aizan
Veteran
this is one of those harsh bokeh, but not distracting bokeh situations. the "real thing" does the same thing once in a while.
johne
Well-known
If you find out what caused such a picture, let me know and I will try to put it into my lenses!!! Wonderful shot. My compliments.
Johne
Johne
schmoozit
Schmoozit good...
In my opinion, this is no better or worse than many other lenses; probably ones that you own, even. Because of the exact focal length, plus the distance of the "troubling" objects, and of course your wide open (I presume) lens, happened to give a doubling that was more noticeable than if it had slightly different parameters somewhere in the equation.
I guess all that I'm saying is, even with this very lens, you'll likely only see a "problem" like this on occasion. I know many lenses do the same thing. Sometimes it sticks out more than others. Here, it happens to stick out because of the relatively small effective OOF rendition. Had the objects been a foot further away, they'd have rendered better. If they were a foot closer, they'd have rendered sharp enough to also be better. An additional problem is that the doubling happens to be very nicely highlighted, bringing even more attention to it, even if only from us photojunkies.
I think I understand your philosophy, and I like it very much. I'm sure you weren't obsessing, just curious. Anyway... I think you could produce this same effect with almost any lens, if you really wanted to spend the time to try. Game?
I guess all that I'm saying is, even with this very lens, you'll likely only see a "problem" like this on occasion. I know many lenses do the same thing. Sometimes it sticks out more than others. Here, it happens to stick out because of the relatively small effective OOF rendition. Had the objects been a foot further away, they'd have rendered better. If they were a foot closer, they'd have rendered sharp enough to also be better. An additional problem is that the doubling happens to be very nicely highlighted, bringing even more attention to it, even if only from us photojunkies.
I think I understand your philosophy, and I like it very much. I'm sure you weren't obsessing, just curious. Anyway... I think you could produce this same effect with almost any lens, if you really wanted to spend the time to try. Game?
M
merciful
Guest
johne said:
Thank, John (and everyone else). Schmoozit, I've got the time to try, but not the desire to run all that film for the hell of it.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Very nice portrait. Am I the only one to think that the "double lines" of the chair's back look that way because they WERE that way in real life? The edge of the chair looks like it is a decorative fluted affair made with parallel, adjacent tubes or round pieces of wood. Just a thought . . . it isn't nisen bokeh if the double lines were there all along . . .
Ben Marks
Ben Marks
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
There you have it : Bokeh translates as Unschärfeleistung 
Not the same thing at all!
Not the same thing at all!
Flyfisher Tom
Well-known
Cool shot Merciful.
Back to your original question, I've not heard that it is a cron-imitation. In any event, my crons (tabbed & latest) have not exhibited that sort of double bokeh in the background. Actually I think the modern crons have some of the smoothest bokehs around, just one man's opinion.
Back to your original question, I've not heard that it is a cron-imitation. In any event, my crons (tabbed & latest) have not exhibited that sort of double bokeh in the background. Actually I think the modern crons have some of the smoothest bokehs around, just one man's opinion.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
This double contour probably has to do with the diaphragm not being placed in the optical centre of the lens. Or it might even be an internal reflection. The superior quality of the unsharpness of Leica (and Zeiss etc.) depends on the exact location of the diaphragm blades and the large number of them, giving a perfctly round aperture.
Last edited:
lubitel
Well-known
Funny, my Holga does that doubling to pictures in lower right corner.
Chaser
Well-known
From: http://www.dantestella.com/technical/hexar.html
"Generalities: Autofocus camera with high-speed 35mm f/2 lens modeled after the 4th-generation Leica Summicron; about the size of a Leica M6 with 35/2 lens. A heavy little beastie, all metal. Black phosphate finish on alloy body."
"Generalities: Autofocus camera with high-speed 35mm f/2 lens modeled after the 4th-generation Leica Summicron; about the size of a Leica M6 with 35/2 lens. A heavy little beastie, all metal. Black phosphate finish on alloy body."
