07-29-2012, 10:36 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-29-2012, 10:38 PM by Ballonseide.)
[quote name='karlmera' timestamp='1343495134' post='19624']
Yes I have the lens for Nikon. It has 8 full clickstops from 16 to 1,4. But you can choose all fine between positions.
[/quote]
Interesting. Is it the SLII version, too? I get exactly 12 clicks between f/16 and f/1.4: 1 EV ("large") clicks from f/1,4 to f/2 and from f/11 to f/16; and 1/2 EV ("small") clicks between all other positions.
As regards my bokeh problem, I did both some more testing and some more browsing through the Photozone reviews and I now believe the issue is just a depth of field effect, although one I did not know existed. All 50/1.4 lenses reviewed show no difference in background blur strength between f/1.4 and f/2 in the test shots; on the other hand, the Canon 50/1.2 does and most 85/1.4 lenses do, both of which should have smaller DOF at full aperture in the given scene. So I tried to provoke a smaller DOF myself by using a very close focus distance, and indeed, I saw increasing blur down to f/1.4. (The shots from f/1.4 to f/2 are attached if someone is interested.) The difference is still small; it would probably be more pronounced if the background were farther away (like close-up portrait with distant trees as background). Quite useful to know that there will be no difference in the amount of background blur in many scenes under f/2; it seems wise then to default to f/2 and use the better resolution (and reduced outlining) it provides.
Yes I have the lens for Nikon. It has 8 full clickstops from 16 to 1,4. But you can choose all fine between positions.
[/quote]
Interesting. Is it the SLII version, too? I get exactly 12 clicks between f/16 and f/1.4: 1 EV ("large") clicks from f/1,4 to f/2 and from f/11 to f/16; and 1/2 EV ("small") clicks between all other positions.
As regards my bokeh problem, I did both some more testing and some more browsing through the Photozone reviews and I now believe the issue is just a depth of field effect, although one I did not know existed. All 50/1.4 lenses reviewed show no difference in background blur strength between f/1.4 and f/2 in the test shots; on the other hand, the Canon 50/1.2 does and most 85/1.4 lenses do, both of which should have smaller DOF at full aperture in the given scene. So I tried to provoke a smaller DOF myself by using a very close focus distance, and indeed, I saw increasing blur down to f/1.4. (The shots from f/1.4 to f/2 are attached if someone is interested.) The difference is still small; it would probably be more pronounced if the background were farther away (like close-up portrait with distant trees as background). Quite useful to know that there will be no difference in the amount of background blur in many scenes under f/2; it seems wise then to default to f/2 and use the better resolution (and reduced outlining) it provides.