Samples below - 1x RF35/1.8, some more RF50/1.8 which seems more prone to busy bokeh. Is this the price to pay for having quite good image sharpness even wide-open, combined with affordable price and moderate weight/size? For the RF35, this seems most obvious at focussing distances around 3m, the the RF50 there seem to be more "sour spots". It is too early for me to give an opinion. Thanks Busy reading about what you said but this gives a good impression. With the pencil held vertically in the foreground, the bokeh show approximately vertical stripes. With this disclaimer, let me ask my question:īoth f/1.8 lenses - the RF35/1.8 and RF50/1.8 give me busy bokeh quite often. With the pencil held horizontally in the foreground, the background bokeh show approximately horizontal stripes. I like both lenses, and I do not think they are terrible at all. English: Examples of the photographic technique bokeh, 'quality of blur'. PS: even the very slow RF 24–105MM F4-7.1 IS STM will give you some sort of "bokeh" by choosing the appropriate distance to subject/aperture/focal distance combination. The result should be a much more accentuated out of focus (bokeh) effect. To increase the "bokeh effect" you should get "closer to subject" and say, focus on a subject at around 1m (or less), while keeping the background elements in a distance and, of course, use a rather open aperture. At this focusing distance, the background is just "out of focus" (slightly). "Bokeh" (out of focus area) is mainly given by the interaction of 4 factors :ġ.) Sensor size (in your case 24x36, so FF) -Ģ.) Aperture (your case F1.8 or 2.8 for the last shot)ģ.) Focal distance (35mm tends naturally to offer more DOF/less bokeh than the 50mm)Ĥ.) Distance to subject : in your case the distance to subject is rather high (3m to 7m) for the focal length you chose (35 or 50 mm). The Meyer Optik Trioplan 100mm 2.8 is so sought after for its soap bubble effect that good examples now fetch very high prices. No small winged thing survives a play session with my Beagle girl.īoth lenses are fain and the bokeh looks all right for the given focal lenses - For example, old Russian lenses like the Helios 44-2, which can be purchased for a fraction of the cost of modern lenses is famous for its swirley bokeh. And then, while they were laying stunned on the floor, I'd let my little girl Beagle play with them. If they tried to do the same at 50mm (I have the Sigma Art now), I'd swat them with the battery-powered electrocution bat I use for annoying insects. From what I've seen the RF 50 f/1.8 isn't especially worse than it's predecessors, but to me that's not high praise.īottom line: if the lens fairies magically swapped my EF 35 IS USM for your RF 35 in the middle of the night, I'd be OK with it. I've gone through most of Canon's budget 50mm offerings and I haven't been keen on the bokeh that any of them routinely deliver. From what I've seen, I don't think the budget RF 35 has any gross weak spots like that. Also the color/s, or how busy the background is can make for bad bokeh as well. ![]() Right now I've got the EF 35 f/2 IS USM and I can tell you that there are situations where that lens really does deliver an objectionable result, to the extent that I use selective PP techniques to mitigate it. I dont know that Ive got any bad examples. It's easy to get some pretty ugly backgrounds at 35mm if you work at it, but the RF f/1.8 looks OK to me given it's place in the market, and your 35mm example doesn't demonstrate objectionable bokeh to my eyes. In Europe at Wex UK, Technikdirekt and Amazon.None of the comparisons I've seen lead me to believe that the RF 35 f/1.8 is particularly bad when it comes to bokeh. In USA/Canada at Amazon, Adorama, Bhphoto, GetOlympus and GetOlympus Canada. Obviously the Olympus has the bigger range (and as such also a bigger size/weight) and is somewhat sharper whereas the Panasonic has clearly the better bokeh plus an image stabilizer. Olympus M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO is directly competing with Panasonic’s Lumix G X 35-100mm f/2.8 Power OIS. One the downside, the quality of the bokeh (out-of-focus blur) can be disappointing – not in all scenes but busy backgrounds are clearly not the lens’ best friends. It is very sharp across the focal length range including some greatness in the middle portion. For example, the Nikon 85mm f/1.4D lens produces exceptionally good-looking bokeh, while the Nikon 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G DX lens produces poor bokeh at the same focal length and aperture all due to differences in optical designs of both lenses. On the positive side, it is very good if not excellent in the primary image quality metrics. ![]() The Olympus M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO is, mostly, a highly desirable lens – except for one bug. Photozone posted the full Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO lens review and writes:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |