• 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 / The Last Word / Bokeh, can you see? — cat’s eyes

Bokeh, can you see? — cat’s eyes

December 22, 2016 JimK Leave a Comment

This is a continuation of a series of posts about bokeh and lenses that are designed to optimize it. The series starts here.

We’ve seen that in the Zeiss 135 mm f/2 Apo-Sonnar ZF.2, and to a lesser extent in the Nikon 135 mm f/2 DC-Nikkor, that out of focus (OOF) point sources are rendered as disks with approximately the same illumination across the disk. The Sony 135 mm f/2.8 STF lens has a different rendering, one with more of the energy concentrated towards the center of the blur circle.

All that is true when the point sources are near the center of the image. However, when the points are at the edges or corners, their view of the lens aperture is from the side, and the bourred area can cease to be circulat, ans assume the shape that some bokeh aficionados call “cat’s eyes”.

In this post, I’m going to look at point source rendering at the edges and corners with all three lenses when they are wide open, which is the worst-case setting.

First, the Apo-Sonnar:

Zeiss

 

Zeiss

 

Zeiss

Ignore the dark lines and bands; they are artifacts of the way the LED light works. The Zeiss cat’s eyes are gone at f/4 and narrower apertures.

Now the Nikon lens with the defocus control set to off:

Nikon no DC

 

Nikon no DC

 

Nikon no DC

With the Nikon, the cat’s eyes are almost gone at f/2.8. 

Now the Nikon with the defocus control turned on:

Nikon DC

 

Nikon DC

 

Nikon DC

 

The defocus control makes essentially no difference  with respect to cat’s eyes.

Now the Sony STF lens:

 

STF

 

STF

No cat’s eyes. But the Sony STF is only a f/2.8 lens, so it has an easier time with cat’s eyes than the other two lenses, which are a full stop faster. Only the Zeiss lens shows significant feline characteristics at f/2.8.

 

 

 

The Last Word

← Bokeh, can you see? — closely defocused images Bokeh, can you see? — greatly defocused images →

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Your email address will not be published.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 How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • Štěpán Kaňa on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Štěpán Kaňa on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Javier Sanchez on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?

Archives

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

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.