[PuxaVida]

[quote name='Lomskij' timestamp='1299146292' post='6462']

I'd rather say that Nikon fans are simply better behaving here <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[/quote]



Although I don't believe in the idea of separation into brand-parties, I have to agree with that...

[PuxaVida]

[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1299116672' post='6454']

...

3. I'm not a "fanboy"... I prefer "fan-warlord". The red rings around my lenses symbolise the fearlessness I have even if it means I'm going to be beheaded for speaking the truth <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

...

[/quote]



LOL.... I thought the red rings were symbolising the bloodshed* along the path you've chosen...<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' />...



*) see [url="http://forum.photozone.de/index.php?/topic/685-d700-successor/page__pid__5978#entry5978"]another nice opening round[/url] from GTW

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='Claus' timestamp='1299072509' post='6436']

It's always very funny with the two guys (genotypewriter and brightcolors) here in this forum.



Both are known as die-hard-Canon-fanboys (not only here but also in the dpreview forum). So my advice is to take their assumptions, their statements (Canon has generally a better bokeh as Nikon... LOL!!! what a BS) and hints always with a grain of salt.



And pay attention: they do this often in a very subtly way.

[/quote]

You have eyes, don't you? Simple enough to verify that in general Canon lenses have smoother bokeh than Nikon lenses.



Flickr

Pixel-peeper.



Being right does not make one a die-hard-Canon-fanboy. Making everything positive someone says about certain aspects Canon lenses or anything negative someone says about certain aspects of Nikon lenses into "die-hard-Canon-fanboy"-stuff only points to one thing: You must be a die-hard-Nikon-fanboy.



If you do not know how to judge bokeh, fine. Just keep your opinion about me to yourself.



If you happen to have another opinion about a certain lens, then just share your opinion with what you base your opinion on. Better than your lame flaming.

[mst]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1299181915' post='6481']

You have eyes, don't you? Simple enough to verify that in general Canon lenses have smoother bokeh than Nikon lenses.

[/quote]



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



-- Markus

[Guest]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1299181915' post='6481']

You have eyes, don't you? Simple enough to verify that in general Canon lenses have smoother bokeh than Nikon lenses.



Flickr

Pixel-peeper.



Being right does not make one a die-hard-Canon-fanboy. Making everything positive someone says about certain aspects Canon lenses or anything negative someone says about certain aspects of Nikon lenses into "die-hard-Canon-fanboy"-stuff only points to one thing: You must be a die-hard-Nikon-fanboy.



If you do not know how to judge bokeh, fine. Just keep your opinion about me to yourself.

[/quote]



As I said... a (very) die-hard-Canon fanboy.

And obviously a contemporary without any sense of humour. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':o' />



And please: don't try to deny my competence. That will lead to nothing. You'll stay a die-hard-Canon-fanboy <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

But... don't worry...there are worse things in life than this.

[Brightcolours]

[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]

Yes, sure. If you happen to disagree on certain lenses, concerning bokeh, then just share your opinion and with some evidence of what you base it on.



Lenses of which I have said in the past the the Canon has smoother bokeh:

Canon 85mm f1.2 L IS USM II, compared to Nikon 85mm f1.4 D + G.

Canon 200mm f2 L IS USM, compared to Nikon 200mm f2 VR (I + II).

Canon 35mm f2, compared to Nikon 35mm AF-S f1.8 DX.



Especially from you I would expect more than just eye-rolling joining the flaming club..



I will gladly post samples again, to show what I base my opinion on. But then I expect a grown up debate about it, not the same name calling and flaming. A good debate is always welcome.

[mst]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1299184065' post='6484']

Yes, sure. If you happen to disagree on certain lenses, concerning bokeh, then just share your opinion and with some evidence of what you base it on.

[/quote]



Easy:







Wouldn't you call it smooth?



-- Markus

[Brightcolours]

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

Easy:







Wouldn't you call it smooth?



-- Markus

[/quote]

No, it is very un-smooth. Would you call that smooth?? We see a very busy background, lots if double "images/lines" creating a very restless bokeh.



Here is a simple(istic?) explanation about smooth foreground bokeh vs smooth background bokeh, and undesirable nisen bokeh:

http://www.sony.ca/html/uf/microsite/Capturing_Depth_Minisite/2.html



It is a bit difficult to find images that one can compare your image with in a reasonable way (busy background and similar distance to subject), but trying, here are a few from the Canon:



http://www.flickr.com/photos/lostsoul/5240914452/sizes/l/in/pool-1193071@N20/



http://daveennis.zenfolio.com/img/v4/p73204589-4.jpg



http://recordproduction.smugmug.com/photos/181092665-L.jpg



http://recordproduction.smugmug.com/photos/181851966-L.jpg



http://mrs-h.smugmug.com/photos/180769455-O.jpg



http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_0502.jpg



Of course, the canon is not bokeh king either, some portrait lenses do a lot better still... like the Canon 135mm f2 and especially the Sony 135mm STF. And there are some Leica lenses that are really bokeh-licious too.



But in all fairness, the image you posted... no, one can not describe the background bokeh there as being smooth. Btw, look at the foreground bokeh of the image you posted. A lot smoother. Seems a perfect example of a lens that has nisen background bokeh,

[mst]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1299186824' post='6487']

But in all fairness, the image you posted... no, one can not describe the background bokeh there as being smooth.

[/quote]



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

[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.