Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,856   Posts: 1,583,025   Online: 924
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Alamo City, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,872
    Drew... Are you sure it's Nikon's version of the Tessar formula that bothers you or is it the 5 or 7 blade apertures in those newer shutters?

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,802
    These are really two different issues. The roundness of the aperture determines the shape of the out-of-focus highlights etc. The characteristics of background lines is another issue. I don't want to get into convoluted arguments about what might or might not constitute
    ideal "bokeh', but almost everyone agrees that no-no's include conspicuous polygons and double-lines or related distracting rendition of unwanted detail. No different with Nikkor small optics. Most are miserable in this respect, but then they specifically engineered certain items like the fast 85's and defocus-control 105's and 135's for exceptionally pleasing background blur. Most modern view camera lens have given up on that kind of thing, with the exception of a few soft-focus options per se, which is not the same thing. Even with modern plastmats, I find that images taken with my old Schneider Symmar S have more pleasing out of focus rendition than the otherwise superior, sharper,
    and more contrasty plastmats which replaced them. Different lenses have different personalities at times. Nice to have choices.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin