanding based on what I have seen and other users have posted or commented:
Most agree the 50 lux asph to be quite neutral.
Many accept the 28 cron to be very smooth; smoother than the 28 2.8 asph.
The 35 cron can be a little wild in the OOF but is mostly just fine.
The 75 cron asph seems to be even smoother than spherical 75 summarit.
The 24 lux asph seems to be exceptionally smooth. Looks like a 35 summarit.
The 24 elmarit is not rough, but not as smooth as the 28 cron or 24 lux.
24 Elmar is very smooth like 24 lux
I don't know how true it is, but it would appear that Leica is aiming for smooth bokeh in their newst lenses. I can't think of any of hte current crop that is not pretty darned smooth... Contrast is not as high with the wide luxes and summarits as some of the earlier asphs (28 elmarit, 35 cron) which Leica is possibly thinking of as being advantagous with digital sensors (that said the 24 elmar has high contrast).
All in all, I think each asph has to be considered on a model by model basis. Looking at other brands, like CV, the 28 1.9 asph is known to be creamy.
Most agree the 50 lux asph to be quite neutral.
Many accept the 28 cron to be very smooth; smoother than the 28 2.8 asph.
The 35 cron can be a little wild in the OOF but is mostly just fine.
The 75 cron asph seems to be even smoother than spherical 75 summarit.
The 24 lux asph seems to be exceptionally smooth. Looks like a 35 summarit.
The 24 elmarit is not rough, but not as smooth as the 28 cron or 24 lux.
24 Elmar is very smooth like 24 lux
I don't know how true it is, but it would appear that Leica is aiming for smooth bokeh in their newst lenses. I can't think of any of hte current crop that is not pretty darned smooth... Contrast is not as high with the wide luxes and summarits as some of the earlier asphs (28 elmarit, 35 cron) which Leica is possibly thinking of as being advantagous with digital sensors (that said the 24 elmar has high contrast).
All in all, I think each asph has to be considered on a model by model basis. Looking at other brands, like CV, the 28 1.9 asph is known to be creamy.
RichardB
Well-known
Believe it or not some of us just use our ASPH lenses to take pictures and could care less about a non-quantifiable concept as 'bokeh'. I have replaced all my M3 RF lenses, except for a 135mm f2.8, with ASPH lenses and frankly when I shoot the M3 RF lenses side by side with K64, under 5x magnification, I am hard pressed to tell the difference in image quality let alone some indefinable concept such as 'bokeh'.
I would n't waste any time worrying about it.-Dick
I would n't waste any time worrying about it.-Dick
ashrafazlan
Established
I love asph lenses, just wish I could afford them 
I don't find their bokeh harsh at all, having owned a number of old nikon and canon primes guilty of producing nervous bokeh.
I don't find their bokeh harsh at all, having owned a number of old nikon and canon primes guilty of producing nervous bokeh.
maddoc
... likes film again.
Tim Gray
Well-known
Just to return to the thread, I'm not worried about one way or the other. I was just curious where this oft-repeated stereotype comes from. Love or hate the ASPH lenses, it seems like a misplaced comment to me.
hellomikmik
Well-known
This thread made me think about statement from Mr Puts about the "level of correction in sagittal plane" and "definition of background details/blur" when comparing 90/2 Summicron asph and sonnar 85/2 zm.
It's somewhere in the middle of the page - two square portrait shots with cyan background:
http://www.imx.nl/photo/zeiss/zeiss/page72.html
It's somewhere in the middle of the page - two square portrait shots with cyan background:
http://www.imx.nl/photo/zeiss/zeiss/page72.html
Ranchu
Veteran
Interesting thread these guys got over here.
http://forum.mflenses.com/aspherical-lens-elements-always-good-t25179.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/aspherical-lens-elements-always-good-t25179.html
ferider
Veteran
Turtle
Veteran
I'm no bokeh fetishist, but ugly bokeh is usually much more apparent to me than less than perfect resolution (and I am not one to shoot wide open all that much or chase ethereal OOF shots! I also take pictures, believe it or not, but seeing as the thread is about bokeh of asph lenses....
5 magnification is quite low. On an 11x14 or 12x16 modern asph lenses will usually be quite noticeably sharper wide open, but not once a few stops down of course. Bokeh is there regardless of size or resolution and so if you dislike the look of a certain lens (for me, 40 1.4 and 50 1.1 Noktons at wider apertures, then there will be a problem. I have never looked at any of the Leica asph lenses and thought the bokeh would bother me.
5 magnification is quite low. On an 11x14 or 12x16 modern asph lenses will usually be quite noticeably sharper wide open, but not once a few stops down of course. Bokeh is there regardless of size or resolution and so if you dislike the look of a certain lens (for me, 40 1.4 and 50 1.1 Noktons at wider apertures, then there will be a problem. I have never looked at any of the Leica asph lenses and thought the bokeh would bother me.