She says 1.4 bohka "is the best". ----

[vpwphoto]

My intern showed me photos she made with a 50mm f1.8.... then she says 1.4 bohka "is the best, but I can't afford a 1.4".

 

[Klainmeister]

...wait till she sees 1.2!

Ugh, I am so sick of bokeh discussions

 

[edcculus]

You aren't paying her enough!

 

[vpwphoto]

She thinks I'm lame with using f5.6... meh..

 

[heterolysis]

I thought it was pretty cool when I first got a f1.8 lens. Then I soon realized that what I thought was in focus in my viewfinder wasn't always as in focus on the negative... and that you start taking pictures that are mostly bokeh, which is somewhat silly. It was then clear why all of my Zeiss lenses maxed out at f2.8 or f4...

 

[E. von Hoegh]

My intern showed me photos she made with a 50mm f1.8.... then she says 1.4 bohka "is the best, but I can't afford a 1.4".

Sounds like she needs a Holga.

Or maybe I'll design and build a special lens, I have a lot of glass blanks made by Anchor Hocking.

 

[removed account4]

hopefully she doesn't have a leica, or a nocktahlux might have been in her future !

 

[Klainmeister]

Or how about the Canon 0.95!

 

[MaximusM3]

Remind her that fast lenses (for 35mm) were originally developed to allow more light in when there was little, without resorting to loooong exposures, especially handheld. It is only recently, after Leica figured out that there was a huge market in catering to fools who believe that a lens should ALWAYS be used WIDE OPEN, even in the middle of the day, just because it looks cool with all that "bokeh" and 3D pop (God I hate that term), even though the resulting images are usually total shit, that fast lenses have been selling like hot cakes.

 

[Ed Bray]

This was shot at f16, you don't always need fast lenses to get Bokeh this is a straight copy of the negative.


Lucus 2nd 5x7 by Ed Bray, on Flickr

 

[vpwphoto]

She's a Canon 5d shooter... her dad must have bought it for her so she could be a photographer.

 

[cliveh]

Remind her that fast lenses were originally developed to allow more light in when there was little, without resorting to loooong exposures, especially handheld. It is only recently, after Leica figured out that there was a huge market in catering to fools who believe that a lens should ALWAYS be used WIDE OPEN, even in the middle of the day, just because it looks cool with all that "bokeh" and 3D pop (God I hate that term), even though the resulting images are usually total shit, that fast lenses have been selling like hot cakes.

Max, with due respect I don't believe that most Leica users (me included) shoot at full aperture, or that Leitz took this into consideration within their marketing plans.

 

[benjiboy]

Remind her that fast lenses (for 35mm) were originally developed to allow more light in when there was little, without resorting to loooong exposures, especially handheld. It is only recently, after Leica figured out that there was a huge market in catering to fools who believe that a lens should ALWAYS be used WIDE OPEN, even in the middle of the day, just because it looks cool with all that "bokeh" and 3D pop (God I hate that term), even though the resulting images are usually total shit, that fast lenses have been selling like hot cakes.

+1

 

[MattKing]

At least she isn't asking: "Can we fix it in post?"

 

[MaximusM3]

Clive, then you must be out of touch I am obviously not referring to you, or myself for that matter, but most digital shooters, (which make up the vast majority of Leica buyers these days) buy fast lenses to shoot them wide open all the time. If you care to check most sharing sites, you will see what I mean. I'm telling you, it's epidemic

Just ask ANYONE who owns the new Noctilux .95 ($11,000) and ask them why they bought it. I bet you the $11,000 that the answer is not because they can't shoot at ungodly speeds when there is no light, but because they like to put a ND10 in front of it and shoot it at high noon in full sun at .95 to get that "bokah"

 

[removed account4]

Clive, then you must be out of touch I am obviously not referring to you, or myself for that matter, but most digital shooters, (which make up the vast majority of Leica buyers these days) buy fast lenses to shoot them wide open all the time. If you care to check most sharing sites, you will see what I mean. I'm telling you, it's epidemic

Just ask ANYONE who owns the new Noctilux .95 ($11,000) and ask them why they bought it. I bet you the $11,000 that the answer is not because they can't shoot at ungodly speeds when there is no light, but because they like to put a ND10 in front of it and shoot it at high noon in full sun at .95 to get that "bokah"

LOL
just go to flickr and search welder's goggles filter

but the bookqua is so nice at .95!

