Bokeh in two Canon cameras

[Antonio Correia]

-

​

Canon 5D + 24-70 at 70mm f/2,8 + natural morning light + Lightroom
I love this 5D !
--
And Canon G9 at f/4,5 + macro position + natural morning light + Lightroom, also very good bokeh.

Do you agree ?
Bonjour Antonio

please use standard font size when you don't have anything to highlight (though you still may underline or bold a word or a sentence). Larger text size is really distracting.

Thank you for understanding

Have a great day!

 

[Gary Ayala]

Antonio, the 5D is pure cream, no distracting detail. The G9, do to the huge DOF of a small sensor, is nothing but distracting detail in the background. The 5D kicks the G9's but in bokeh.

Gary

 

[Antonio Correia]

Antonio, the 5D is pure cream, no distracting detail. The G9, do to the huge DOF of a small sensor, is nothing but distracting detail in the background. The 5D kicks the G9's but in bokeh.

Gary

Thak you Gary

 

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, Antonio,

The effect in number 2 is quite good. It is really nice.

In number 1, I have the feeling that two much of the "subject" is out of focus (DoF too small for this work).

 

[Antonio Correia]

Hi, Antonio,
The effect in number 2 is quite good. It is really nice.
In number 1, I have the feeling that two much of the "subject" is out of focus (DoF too small for this work).

May be you are right about the so shallow DoF ... May be ...
I accept that critique but the photo is nice, isn't it ?

 

[Mike Shimwell]

I much prefer the first. The oof areas in the second picture are quite 'jangly' to me. Really it's the lens and the format, ratehr than the 5D in itself that delivers this sort of bokeh. I think this looks better than the 24-105, and more like the 100 macro in it's oof rendition.

If you look through Fahim's work with the zeiss zf 100 f2, that delviers lovely oof.

Mike

 

[John Sheehy]

The 5D clearly has more depth *with* bokeh (I don't equate bokeh with the lack of DOF as at least one other poster has; to me Bokeh is the quality of the blur of OOF areas, with a gaussian blur as a possible optimum), but the quality of the bokeh is better in the G9 image, IMO. The 5D bokeh has more artifacts that suggest motion, and so to me, the 5D background is more distracting, even though it is more OOF.

 

[Antonio Correia]

The 5D clearly has more depth *with* bokeh (I don't equate bokeh with the lack of DOF as at least one other poster has; to me Bokeh is the quality of the blur of OOF areas, with a gaussian blur as a possible optimum), but the quality of the bokeh is better in the G9 image, IMO. The 5D bokeh has more artifacts that suggest motion, and so to me, the 5D background is more distracting, even though it is more OOF.

Huumm ... nice explanation.

Well, after all it's just a very exquisite way to look at pictures.

 

[Jim Galli]

Sorry, no.

Both photos are full of tension in the transition that doesn't please.

 

[Mike Shimwell]

Sorry, no.

Both photos are full of tension in the transition that doesn't please.

I think that's where the Zeiss 100, and the canon 110 macro to a lesser extent, really score. The transition from sharp to oof are nice and smooth.

Mike