the last word

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

  • site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge
You are here: Home / The Last Word / Bokeh, can you see? — closely defocused images

Bokeh, can you see? — closely defocused images

December 21, 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.

I set up one of my regular bokeh-evaluation scenes, and photographed it with the Nikon 135 mm f/2 DC-Nikkor and Sony 135mm T/4.5 (f/2.8) STF lens. I made images with the DC-Nikkor both with the defocusing control defeated, and with it set to optimize the bokeh for objects farther away than the focused distance. I also added the Zeiss 135 mm f/2 Apo-Sonnar ZF.2 into the mix. 

I’ll run through the images from widest to narrowest aperture. 

Zeiss f/2

 

Nikon f/2 without DC

 

Nikon f/2 with DC

The Nikon lens uses internal focusing, which means that the focal length shortens as the focused distance gets closer. I have compensated for that somewhat by adjusting the camera/subject distance. In each image, I focused on the bunny’s nose. That meant that I had to refocus the DC Nikkor for every shot with the defocusing control on, since adjusting the control changes the focused distance. I forgot this the first time through, and had to reshoot the whole series. 

Here’s what I look at in this scene. 

  • The reflections of the LED panel light source in two places on the left and one on the right. The panel consists of an array of LEDs of two colors. You can see them clearly if the lens is focused on them If the bokeh were super-smooth, you wouldn’t be able to tell that the panel were not continuous. 
  • The diffuse specular reflections in the roll of picture wire on the left. Smooth is good. 
  • The white blur in the left background.
  • The specular reflections on the slightly OOF carrot and similarly defocused eye. The carrot is closr than the focused distance, and the eye is farther away. 
  • The texture of the straw as is gets out of focus. 

 

You can judge for yourself, but in general, I find the Zeiss bokeh smother than the Nikon’s, even with the defocus control on. The effects of the defocus control are subtle.

Zeiss f/2.8

 

Nikon f/2.8 without DC

 

Nikon f/2.8 with DC

 

Sony STF f/2.8 (T/4.5)

The Sony lens appears to have a slightly longer focal length than indicated. To my eyes, it has the smoothest bokeh, but in this image, the differences are not striking. I expect that to change when the background is severely OOF. The differences provided by the Nikon defocusing control are disappointing to me. 

Zeiss f/4

 

Nikon f/4 without DC

 

Nikon f/4 with DC

 

Sony STF f/4 (T/5.6)

If I had to rank them, it would be

  1. Sony
  2. Zeiss
  3. Nikon no DC
  4. Nikon with DC

Coming soon: a scene with greater subject/background distance difference.

The Last Word

← Bokeh, can you see? Bokeh, can you see? — cat’s eyes →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

March 2023
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Jan    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • Good 35-70 MF lens
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
  • 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 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

  • Mal Paso on Christmas tree light bokeh with the XCD 38V on the X2D
  • Sebastian on More on tilted adapters
  • JimK on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • Kyle Krug on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • JimK on Hasselblad X2D electronic shutter scan time
  • Jake on Hasselblad X2D electronic shutter scan time
  • Piotr Chylarecki on Who am I?
  • JimK on Who am I?
  • Piotr Chylarecki on Who am I?
  • Stefan on Swebo TC-1 OOBE

Archives

Copyright © 2023 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.