 

[cliveh]

Clive, then you must be out of touch I am obviously not referring to you, or myself for that matter, but most digital shooters, (which make up the vast majority of Leica buyers these days) buy fast lenses to shoot them wide open all the time. If you care to check most sharing sites, you will see what I mean. I'm telling you, it's epidemic

Just ask ANYONE who owns the new Noctilux .95 ($11,000) and ask them why they bought it. I bet you the $11,000 that the answer is not because they can't shoot at ungodly speeds when there is no light, but because they like to put a ND10 in front of it and shoot it at high noon in full sun at .95 to get that "bokah"

Max, you could be correct, as I did not think about digital shooters. I am still finding it difficult to equate digital technology in relation to Leica which is a camera system that goes back so many years.

 

[LiamG]

Unbelivers- the best bohkens can only be achieved by becoming one with the zero, with the asymptotic lens, the F/0. Believe.

 

[MaximusM3]

Max, you could be correct, as I did not think about digital shooters. I am still finding it difficult to equate digital technology in relation to Leica which is a camera system that goes back so many years.

Clive,

Trust me, I have the same issue. The reality is that for Leica to survive in this brave new world, they have to play the game very differently. Having said that, I've fallen for the same fast lens gimmicks a few years back, but I am happy to say that I have grown a bit as a photographer. I think many go through it, and eventually realize that aperture should be at the service of the image, vision and mostly about necessity (for 35mm anyway).

 

[MaximusM3]

LOL
just go to flickr and search welder's goggles filter

but the bookqua is so nice at .95!

Yeah!

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

Max aperture all the way, all the time folks are interesting breed... Its really odd to see their group photos of people, where only one or two are in focus and the rest out of focus because they are on a different focus plane just a foot behind or in front of the others that are in focus, or the use of crazy shutter speeds like 1/4000 of a second outdoors in every shot so they can use that aperture. I wish they would realize that they dont need to spend all that dough and just use a lens of a longer focal length to get some of that bokeh they want.

 

[cjbecker]

The only reason to have a fast lens is to let more light in. At least that's the way I see it. I must be a different breed as I'm 22

 

[Helinophoto]

You should explain that she is confusing the terms.
"Bokeh" (not 'Bohka' btw), refers to the quality of out of focus objects and highlights.

What I think she means, is "DOF", and that she prefer very narrow depth of field.

Although, if she is indeed a Canon-shooter, the two 50's cannot be shot wide-open really, as they (at least the f1.4) become both soft and rather strange at those apertures (halo-effects on in-focus objects and also on objects that are out of focus).

Nothing wrong with playing with narrow depth of field (or even tilt-shift lenses with narrow depth of field as well), this is a creative decision.
- Who decided that you have to shoot at f22 to be a "proper photographer"?

I use whatever aperture that suit the situation, but for people in an environment, narrow depth of field can be really nice, you can even use the shapes in the "Bokeh" to add to your composition, as well as eliminate distracting elements in the background more effectively.

I think you are all a bit patronizing here, why does she deserve to be laughed of, just because she got a creative preference and confuse the terms a bit?

 

[Jammoh]

Shooting wide open, blurred backgrounds with main subjects often out of focus, etc., has long encroached beyond the realm of still photography, at least here in Germany.

As a DOP myself, I sometimes have discussions with directors about that "look" that has become so trendy amongst the younger generation of camera persons with gadgets like the 5d with fast lenses, who say things to me like "it does not matter if even the main subject is sometimes out of focus, it adds to the aesthetics of THAT look"!!

Of course it looks different, I can even understand the allure of Bokeh, but there has to be a balance between "look" and content. It has to make sense.

 

[Felinik]

I think it's cute, good that you have observed her odd presumptions and can help her to better knowing..