The Bokeh Monster(s)

cletus · April 15, 2004

Anyone have either one of these beauties?

105mm f2/DC Nikkor
135mm f2/DC Nikkor

I've always had an interest is these lenses, but I've never played around with them. I was curious if anyone had any comments about them.

Andy · April 15, 2004

naw but
i've been very impressed with the bokeh from my

canon 50mm f/1.4
and
canon 70-200L f/2.8 (i.s.)

it's really cool. some shots posting soon :andy

HarveyMushman · April 15, 2004

Bokeh: Define, please.

cletus · April 15, 2004

HarveyMushman wrote:

Bokeh: Define, please.

From kenrockwell.com

Bokeh is simply a way to describe how out-of-focus points of light are rendered. It describes the appearance or "feel" of out-of-focus backgrounds and foregrounds. Differing amounts of spherical aberration alter how lenses render out-of-focus points of light, and thus their bokeh. The word "bokeh" comes from Japanese.

DoctorIt · April 15, 2004

Now, whats a bokeh monster?
Is that like a really blurry dragon or something?

Those lenses would be fun to play with!

pathfinder · April 15, 2004

cletus wrote:

Anyone have either one of these beauties?

105mm f2/DC Nikkor
135mm f2/DC Nikkor

I've always had an interest is these lenses, but I've never played around with them. I was curious if anyone had any comments about them.

Cannons 85 f1.2 and 135f2.0 are probably similar I suspect. You really have to have a specific need for these lenses since they are both encompassed in the very excellent 70-200f2.8 IS from Canon. The 85f1.2 is big, heavy and expensive - I chose the 85f1.8 for my needs if I need a faster portrait lens.

The 50 f1.4 certainly does have nice bokeh also.

wxwax · April 15, 2004

Pshaw.

You want real bokeh and narrow depth of field, check out the lenses

for sale here.

wxwax · April 15, 2004

pathfinder wrote:

Cannons 85 f1.2 and 135f2.0 are probably similar I suspect. You really have to have a specific need for these lenses since they are both encompassed in the very excellent 70-200f2.8 IS from Canon. The 85f1.2 is big, heavy and expensive - I chose the 85f1.8 for my needs if I need a faster portrait lens.

The 50 f1.4 certainly does have nice bokeh also.

I would have thought its low light capability would be the deciding factor. I could have used it this weekend, trying to shoot a club act in natural light.

cletus · April 15, 2004

I think some of you Canon boys have missed the point of these two lenses!

The key is the "DC" in the lens names. These are the Nikon Defocus Control lenses. The DC lenses allow you to control the ammount of foreground and background blur independent of the aperture. While the Defocus Control can't increase the depth of field, it can allow you to fine tune it.

pathfinder · April 15, 2004

cletus wrote:

I think some of you Canon boys have missed the point of these two lenses!

The key is the "DC" in the lens names. These are the Nikon Defocus Control lenses. The DC lenses allow you to control the ammount of foreground and background blur independent of the aperture. While the Defocus Control can't increase the depth of field, it can allow you to fine tune it.

It seems I am in good company, Cletus, and I did not appreciate the DC designation as you say. I would love to see some images from these optics that let them strut their stuff.

cmr164 · April 16, 2004

cletus wrote:

I think some of you Canon boys have missed the point of these two lenses!

The key is the "DC" in the lens names. These are the Nikon Defocus Control lenses. The DC lenses allow you to control the ammount of foreground and background blur independent of the aperture. While the Defocus Control can't increase the depth of field, it can allow you to fine tune it.

Actually DC does not really affect DoF at all. What it does is vary the sperical aberration of the lens to change the character of near and far bokeh. In theory allowing the shooter to choose better bokeh depending on the distance of the out of focus elements in relation to the in focus areas. Sounds like a nice feature of limited everyday use.

For folks who were wondering about the Canon 85mm f1.2 the following shots show some of the character of the OOF areas.

As usual, click the image for the full size

ISO Speed: 400
Aperture: f1.2
Shutter: 1/90
Focal Length (mm): 85

ISO Speed: 200
Aperture: f6.7
Shutter: 1/2000
Focal Length (mm): 85

pathfinder · April 16, 2004

cmr164 wrote:

Actually DC does not really affect DoF at all. What it does is vary the sperical aberration of the lens to change the character of near and far bokeh. In theory allowing the shooter to choose better bokeh depending on the distance of the out of focus elements in relation to the in focus areas. Sounds like a nice feature of limited everyday use.

For folks who were wondering about the Canon 85mm f1.2 the following shots show some of the character of the OOF areas.