M
merciful
Guest
Benjamin Marks said:
Thanks again, to Ben and all. The "chairs" are actually jewelry displays on a table, and they really don't have a doubled look to them: it is bokeh in this on the same roll are a couple of examples where OOF faces have the same effect.
tajart
ancien
a further thought on the double bokeh effect in this picture, which we all agree, is a nice one. just curous if you mount a filter on the lens?
S
StuartR
Guest
This is a shot of mine with the Hexar AF at f/2...I think it exhibits a similar effect, but it does not bother me.
I think that your photo has the sharpening turned very high and it appears to be global sharpening. You might want to turn down the sharpening in the background, as I think it is accentuating the double imaging.
I think that your photo has the sharpening turned very high and it appears to be global sharpening. You might want to turn down the sharpening in the background, as I think it is accentuating the double imaging.
M
merciful
Guest
tajart said:
No filter (though I need to get a clear B+W when I remember.)
M
merciful
Guest
StuartR said:
Yes, good point about the sharpening accentuating the effect, Stuart. That's my typical USM for a shot of that size, but that lens is the sharpest I've got.
taffer
void
I think our goal should just be to put an interesting enough foreground in our photos so that we can easily forget and/or forgive the appearance of OOF areas.
With Stuart's shot above, I have no problems at all to do that
With Stuart's shot above, I have no problems at all to do that
M
merciful
Guest
taffer said:I think our goal should just be to put an interesting enough foreground in our photos so that we can easily forget and/or forgive the appearance of OOF areas.
With Stuart's shot above, I have no problems at all to do that
Indeed. She looks a lot like one of Allison's sisters. Unfortunately, the two of them irritate me to such an extent that I rarely photograph them
wilt
Well-known
Great shot, Merciful!
Stuart: yes, sharpening can do stuff to an otherwise pleasant bokeh, that's my experience too. For example, this picture (wide open Summicron 50) was moderately sharpened; look at the out of focus lights in the background, they have a more intense perimeter (like a "shell"). This effect was not at all strong (or even invisible) without sharpening. The effect was very clear when switching back and forth between sharpening in Photoshop.
Compare this one which has no sharpening and thus better bokeh than for example this (which also has different contrast). (This last comparison is a bit misleading, comparing apples and oranges, because one of them was taken with the F-Zuiko 50 wide open, the other one with the Summicron 50 wide open. Guess which!)
Ahh, the subtilities of lens optic signatures!
Stuart: yes, sharpening can do stuff to an otherwise pleasant bokeh, that's my experience too. For example, this picture (wide open Summicron 50) was moderately sharpened; look at the out of focus lights in the background, they have a more intense perimeter (like a "shell"). This effect was not at all strong (or even invisible) without sharpening. The effect was very clear when switching back and forth between sharpening in Photoshop.
Compare this one which has no sharpening and thus better bokeh than for example this (which also has different contrast). (This last comparison is a bit misleading, comparing apples and oranges, because one of them was taken with the F-Zuiko 50 wide open, the other one with the Summicron 50 wide open. Guess which!)
Ahh, the subtilities of lens optic signatures!
MCTuomey
Veteran
You're getting wonderful results from that camera and lens. I'd be thrilled to have taken that photograph ... stop with the background critique.
Don't ya just love that Fuji Superia? I like the 400, too. Sometimes it just tears up Fuji's pro color film line, IMHO. I keep it on hand in the fridge for those strange color urges ...
Don't ya just love that Fuji Superia? I like the 400, too. Sometimes it just tears up Fuji's pro color film line, IMHO. I keep it on hand in the fridge for those strange color urges ...
M
merciful
Guest
MCTuomey said:
Thanks very much. Hey, I was just asking...
I like the 200, 400, and 800 just fine, and I'd try the 100 if I could find it in my supermarket. I haven't seen any need at all for pro neg film.