Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/01/02

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Bokeh - proven myth ?
From: gb@murphy.bofh.ms (Georg Bauer)
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:51:16 GMT

In article <20020102032344.22763.qmail@web14005.mail.yahoo.com>,
	Henry Ting <henryting10@yahoo.com> writes:
> physics". Where I'm standing, existentialism is what
> exist, proven and controlled after my experiment. Not
> at all quacky, don't you think ?

Yeah. You sample two lenses and conclude your utter wisdom. Laughable.

Sorry, but to really comprehend the complex thematics of optics, you
for example should try out a Hektor with a 18-blade-diaphragm against
some of those el-cheapo 4 or 5-blade-diaphragm lenses. _Then_ you will
see that much more than just the focal-length is important to
out-of-focus areas. The complete lense-design comes into play, as the
bending of the light falling onto the film plane is what makes
different out-of-focus rendering.

It's not a leica myth, it's actually not a myth at all, it's just plain
and stupid optics. Oh, and it is not connected to Leica at all, it's
just that Leica-photog's tend to notice it more, since many of them
shoot with full opened or almost full opened aperture.

There is nothing funny about seeing no big difference between high-end
Nikon lenses and Leica lenses. It's not as if Nikon produces just
garbage ...

Oh, another nice subject for testing would be to run a zoom lense
against a prime lense. Should give you additional input for drawing
conclusions.

bye, Georg


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html