• 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?

Bokeh, can you see?

December 20, 2016 JimK 7 Comments

This is the first of a four-part series on lenses which attempt to control bokeh. If you want to easily navigate to the other parts, at the bottom of this post (below the comments) you’ll find pingback links to each of them. 

Bokeh is a term, originally used in  Japan, that describes a camera/lens system’s rendering of out of focus (OOF) objects. Since the OOF parts of a scene can be thought of as the superposition (linear addition)  of the OOF renderings of each point in the scene, almost all that is necessary to define a lens’ bokeh is the shape and size of the OOF rendering of a point source. Once the lens is focused at a particular distance, the shape may vary with object distance, but that’s a second-order effect. The size will certainly vary with object distance. When it’s placed well away from the focus distance, the diameter of the blur circle of a point source can be estimated quite precisely by conventional DOF methods, both in the image field (on the sensor) and the object field (in the scene). For a thorough explanation, look here.   If you get interested in the behavior of OOF blur near the point of focus, or when lens aberrations and diffraction are taken into account, have a look here. The  preceding link is to the start of a rather long-winded and many-part exposition. To see the parts, go to the bottom of the first page (below the comments) and click on the pingback links. 

This post is not about the quantity of the OOF blur, but rather about its quality. 

I have two lenses that are designed to produce unusual bokeh. One is the Sony 135 mm T/4.5 (f/2.8) STF, and the other is the Nikon 135 mm f/2 DC-Nikkor. STF stands for smooth transition focus, and DC stand for defocus control. The Nikon lens has a control that allows the user to turn the defocus control feature on or off, so it can act like a regular 135 mm f/2 lens. The Sony lens is a more special-purpose device, and the STF feature is baked into the design of the lens. 

I tested both lenses on a Sony a7RII.

Here’s an image of a small LED flashlight about  25 feet from the DC-Nikkor, with the lens wide open and focused at its minimum distance, which is a bit less than four feet:

There is a very slight radially symmetric falloff that starts about two thirds of the way from the center to thee edge. Longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA) contributes to the color fringing at the edge. Otherwise, the image is altogether unremarkable. 

Leaving the focus at the same place, and dialing in the appropriate defocus control for objects further than the focused distance gives us this:

There is more falloff from the center to the periphery, it is smother, and it starts sooner. All this should produce smother bokeh. 

If we want to be perverse, and twist the defocus control in the wrong direction, we see this:

Now you can see that the falloff as the radial distance increases actually reverses as you get near the edge. That’s a recipe for jittery bokeh.

Wide open, and focused to about the same distance, the STF produces an image like this:

The rolloff in brightness as you get away from the center is much more dramatic. There is still a sudden drop at the very edge of the circle, but the light has fallen off by a whole lot by then. This lens should produce really smooth bokeh. 

Stop the Sony lens down a stop, to T/5.6 (f/4ish) and we get this:

This won’t produce quite a smooth bokeh as the lens does wide open, but it should still be pretty darned smooth. Note that you can see that the aperture is not quite round when the lens is stopped down.

Stopping the Nikkor  down to f/2.8 and setting the defocus control correctly gives us this:

I never did like the way this lens worked at f/2.8, and now I know why. The odd way the blades close in the lower  right part of the image is reduced at f/4, and disappears entirely by f/5.6. 

It is clear that the Nikon’s control of bokeh is much more subtle than the Sony’s. What’s all this mean in the real world? We’ll shoot some pictures next.

 

The Last Word

← Refining the Q&D lens tilt test Bokeh, can you see? — closely defocused images →

Comments

  1. william says

    December 20, 2016 at 3:39 pm

    I assume the Nikon’s green ring is chromatic aberration.

    Reply
    • JimK says

      December 20, 2016 at 8:35 pm

      Yep. LoCA.

      Reply
  2. william says

    December 22, 2016 at 5:59 am

    I thought so.

    I once owned half a dozen contemporary Nikon primes. The LoCA levels drove me nuts. I abandoned Nikon for several reasons. Their lenses’ high levels of LoCa in OOF rendering was one of these.

    Reply
  3. ayo says

    April 18, 2020 at 5:50 am

    “Stop the Sony lens down a stop, to T/5.6 (f/4ish) and we get this:”

    This lens is wide open at T/5.6, I guess you meant T/8 (which would correlate to f/4).

    Reply
    • JimK says

      April 18, 2020 at 3:09 pm

      Wide open, the lens is T/4.5.

      Reply

Trackbacks

  1. Bokeh, can you see? — closely defocused images says:
    December 21, 2016 at 9:41 am

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

    Reply
  2. Bokeh, can you see? — cat’s eyes says:
    December 22, 2016 at 9:58 am

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

    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.