A recent set of images back from the lab struck me with regards to bokeh. I was (and am) shooting a Fujifilm GA645; a camera with an f/4 lens. Not a lens one would expect much bokeh from. I thought I was giving up this aspect of my images when I started with this camera. However, as I found recently, not the case. This got me interested in other medium format lenses and the bokeh they produce. 35mm lenses get all the 'glory' over this so perhaps a thread devoted to medium format would be suitable.
Nice shots Martin, I may get myself a P67 for Christmas. The only thing that stopped me from getting one was when I held the late 55/4... it was so big it scared me off ordering the camera. May just have to tripod mount it.
redisburning wrote:
Nice shots Martin, I may get myself a P67 for Christmas. The only thing that stopped me from getting one was when I held the late 55/4... it was so big it scared me off ordering the camera. May just have to tripod mount it.
The late 55/4 is smaller than the former one, which I own. And you definitely don't have to use a tripod. I've shot 99% handheld and only like once got visible blur from camera shake, at 1/30 second with 55 mm.
Some more bokeh with the (smallish) 90/2.8 on P67II, wide open...
The bokeh is a bit harsh, but it doesn't matter a bit since the sharpness is stellar and the separation from the background is more than you'd ever want. There is just no way to get this look from 24x36.
That is still one of the reasons of existence of medium format digital backs. Too many amateur photographers believe digital backs are here for megapixels, bit depth or whatever, but the image rendering in an image circle that covers 6X6 or 6X7 is very much different from (35mm) full frame. Just like the 35 mm renders different from APS-C and smaller.
BTW, some good samples that show that DOF and bokeh are not the same. I particularly like the Pentax 67 shots. THX for sharing!
Poison thread! I only have a handful of Mamiya 80/1.9 samples, but will dig them up tomorrow. It's the hardest bokeh I've ever seen, but kind of interesting non the less.
The long FLs are always going to bring focus fade and OOF into play fast, so MF designers attended to it rather well, all of them. It's so good to see more MF film, there is just nothing like it.
Red, the doggo in #1 looks like his mood was rather magnified that day.
RM, the young lady might like to see these in 20 years time. Actually I recall a guy saying how much he thought the GA645 bokeh was really poor. I have one for landscape, and seldom see bokeh as the thing works great even at f16-f19, the 60/4 is one of the sharpest lenses I ever saw, and it runs away and hides its small self when you turn off the camera, lol. As much as people like the newer Fuji lenses, their old MF/LF are terrific.
philip_pj wrote:
The long FLs are always going to bring focus fade and OOF into play fast, so MF designers attended to it rather well, all of them. It's so good to see more MF film, there is just nothing like it.
Red, the doggo in #1 looks like his mood was rather magnified that day.
RM, the young lady might like to see these in 20 years time. Actually I recall a guy saying how much he thought the GA645 bokeh was really poor. I have one for landscape, and seldom see bokeh as the thing works great even at f16-f19, the 60/4 is one of the sharpest lenses I ever saw, and it runs away and hides its small self when you turn off the camera, lol. As much as people like the newer Fuji lenses, their old MF/LF are terrific. ...Show more →
That lady is my daughter, so she will see them in 20 years.
I'm fairly shocked at how well the GA645 produces good bokeh. The one issue I have is that autofocus is not so accurate at close range so I try not to shoot much under 1 meter. If it were 100% spot on at 0.7 meters, then the bokeh would be even more intense.
It's a great camera, although I am constantly lured by 6 x 7 or 6 x 9 cameras.
And you definitely don't have to use a tripod. I've shot 99% handheld and only like once got visible blur from camera shake, at 1/30 second with 55 mm.
