To be clear: I was asking for bokeh - not for DoF. I also took some shots wide open and roughly at distance proportions I guessed from your pictures. I'd say the bokeh of the Sigma was creamier than the one from the canon lens - which doesn't make it a bad lens in my eyes. Especially for reportage, streetphoto it's great to have a very wide open apterure and thanks to mirrorless AF also a precise focussing.
(11-19-2018, 10:30 AM)Klaus Wrote: I also somewhat surprised that we are having a DoF discussion here.
Many of those shots were taken at a fairly substantial distance so the amount of blur is naturally limited.
+1. Me too. The pictures are self-explainable.
Hereunder is the source of discussed document.
https://lenspire.zeiss.com/photo/app/uploads/2018/04/Article-Bokeh-2010-EN.pdf
At my point the text is also self explainable.
You mean "self-explanatory", I think.
11-19-2018, 08:35 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-19-2018, 08:38 PM by you2.)
(11-19-2018, 10:25 AM)obican Wrote: (11-18-2018, 02:58 PM)you2 Wrote: (11-18-2018, 12:29 PM)Klaus Wrote: Well, it is just a 50mm lens so you have to get fairly close for a real shallow DoF.
And yes, it seems darn sharp - at least at 30mp (which is not a lot these days)
There is a zeiss paper that talks about this aspect of lens design. For a given focal length (50, 80, ...) the lens design can play a significant factor in the total blur in foreground/background. The net summary is not all xxmm lens are created equal in this aspect. However, it can be tricky to design a lens to meet different objects (clean bokeh, high bokeh, high resolution). The paper didn't really go into that aspect it just explained in detail why different lenses of the same focal length had different amount of blurring.
DOF only depends on two things, Magnification and Aperture. So, lens design apart from these two factors shouldn't create any difference in DOF. Total background/foreground blur is something different but then even then only depends on the Magnification and Aperture. You can't change sensor size, lens design, amount of glass, number of blades or anything else and expect a difference in the amount of DOF / background blur without touching those two variables.
That was the argument that trigger someone digging out the paper. That optical design can in fact play a role in actual DOF for two lenses with the same focal length and aperture can have different DOF. I believe the details were along the lines that DOF is defined as the area from the point of focus that retain focus and by bending the light at sharper angels you can change this area.
(11-18-2018, 03:41 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: Can you find that paper again? In my (Probably failing in this case) memory the paper seemed to just make the proposition without any actual explanation or substance?
If I find it later I'll follow up with a link. I couldn't find it last night. I know it was at least 10 years ago (not one of the newer papers); and the person presented it (dug out the link) in one of the many DOF arguments. My recollection, which is not exact since I only skimmed the paper many years ago, is that it presented two real lenses and showed how one have a higher degree of bending the rays to change the area of DOF.
Hi Klaus, what are the chances EOS R will become your favorite camera? Size, weight, feel?
(11-20-2018, 07:12 PM)borisbg Wrote: Hi Klaus, what are the chances EOS R will become your favorite camera? Size, weight, feel?
When it morfs into mft
Well. I did actually quite liked it AFTER some customization. Out of the box, I thought WTF.
Whether it could be more than just an interim play depends on the RF 24-105.
That being said - I don't really stick to a system anyway.
The only thing that I can tell for sure is that DSLRs are history for me (but that's hardly news anymore)
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
(11-21-2018, 09:53 AM)Klaus Wrote: Well. I did actually quite liked it AFTER some customization. Out of the box, I thought WTF.
Whether it could be more than just an interim play depends on the RF 24-105.
That being said - I don't really stick to a system anyway.
The only thing that I can tell for sure is that DSLRs are history for me (but that's hardly news anymore)
As a user how do you compare it to olympus/fuji offerings. Not so much image quality but handling/weight/ease of use et all. Do you enjoy using it or do you find it a drag (even if you like the image quality).
11-21-2018, 06:39 PM
(11-20-2018, 08:00 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: (11-20-2018, 07:12 PM)borisbg Wrote: Hi Klaus, what are the chances EOS R will become your favorite camera? Size, weight, feel?
When it morfs into mft
Good joke BC! ..........however, as you've become my "grammatical Nemesis"....I think it's....
morphs!.........
(11-21-2018, 02:41 PM)you2 Wrote: (11-21-2018, 09:53 AM)Klaus Wrote: Well. I did actually quite liked it AFTER some customization. Out of the box, I thought WTF.
Whether it could be more than just an interim play depends on the RF 24-105.
That being said - I don't really stick to a system anyway.
The only thing that I can tell for sure is that DSLRs are history for me (but that's hardly news anymore)
As a user how do you compare it to olympus/fuji offerings. Not so much image quality but handling/weight/ease of use et all. Do you enjoy using it or do you find it a drag (even if you like the image quality).
There's no definite answer to this.
I'd say that in terms of handling, the Panasonic G9 is the best of in the mirrorless group (if you can stand its size) - for me that is.
I also like the Fuji X-T concept - albeit it may be a tad too traditional (like the exp. comp.).
Olympus is Ok but no joyful in my book but it all depends on the specific camera, of course. I don't know them all.
Sony ... hmmmh ... there's too much design over function here in my book.
If you are an EOS DSLR user, you may be surprised how different the EOS R feels although there are, of course, similarities. Whether YOU could enjoy the EOS R depends on how much you can customize it to your preferences. As mentioned I wasn't happy with the defaults but in the end, I was rather surprised how much I liked it. But keep in mind that I'm a simple guy with a preference for a simple setup. If you change details often, I doubt that that the EOS R is for you.
If you come from EOS (which is where I started my journey back in the days), the Pana G9 will feel more familiar.
The question is whether "familiarity" is really an important thing. I, for one, could live with 9 out of 10 cameras out there. A camera is not the thing that gives me joy - which is why this is a lens testing website ;-)
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
|