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] Bokeh - proven myth ?
From: Henning Wulff <henningw@archiphoto.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 11:58:11 -0800
References: <B8589315.1028B%alexpix@worldnet.att.net>

At 10:36 AM -0500 1/2/02, Steven Alexander wrote:

>My question after 4 decades of professional shooting 2 of them in Washington
>D.C., shooting side by side with many of those folks mentioned by Sal, is
>there really any discernible difference between any 180mm lens wide open
>focused at 7 feet rendering of the OOF background?  This question applies to
>any focal length used in a like manner.

As an extreme example, consider the 500/4.5 Zeiss Mirotar and the 
500/4 Nikkor. The OOF areas are distinctly different, even though 
both are fine lenses. The way OOF areas are imaged depends on 
strictly geometric edge effects like the annular shape of the 
entrance pupil of the mirror lenses and on diaphragm shapes, and also 
on the optical transfer function of the lens. This is proveable and 
measurable. Whether it makes any difference whatsoever to your 
pictures is up to you, and becomes completely subjective. As Frank F. 
explained quite well, photojournalism is an area of photography that 
by its very nature would not worry much about the OOF areas, whereas 
more contemplative portraiture might depend a lot on them. To each 
his own; there is not right way, but there are differences in the way 
lenses treat OOF areas, and they are demonstrable.

- -- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from Steven Alexander <alexpix@worldnet.att.net> (Re: [Leica] Bokeh - proven myth ?)