SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Let's share nice cases of bokeh! One thing: it's nice when it occurs unexpectedly, like here (Canonet, of course, on TCN400 film):
Bokeh!!
- Thread starter SolaresLarrave
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 43
- Views 4K
With this shot I was trying out a new Voigtlander 75mm on my M2... It was a dreary wet day and I was able to shoot wide open at f/2.5, and focused fairly close-up. So, primarily a test...
P
pshinkaw
Guest
I think this Bokeh (any Bokeh?) here is a distraction, but I was struck by how almost perfectly round it is.
This is a Jupiter-8 on a Zorki-4, 1/30@f2.8 with a Philips electronic flash set at 1/16 power. Ancient Panatomic-X I've had since 1984 developed in D-76. Sorry about the dust spots.
-Paul
This is a Jupiter-8 on a Zorki-4, 1/30@f2.8 with a Philips electronic flash set at 1/16 power. Ancient Panatomic-X I've had since 1984 developed in D-76. Sorry about the dust spots.
-Paul
T
That Guy
Guest
WOW! Great one, Doug! Really nice bokeh on that Heliar.
FrankS
Registered User
I may be wrong, but wouldn't the out of focus points of light for any lens used wide open be perfectly round since the iris blades are fully retracted. f2.8 would be wide open for this lens, yes?
jdos2
Well-known
It depends on aberation correction.
My Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.5 wide open renders OOF highlights in the zones as funky looking egg-shapes (getting quite circular at f/2.8), pointing away from the center of the frame. I'll try to post an example. Lotsa aperture blades (or round ones) is only one component of bokeh.
My Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.5 wide open renders OOF highlights in the zones as funky looking egg-shapes (getting quite circular at f/2.8), pointing away from the center of the frame. I'll try to post an example. Lotsa aperture blades (or round ones) is only one component of bokeh.
Last edited:
bmattock
Veteran
My Bokeh Kitty...
Last edited:
Sonnar Brian
Established
Bill, what lens did you use? Wide-open I take it!
The background is so smooth that it looks looks like a backdrop!
The background is so smooth that it looks looks like a backdrop!
Sonnar Brian
Established
Nikkor 10.5cm F2.5, Wide-Open and Closest Focus.
bmattock
Veteran
Brian Sweeney said:
The lens is a Canon FL 135mm f2.5, wide open as you suspected. Sorry, an SLR! The background is a dirty glass window opening onto my backyard - you really can't tell, though, fortunately.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
P
pshinkaw
Guest
FrankS:
The Jupiter 9 is an f2.0 lens. It has lot of iris blades though.
-Paul
The Jupiter 9 is an f2.0 lens. It has lot of iris blades though.
-Paul
T
That Guy
Guest
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Nice to see that one's threads can come back full of vim and vigor! 🙂
jon_flanders
Well-known
Posted this one in the gallery. I named the file bokeh-balls.jpg.
Fed 2 with Industar 2.8.
Fed 2 with Industar 2.8.
K
Kris
Guest
All bokeh in this shot because I miss the focus 🙂 Have to be careful next time with Color-Heliar 75/2.5 close up and wide open.
Hmmm, Jon; "bokeh-balls"... cute play on words, if it refers to fullerenes. 🙂
doubs43
Well-known
Panatomic-X! ASA/ISO 32 IIRC. The first B&W film I ever used in 35mm. I was in the Philippines at the time and the light was so bright most of the time that I went with slow film. I used it in my Fujica-V2, a rangefinder camera with a fixed 45mm f/1.8 lens that gave extremely sharp images. I'm amazed that anyone still has it in useable condition.
Walker
bmattock
Veteran
Doug said:
Ah, a play on Bucky Balls. Good old Buckminster Fuller. Love those domes.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Kris, that photo is so great🙂
The others too, of course! Nice thread.
I could contribute only with SLR shots, have no scanned RF frames that I remember having interesting OOF.
Regarding the round highlights question, I think lots of wider angle lenses have intentionally introduced coma aberration which leads to less light falloff in the edges (the cos^4 law for light falloff versus deistance from centre becomes cos^3 )but the result is that OOF highlights are not round but egg-shape, sometimes even hourglass-shape.
Normal and tele lenses don't have this, or not so pronounced anyway.
My Minolta 135/2.8 has very nice OOF highlights wide-open and there's a clear difference between wide-open and stopped down half stop.
I just wonder what the Sonnar 50/1.5 will do - with the lots-of-iris-blades (13 or something), around f/4 the iris has a funky sunflower-shape. Anybody, any experience with it?
The others too, of course! Nice thread.
I could contribute only with SLR shots, have no scanned RF frames that I remember having interesting OOF.
Regarding the round highlights question, I think lots of wider angle lenses have intentionally introduced coma aberration which leads to less light falloff in the edges (the cos^4 law for light falloff versus deistance from centre becomes cos^3 )but the result is that OOF highlights are not round but egg-shape, sometimes even hourglass-shape.
Normal and tele lenses don't have this, or not so pronounced anyway.
My Minolta 135/2.8 has very nice OOF highlights wide-open and there's a clear difference between wide-open and stopped down half stop.
I just wonder what the Sonnar 50/1.5 will do - with the lots-of-iris-blades (13 or something), around f/4 the iris has a funky sunflower-shape. Anybody, any experience with it?
jdos2
Well-known
Here's the Voigtlander 50mm Nokton wide open. Notice the speculars in the poster off to the right.
This was bulk Kodak 100 speed film shot at 1600. It's a "tad" grainy, but I like the results.
This was bulk Kodak 100 speed film shot at 1600. It's a "tad" grainy, but I like the results.
Last edited:
