Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/04/28

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] sharpness & optical quality
From: Larry Kopitnik <kopitnil@marketingcomm.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 14:58:55 -0500

>>>>>>>>>>
Now bokeh, which is just a new word for the older concept of
'rendition of unsharpness areas' is a very imprecise notion and is
based on perception and personal judgment and appreciation. The
sharpness impression is also imprecise and based on perception etc.
<<<<<<<<<<

Well, so is like or dislike of the resulting photograph. Which makes 
the concepts of "bokeh" and "sharpness" relevant to the evaluation of 
the photograph a lens produces. They may or may not be rigorously 
defined concepts used or not used in the current optical design 
theory. Of that, I could not care less. What I care about is the 
quality and aestheic appreciation of the photograph that I get when I 
use a particular lens on a particular camera body with a particular 
film in a particular kind of light. And in that photograph, the 
perception of sharpness, of tonal gradations, of the quality of 
unsharp areas, along with artistic composition, all combine to 
generate a reaction that it the photo a good photograph or a poor 
photograph or a photograph which elicits an indifference. And for me, 
nothing in photography takes precedence over that.

Case in point: The National Geographic photo of an Afghan refugee 
girl, staring out with haunting green eyes, was taken with a Nikon FE 
and 105 mm f/2.5 Nikkor lens. It's an image as memorable and as 
perfect as any ever burned into my mind. Every time I see it 
reprinted, it stops me for a prolonged look. Would that 105 f/2.5 
Nikkor test as well as a 90 mm APO ASPH? I seriously doubt it. Would 
that image be any better -- better as in evoking a more impassioned 
reaction, or being more greatly appreciated -- if taken today with a 
90 mm APO ASPH, a lens no doubt designed to the best of current 
optical theory? Not that I can conceive.

I suppose, as someone trained as an artist, I place the value of 
aestheic response over scientific theory. In evaluation of 
photography and art, that is a valid approach.

Larry