[mst]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1299187858' post='6489']

So, play fair and give real Nikon/Canon examples from same distance and in ways comparable image content.

[/quote]



How could I? I don't own any digital Canon gear anymore.



Our bokeh test scene might give you a rough idea, but of course the shots aren't identical in different reviews ... there are few hundred kilometers between Klaus' and my home.



-- Markus

[Guest]

I would not; but the question is can another lens do better ? I was always happy with the zeiss 85f1.4 c/y but it was hardly bokeh king. The 100f2 was significantly better for some reason it never caught my fancy (maybe too sharp?). Anyways these games are always slippery slopes (maybe I should shut up and read what is written above).



[quote name='mst' timestamp='1299185002' post='6486']

Easy:







Wouldn't you call it smooth?



-- Markus

[/quote]

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1299187147' post='6488']

Yep. Fully agree.



Oh, btw: that image was shot with a 85L, wide open.



Thanks for stepping into that trap, BC. I know it was mean, and I'm sorry, but what I wanted to show is: you can find bad bokeh samples for any lens.



Your claim, that one brand in general has smoother bokeh than another is, sorry, nonsense (I've been shooting both systems long enough to know). You cannot even compare bokeh of two different lenses the way you want to unless you shoot the exact same shot with those two lenses.



With the images available out there, you can find samples to "prove" anything.



-- Markus

[/quote]

So, play fair and give real Nikon/Canon examples from same distance and in ways comparable image content.



Same exercise for the Nikon 85mm f1.4:

Impossible, I tried to find comparable images (both in distance (size of people in frame) and busy background. but exactly found... none. Bummer.



Trying to find real comparisons, with the same scene, seems almost impossible, so it remains subjective impressions.



Photographer who uses both:

http://jpgmag.com/stories/16734



Bit useless comparsion where the bokeh is not really judgeable due to nothing going on in either detail or transitions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adQHzNfvzFM



Most useless comparison ever:

http://shashinki.com/blog/2007/06/24/nikon-af-85mm-f14d-versus-canon-ef-85mm-f12-usm-l-ii/



Or the Nikon 85mm f1.4 G and Canon 85mm f1.8:

http://neilvn.com/tangents/2010/10/26/bokeh-a-few-notes/



50 bokeh rankings by Mike Johnson (no verifiable samples, so has to be viewed as purely subjective):

http://www.lulu.com/items/volume_1/129000/129691/4/print/bokehrankings5.pdf



Whether you agree with me or not... I think the Samyang 85mm f1.4 seems to beat them all (Canon 85mm f1.2 L II, Nikon 85mm f1.4 G/D, Sigma 85mm f1.4) in terms of bokeh smoothness.



http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/chloe_drum.jpg

[genotypewriter]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1299193919' post='6492']

I think the Samyang 85mm f1.4 seems to beat them all (Canon 85mm f1.2 L II, Nikon 85mm f1.4 G/D, Sigma 85mm f1.4) in terms of bokeh smoothness.

[/quote]

Just saying but I don't think we're giving enough credit for the achievement that is an autofocus f/1.2 lens. Wouldn't it be like saying "sure, the Lambo's great but the Corolla is what's relaxing to drive"? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



GTW

[Guest]

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1299183159' post='6482']

Yeah, sure ... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



-- Markus

[/quote]



Thanks for that, Markus. I already thought I was the only one upset by such statements... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[Guest]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1299187858' post='6489']

So, play fair and give real Nikon/Canon examples from same distance and in ways comparable image content.

[/quote]



You haven't been doing that either. So why demand it from somebody else?

[Martin_MM]

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1299187147' post='6488']

Yep. Fully agree.



Oh, btw: that image was shot with a 85L, wide open.



Thanks for stepping into that trap, BC.

[/quote]





LOL, <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> - THAT was a really nice one! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



You´ve made a complete idiot out of yourself, Brightcolors, LOL <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[Guest]

[quote name='BG_Home' timestamp='1299224638' post='6499']

Thanks for that, Markus. I already thought I was the only one upset by such statements... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[/quote]

I second that. What it proves is just that half of bokeh's appeal is personal perception - that's why there are those beliefs about the "special character" of Zeiss / Leica / Canon / insert your favourite here / etc lenses that non believers simply don't get.



I've seen examples where underdogs clearly outperformed so called "bokeh kings" in some situations, so what? Some lenses show butter smooth transitions but fail miserably on highlights (onion look), etc.



Also I find the usage of blanket statements funny as well. I can generate some as well: Nikon generally has better ergonomics than Canon. White lenses generally look ugly. Oranges generally taste better than apples. Here.

[Guest]

By the way, I was looking for a lens to fit my Nikon aesthetically (matching that red bit on the grip basically) and I finally found it:







As Canon's colour scheme is even worse (red ring on a lens and blue markings on a camera, yuck), it's 1:0 to Nikon here.

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='Lomskij' timestamp='1299232243' post='6504']

I second that. What it proves is just that half of bokeh's appeal is personal perception - that's why there are those beliefs about the "special character" of Zeiss / Leica / Canon / insert your favourite here / etc lenses that non believers simply don't get.



I've seen examples where underdogs clearly outperformed so called "bokeh kings" in some situations, so what? Some lenses show butter smooth transitions but fail miserably on highlights (onion look), etc.



Also I find the usage of blanket statements funny as well. I can generate some as well: Nikon generally has better ergonomics than Canon. White lenses generally look ugly. Oranges generally taste better than apples. Here.

[/quote]

In general, is not a blanket statement. Blanket statement: Canon lenses have better bokeh than the equivalent Nikon lenses. In general makes clear that:

a. It is a generalization

b. There are or may be exceptions.



Anyway, here still some of the in no way smooth or creamy bokeh of the Nikon AF 85mm f1.4 D. Called by some the Nikon "cream-machine".



http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2711/4495313825_d1f316c408_b.jpg



And Nikon Af-S 85mm f1.4 G, "cream-machine 2.0".



http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5287/5226296368_f1b215fd89_b.jpg



http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5169/5208737731_f27aeaabba_b.jpg





I have found no image (with anything in the background) of either lens that makes one think "what a creamy, peaceful and effortless bokeh feel".



Not impressed by the bokeh of the 105mm VR macro either, nor of the 50mm f1.4 or the 35mm f1.8 DX.

My Nikkor 85mm f1.8 (pre Ai-S) and 55mm f3.5 micro seemed to behave a lot better, frankly.