As usual, click the image for the full size

ISO Speed: 400
Aperture: f1.2
Shutter: 1/90
Focal Length (mm): 85

ISO Speed: 200
Aperture: f6.7
Shutter: 1/2000
Focal Length (mm): 85

Is that 85f1.2 yours cmr? You lucky devil!

cmr164 · April 16, 2004

pathfinder wrote:

Is that 85f1.2 yours cmr? You lucky devil!

Yes it is. But let me add that it is heavy as sin, has a slow focus and a loud focus motor. Course I do love the lens! The f1.2 gets pictures that are just not there otherwise.

pathfinder · April 16, 2004

cmr164 wrote:

Yes it is. But let me add that it is heavy as sin, has a slow focus and a loud focus motor. Course I do love the lens! The f1.2 gets pictures that are just not there otherwise.

2.3 pounds - but it is cheap, right?? Just kidding - it is a lovely lens, I was just too cheap and bought the f1.8 instead. But for low light, f1.2 rules! Please, show us some more of your images with that f1.2 optic.

patch29 · April 17, 2004

Canon makes a 135mm softfocus lens. I think it is very similar to the Nikon DC's. I never owned one or really try one. I have always been happy with the results of my fast lenses.

Telephoto lens with a softfocus feature. It can give razor-sharp snapshots as well as softfocus shots that do not look blurry. You have a choice of two softfocus settings. Even for softfocus shots, focusing with AF is quick and accurate.

cmr164 · April 17, 2004

pathfinder wrote:

2.3 pounds - but it is cheap, right?? Just kidding - it is a lovely lens, I was just too cheap and bought the f1.8 instead. But for low light, f1.2 rules! Please, show us some more of your images with that f1.2 optic.

Quite a few of the images I have posted here already were done with the 85 f1.2 The only real complaint I have is that this is one of the few lenses where I am bothered by the dslr 1.6 multiplier. When I buy my next dslr that problem will go away. (maybe the 14mp Kodak Pro-SLR/c)

Other pics previously posted here from that lens:

http://www.iisc.com/dgrin/1215551nightlines.jpg
http://www.iisc.com/dgrin/BostonlookingNorth01apr01.jpg
http://www.iisc.com/dgrin/TurkishDancer04.jpg
http://www.iisc.com/dgrin/benchSnow2873.jpg
http://www.iisc.com/dgrin/bermuda01oct303seanight.jpg
http://www.iisc.com/dgrin/rome00dec227nightftn.jpg
http://www.iisc.com/dgrin/twigSnow2864.jpg

patch29 · April 17, 2004

cmr164 wrote:

Quite a few of the images I have posted here already were done with the 85 f1.2 The only real complaint I have is that this is one of the few lenses where I am bothered by the dslr 1.6 multiplier. When I buy my next dslr that problem will go away. (maybe the 14mp Kodak Pro-SLR/c)

Time to start looking for a 50/1.0. That would probably work better with the multiplier. It too suffers from slow focusing. I picked up a nice one last year. I knew they would be hard to find so I grabbed it when it came up. I would love to have the 85/1.2 (now only the 1.8, which works well) and the 200/1.8, very hard to find and still pricey. If they came out with one of those with the newer AF and IS it would be a winner. It is sad to see Canon abandoning the super fast glass that they make, hopefully it will return some day, possible with the expanding of the TSE line of lens.

We can dream, right?

cmr164 · April 17, 2004

patch29 wrote:

Time to start looking for a 50/1.0. That would probably work better with the multiplier. It too suffers from slow focusing. I picked up a nice one last year. I knew they would be hard to find so I grabbed it when it came up. I would love to have the 85/1.2 (now only the 1.8, which works well) and the 200/1.8, very hard to find and still pricey. If they came out with one of those with the newer AF and IS it would be a winner. It is sad to see Canon abandoning the super fast glass that they make, hopefully it will return some day, possible with the expanding of the TSE line of lens. We can dream, right?

Maybe...

I am thinking of selling the 100-400L and the 17-35L and picking up
a 14mm 2.8L, a 24 1.4L, 351.4L the 70-200 2.8 IS, and a 400 4.0 DO to suplement the 85mm and the 50mm.... course some money first would help.

patch29 · April 17, 2004

cmr164 wrote:

Maybe...

I am thinking of selling the 100-400L and the 17-35L and picking up
a 14mm 2.8L, a 24 1.4L, 351.4L the 70-200 2.8 IS, and a 400 4.0 DO to suplement the 85mm and the 50mm.... course some money first would help.

I have a very long wish list too. Someday it might get filled, the lenses keep getting more expensive that I want.

The Bokeh Monster(s)

Comments