Quick Bokeh comparison

[James Axford]

Just a very fast bokeh comparison between the 24mm f/1.4 MkII, 50mm f/1.2, 85mm f/1.2 MkI, 135mm f/2, and just for fun then 17mm f/4 TS-E. Oh and everything is wide open.
not sure if it any help for anyone but here it is anyway

24mm f/1.4



50mm f/1.2



85mm f/1.2



135mm f/2



and just for fun... kinda ugly bokeh actually...
17mm f/4 TS-E

[Ray Heath]

So James, which do you prefer?

[James Axford]

I guess i've seen the bigger picture and it's hard for you because you have not....
So I'd say the 135 would be my pick.

[Ray Heath]

I guess i've seen the bigger picture and it's hard for you because you have not....
So I'd say the 135 would be my pick.

Yeh, it looks good James.

How then does this comparison/test inform your equipment selection?

[James Axford]

Yeh, it looks good James.

How then does this comparison/test inform your equipment selection?

I guess i'd love to use the 135mm more than i do now. but it's just too long for most of the things i take around Melbourne. I use the 135mm as 1 of my 3 travel lenses, and it's probably my most used lens then.

in the end it informs me that the 17mm's bokeh is rubbish lol

[stoogest]

Definitely the 135mm, although the 85mm is not far off.

[Ray Heath]

I quite like the 17mm, seems more "real" to me.

I wonder though, is "Bokeh" rendition a valid criteria for choosing which lens to use in a particular shooting situation?

I'd have thought angle of view, perspective and suitability for the job at hand would be more important considerations.

Ray

[James Axford]

Bokeh is not the most important choice for all photos.
but sometimes if your after a particular photo sometimes it helps having the right bekeh.
it's good taking everything into consideration.

[Big Pix]

if you do this test again, with a different background or one a bit further away, you will get a very different result........

[bigdazzler]

I like the 85.

Couldnt really expect much different form the tilt shift, at 17mm and f4, comparing it to the mid teles and super wide apertures.

[James Axford]

if you do this test again, with a different background or one a bit further away, you will get a very different result........

yeah it was just a muck around test really... i'm sure there would be a different result.

I like the 85.

Couldnt really expect much different form the tilt shift, at 17mm and f4, comparing it to the mid teles and super wide apertures.

yeah the 17mm really doesn't compare, was just for fun.

[swifty]

Both the 85mm and 135mm look great. So creamy dreamy.
Thanks for the quick comparison.

[JorgD]

I like the smoothness of the 50mm f1.2 personally. It really makes the background smooth and disappear.

[Cage]

Interesting how the 135 picked up the spider wed on the right and the others didn't.

Cheers

Kevin

[Cage]

Oooppsss, you can see it in the 24 too

[R1titan]

The 50L and 85L work best for me.
I suppose these were taken at mfds. Getting further away from mfd you will see the 85L come into is own league...

[Mary Anne]

That's very interesting all the same. Thanks for sharing..

[James Axford]

Interesting how the 135 picked up the spider wed on the right and the others didn't.

Cheers

Kevin

should have really fucused all the shots on the spider web, would have been a touch more fair. i'll do it again when i'm in the mood

The 50L and 85L work best for me.
I suppose these were taken at mfds. Getting further away from mfd you will see the 85L come into is own league...

true true, i'd need the 200 f/2 to give then 85L a run for it's money

That's very interesting all the same. Thanks for sharing..

no problem

[James Axford]

Both the 85mm and 135mm look great. So creamy dreamy.
Thanks for the quick comparison.

the 50 is up there also... very hard to compare with my test lol