• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / Nikon Z6/7 / Nikon 50/1.8S near-focus bokeh

Nikon 50/1.8S near-focus bokeh

December 22, 2018 JimK 5 Comments

This is one in a series of posts on the Nikon Z6 and Z7. You should be able to find all the posts about that camera in the Category List on the right sidebar, below the Articles widget. There’s a drop-down menu there that you can use to get to all the posts in this series; just look for “Nikon Z6/7”.

In the previous post, we looked at the out of focus point spread functions of the Nikon 50 mm f/1.8 S lens on a Nikon Z7, which is a good way to get a handle on the lens’ bokeh for far out of focus objects. Now we’ll take a look at the transition from in to out of focus.

In order to have something to compare the 50S with, I make similar images with the Nikon 58 mm f/1.4 G, a lens known for its bokeh. I backed off a bit to compensate for the focal length difference, but I didn’t go far enough.

First, a look at almost the entire picture height.

50 S f/1.8

 

58G f/1.8

This wasn’t what I set out to learn, but we’ve already learned something about the relative transmittance of the two lenses, or maybe it’s just that the camera didn’t set the f-stops the way it said it did. Both of those images were made at f/1.8, 1/200 second, at ISO 400, and were developed identically in Lightroom. The size of the blur circles of the lights in the background would seem to indicate that the f-stops weren’t the same, but the longer focal length of the 58 will tend to make them bigger.

Looking at the far-OOF lights, the smoother bokeh of the 58 is apparent. Same with the branches in the background.

50 S f/2.8

 

58G f/2.8

This image makes it look like the 58 has a higher transmittance than the 50S since the relative size of the blur circles is about what you’d expect from the focal length difference. The 58 is smoother, but the difference is not striking.

50 S f/4

 

58G f/4
50 S f/5.6

 

58G f/5.6

I invite you to draw your own conclusions about the f/4 and f/5.6 shots.

Now let’s look at the transition region.

50 S f/1.8

 

58G f/1.8

The 58 is a bit smoother.  I’ll show you the rest without individual comment.

50 S f/2.8

 

58G f/2.8

 

50 S f/4

 

58G f/4

 

50 S f/5.6

 

58G f/5.6

I think the 50S is doing pretty darned well in this somewhat unfair comparison.

Note: I should have white balanced to a gray card, but I just used the as-shot setting. My bad.

 

 

 

 

Nikon Z6/7

← Nikon 50/1.8 S OOF PSFs 50 mm f/1.8 Nikkor-S transition point spread functions →

Comments

  1. Micah says

    December 23, 2018 at 4:48 am

    More than focal length, the issue of comparing the 50 S vs. the 58G at 1.8, is that stopping the 58G down at all will hide the natural mechanical vignetting that they surely both experience. I’m curious if you’d see that at 1.4 with the 58. As far as I know, there are no lenses 50 or longer, that don’t produce “cats eye bokeh” in the corners.

    Other than that, it looks to my eye like the 50S is nearly apochomatic! At least by comparison.

    Reply
  2. N/A says

    December 26, 2018 at 5:13 pm

    /offtopic/

    noticed on dpreview – “What does a lens need to support PDAF?”… Lens needs __NOT__ to have APOdization element inside for that (in addition to having AF motor/screw drive mechanism + means to communicate with a proper camera body) – it seems that the only lens w/ APOdization element so far that can do any kind of AF is Fuji’s 56/1.2 and it is still naturally CDAF only

    Reply
    • CarVac says

      December 26, 2018 at 10:33 pm

      The Sony 100 f/2.8 STF GM OSS has autofocus.

      Reply
  3. Dennis Smith says

    May 22, 2019 at 9:28 am

    Hi;

    Just found your site. Really nice. I was wondering if you know what the COC setting is used on the Nikon Z lenses? I know that most of the F lenses used 0.03 (and sometimes 0.033). However, I was wondering if that changed for the S lenses and is more closer to 0.025 (Zeiss standard).

    Thanks, Dennis

    Reply
    • JimK says

      May 22, 2019 at 12:22 pm

      I don’t know the answer to that. There are no DOF markings on the S lenses because they are focus by wire. I’ve never looked at having the camera show me DOF any other way, since I consider 30 um or thereabouts pretty sloppy.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.