Re: FM Review of the Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 Nokton
Makten wrote: twomblywhite wrote:
The amount of blur definitely has something to do with the bokeh quality. It's ridiculous - to me - to say that it doesn't. They're intrinsically linked.
Well, you are wrong and I'm not gonna spend time arguing about it.
Anyway to toss terms like "bad bokeh" around is pointless and purely subjective.
That's why I explained exactly what about the bokeh I don't like. Sigh.
You just seem like a really stubborn person who's opinion won't change in the face of any facts. It's fine if you don't agree with the definition but your arguments aren't extremely credible.
Re: FM Review of the Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 Nokton
Makten wrote: twomblywhite wrote:
The amount of blur definitely has something to do with the bokeh quality. It's ridiculous - to me - to say that it doesn't. They're intrinsically linked.
Well, you are wrong and I'm not gonna spend time arguing about it.
Anyway to toss terms like "bad bokeh" around is pointless and purely subjective.
That's why I explained exactly what about the bokeh I don't like. Sigh.
You just seem like a really stubborn person who's opinion won't change in the face of any facts. It's fine if you don't agree with the definition but your arguments hold zero credibility.
