Maybe he felt 25 pics are needed to prove the point. The real problem are all those who replied with one line of text, and left all of the pics in quote.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Bokeh quality EM1X + Olympus 300/f4
- Thread starter Autoxave
- Start date
Messier Object
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 13,909
- Solutions
- 15
- Reaction score
- 14,947
darn that DNA analysis.Bob, beautiful Purple-backed FW, formerly known as Variegated. Where in Aust did you capture this little beauty?
A Purple-backed Fairy-wren (Malurus assimilis). Shot with an E-M1.1 + 300mm f4, ISO 200, 1/250, f4.
Check out the feather detail and the creamy far bokeh. OK the near bokeh on the twig to the right is a bit messy but can any other 600mm equivalent lens do better? If it can, what's the price?
Just when you think you know the name of a bird. Even my latest bird guide (Menkhorst et al, 2017) is already out of date :-(
On the bright side I’ll be keeping a sharp lookout next time I’m west of the Great Dividing Range
Peter
P
Paul Auclair
Guest
I enjoyed the photos ... very nice, and demonstrating a good point. DPR forums may have 99 problems, but this isn't one of them.
yes, and that's also the fate of canoconsony users. and thy all have in some object-background distance Relations similar issues.
the mz 4/300 is a very excellent lens.
br gusti
Excellent shots and gorgeous backgrounds. Generally with the 500mm at F/4.5 (never stopped down) the backgrounds come out very similar to yours Paul.
Every so often though when the background is busy and closer to the bird, I cop the ....... nervous backgrounds as well. That's on FF, APS-C and m4/3. So IMO it's not a format based thing, it's to do with the closeness of a busy background. 99.99% of the time, it's not an issue though.
A bird very close to the busy background doesn't seem to do it, neither does a large distance busy background, it just seems to be a certain distances close-ish that cops it. I use the same lens on those three formats and none are immune to it. I have no idea of the exact distance, so it's a strange one.
All the best Paul and brilliant shots as said. ;-) No complaints.
Danny.
--
------------
Birds and BIF's https://www.flickr.com/photos/124733969@N06/sets/
Need for speed https://www.flickr.com/photos/130646821@N03/albums
Every so often though when the background is busy and closer to the bird, I cop the ....... nervous backgrounds as well. That's on FF, APS-C and m4/3. So IMO it's not a format based thing, it's to do with the closeness of a busy background. 99.99% of the time, it's not an issue though.
A bird very close to the busy background doesn't seem to do it, neither does a large distance busy background, it just seems to be a certain distances close-ish that cops it. I use the same lens on those three formats and none are immune to it. I have no idea of the exact distance, so it's a strange one.
All the best Paul and brilliant shots as said. ;-) No complaints.
Danny.
--
------------
Birds and BIF's https://www.flickr.com/photos/124733969@N06/sets/
Need for speed https://www.flickr.com/photos/130646821@N03/albums
Last edited:
epozar
Senior Member
You missed the point.
Bokeh quality can be easily judged by looking at defocused night street lamps.... sharper the edges worst the bokeh.
Bokeh quality can be easily judged by looking at defocused night street lamps.... sharper the edges worst the bokeh.
epozar
Senior Member
Gregm61
Forum Pro
I like it for my preferred uses, which is getting at subjects where the 40-150mm f2.8 cannot either get close enough or compress the subject against the background as much as I would like. Great lens to use at the Arboretum. The close focus ability is just brilliant.
--
"There's shadows in life, baby.." Jack Horner- Boogie Nights
--
"There's shadows in life, baby.." Jack Horner- Boogie Nights
Last edited:
Messier Object
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 13,909
- Solutions
- 15
- Reaction score
- 14,947
Other lenses do indeed exhibit the same behaviour but I’ve not seen it demonstrated to the same extent that I see with the Zuiko 300mm F4 Pro - and even more so the 40-150mm F2.8 Pro.
Very rarely do I see annoying or distracting backgrounds from my Zuiko 300mm F2.8 or my Canon 300mm F2.8 at any aperture setting, even with OOF foliage close behind the subject.
Those two M.Zuiko Pros have a tendency to ‘double’ image the edges of near-background grass and branches
Peter
G1Houston
Senior Member
[No message]
katastrofa
Senior Member
I enjoyed looking at them.
ToxicTabasco
Senior Member
Great shot.
A Purple-backed Fairy-wren (Malurus assimilis). Shot with an E-M1.1 + 300mm f4, ISO 200, 1/250, f4.
Check out the feather detail and the creamy far bokeh. OK the near bokeh on the twig to the right is a bit messy but can any other 600mm equivalent lens do better? If it can, what's the price?
Exactly. Backgrounds are essential for a great composition.
i have both 4/300 and 2.8/90-250 and I do know About the differences.
whumber
Senior Member
The only CaNikon lens I'm aware of that has behavior somewhat similar to what the Olympus PRO lenses exhibit is the old Canon 28mm f/1.8. None of the big DSLR lenses give the reflex lens like bokeh of the Olympus PRO lenses. Some of the zooms can have a nervous quality, but the PRO lenses are on another level, especially the 40-150 PRO.
Last edited:
WhiteBeard
Senior Member
Bien vu Paul!
ever checked the bokeh of some caniokon 70-200?
whumber
Senior Member
I have, it's not even close. The CaNikon 70-200 lenses are far superior even if they're not perfect.ever checked the bokeh of some caniokon 70-200?
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum