Samantha with dreamy bokeh

Mitchell

I've never quite seen bokeh like this. Just a grab shot of Samantha after her soccer game today. That's just the grass from the field behind her.

adbsgicom

Sweet. What lens/setting?
Nature's green screen.

Hackbone

What a cutie, I'm very jealous of her hair!! Now that is really cool how you got her hair band to match the bkg!!

Mr. Quiet

That shot made me stop breathing there for a second! Great shot!

divamum

Wow - you're not kiddding! Presumably this was the D700, but which lens?

Samantha adorable as usual - she just eats the camera up!

Zeckson

To have this kind of bokeh, the use of a medium telephoto lens is necessary. It also depends on the distance between the subject-to-lens and background-to-lens. In generally, the following lenses were suspected:

• 50mm f/1.4
• 85mm f/1.8
• 85mm f/1.4
• 85mm f/1.2

If telephoto or super telephoto lenses were used, I am sure the hair would also be in focused. Camera has nothing to do with bokeh smoothness. Its the lens aperture, the number of blades in the lens, the focal length used, the distance from the subject to the camera and the distance from the background to the camera that contributes to the bokeh characteristics.

Qarik

Zeckson wrote:

To have this kind of bokeh, the use of a medium telephoto lens is necessary. It also depends on the distance between the subject-to-lens and background-to-lens. In generally, the following lenses were suspected:

• 50mm f/1.4
• 85mm f/1.8
• 85mm f/1.4
• 85mm f/1.2

If telephoto or super telephoto lenses were used, I am sure the hair would also be in focused. Camera has nothing to do with bokeh smoothness. Its the lens aperture, the number of blades in the lens, the focal length used, the distance from the subject to the camera and the distance from the background to the camera that contributes to the bokeh characteristics.

zeckson..camera sensor size determines the framing of the shot which determines the distance. compare a crop sensor shot and the exact same shot with full frame. full frame will have shallower DOF ie "more" bokeh ..loosely speaking

Zeckson

Qarik wrote:

zeckson..camera sensor size determines the framing of the shot which determines the distance. compare a crop sensor shot and the exact same shot with full frame. full frame will have shallower DOF ie "more" bokeh ..loosely speaking

Agree.

Mitchell

This was taken with my favorite portrait lens... 300mm, f2.8. The shot was at f2.8 on the D700.

Thanks for all the kind words.

divamum

Mitchell wrote:

This was taken with my favorite portrait lens... 300mm, f2.8. The shot was at f2.8 on the D700.

Thanks for all the kind words.

So you were what, half a mile away?! :giggle

Of course, that's one of the reasons we looovveess tele lenses. It's so purty when you nail it ! Do you have incredibly steady hands, or does the lens have come kind of is/vc/whatever the heck Nikon calls it?

Mitchell

divamum wrote:

So you were what, half a mile away?! :giggle

Of course, that's one of the reasons we looovveess tele lenses. It's so purty when you nail it ! Do you have incredibly steady hands, or does the lens have come kind of is/vc/whatever the heck Nikon calls it?

DM, my hands are pretty steady, but you don't really need steady hands or VR (which this lens has) when you shoot at 1/2000!

I handheld this shot, but for long soccer games, I usually use this beast on a monopod with the VR off.

divamum

Mitchell wrote:

DM, my hands are pretty steady, but you don't really need steady hands or VR (which this lens has) when you shoot at 1/2000!

I handheld this shot, but for long soccer games, I usually use this beast on a monopod with the VR off.

Yeah but at 2.8 I'm just seriously impressed you nailed both eyes - man, I SERIOUSLY have to work on my handholding because this is the look I love, but I seldom manage to get that sliver of dof perfectly on the mark. My 200 2.8 is so darned sharp IF I nail the focus point....which I find really hard to do. Do you have a particular technique? I mean at 2.8/300mm it's amazing that you got her eyes and "mask" perfectly sharp

yendikeno

Just beautiful!
I really like this shot. Well done.

Mr. Quiet

divamum wrote:

Yeah but at 2.8 I'm just seriously impressed you nailed both eyes - man, I SERIOUSLY have to work on my handholding because this is the look I love, but I seldom manage to get that sliver of dof perfectly on the mark. My 200 2.8 is so darned sharp IF I nail the focus point....which I find really hard to do. Do you have a particular technique? I mean at 2.8/300mm it's amazing that you got her eyes and "mask" perfectly sharp

With a shutter speed of 2000 that is not hard to do. Even if he used a 400, 2000 would be more then fast enough.

I have to say again though, it is an awesome picture!clap

divamum

Mr. Quiet wrote:

With a shutter speed of 2000 that is not hard to do. Even if he used a 400, 2000 would be more then fast enough.

I have to say again though, it is an awesome picture!clap

It'll be fast enough, but it won't put that focus point in the right place without a very steady hand and eye! I was referring to the accuracy with very shallow DOF rather than motion blur which, of course, at high speeds isn't an issue

WingsOfLovePhoto

Love the dreamy bokeh and love that cute little face Mitchell! That little girl is going to be so happy when she has all these great pictures to look at when she is older.

And Diva.... I have worked hard on nailing the eyes thing. Single focus point directiy between, and when shooting on 2.8 I put the iso up to sometimes 800 dependant on light conditions thus being able to keep my speed up and hand hold the big lens.

Mr. Quiet

divamum wrote:

It'll be fast enough, but it won't put that focus point in the right place without a very steady hand and eye! I was referring to the accuracy with very shallow DOF rather than motion blur which, of course, at high speeds isn't an issue

Well, in that case I guess I should say that....you are right!

cabbey

:jawdrop Awesome shot. And cute as a button.