GEAR GRINDING - or, what bug's you about your equipment

[dolina]

I hate the idea that the paint job of my lenses flakes off. 

[Aglet]

1. not my "art" images but i do think that all these images were ruined (scott kelby has his free critiq session, send them to him and ask to see if my thought is right.  i do trust scott eyes):  http://a2bart.com/gallery/new/new.htm  (wonder that why it is call a-b not a-z LOL)
2. "a scaled shot taken with a 5D Mark II and EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II... 20mm at f/4.0":  show me how you go back and shoot with that focal lengh?  if you should that with 20mm at f/4, i should not see that shallow dof, if i do not want to say that it should be all of them in focus (assume that you were not climbing on the tree to shoot that image  ).
3. an experience photographer would not choose f4 in shooting the posted image (assume that you were shooting at focal of 200mm)

Hey, if you want to buy a copy of that, I'll sell you one.
But the example as art is not being debated.  In that sense I'll put my best up against your best or anyone elses.

This is one of many shots I took at close to the minimum focus of the lens to see how it would perform.
Now I know, and I'm trying to share that info in case someone else thinks this highly praised and pricey piece of gear is nearly perfect because of all the fan-boy ravings about it.

Did you know or suspect that this lens would render the image this poorly in this circumstance?
I have another example to post from a competitor's 70-200mm that's as bad or worse.  Just in case someone was thinking that might be one solution.

EDIT:  hasty typo fixed, supposed to be 200mm, not 20mm.

[Aglet]

Here's more unpleasant bokeh from spankin' new Nikon 70-200mm f/4 VR
I'd hoped it would have less nasty multiple-outline bokeh than the faster Canon I posted at the start of this thread.
Alas, no.  It seems, in fact, to be as bad or worse at times.  No point going this direction instead of the Canon lens unless you're aiming to save size, weight, and money.

scaled from whole FF shot, looks even worse in full rez

200mm @ f/6.3

[willis]

Low ISO performance on 7D... that bug's me quite bit.

[J.R.]

Did you know or suspect that this lens would render the image this poorly in this circumstance?

Yes and no ...

Thanks to you of course , because I remember this picture being posted before and then there was this ...

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11915.msg212684#msg212684

Thanks BTW. If I'd heard someone criticizing the 70-200 on the issue of bokeh, I would have said "I'll wait till I see it".

[SwissBear]

my .02$ for this "multi-outline-bokeh": try shooting these images WITHOUT image stabilisation, and you have solved the problem.
Before further explanation, try to understand how IS works...

[Trevor]

Here's more unpleasant bokeh from spankin' new Nikon 70-200mm f/4 VR

It doesn't look unpleasant to me .... I really don't get this 'bokeh' stuff. I agree in the picture of the berry  the out of focus bits detract ... but it's ok

I think it's another internet photography meme ... bokeh, sharpness, megapixels ...

Still, you've got to be happy with your own photos. But I'd suggest no one would care too much about your fuzzy bits ;-)

[Sith Zombie]

Family Guy You Know What Really Grinds My Gears	Small | Large

[J.R.]

my .02$ for this "multi-outline-bokeh": try shooting these images WITHOUT image stabilisation, and you have solved the problem.
Before further explanation, try to understand how IS works...

Does IS affect bokeh? I've been shooting for only for just over a year so I'm a relative newbie here ... want to learn.

[Sith Zombie]

As the predawn shadows are lifted, I bet the rooster gets really noisy.

GROAN!!!!!

I liked that one! lol

[SwissBear]

my .02$ for this "multi-outline-bokeh": try shooting these images WITHOUT image stabilisation, and you have solved the problem.
Before further explanation, try to understand how IS works...

Does IS affect bokeh? I've been shooting for only for just over a year so I'm a relative newbie here ... want to learn.

Yes it does (in special circumstances only: shallow DOF with objects just OOF). Consider the location of the IS group inside your lens and imagine what happens when you tilt the camera body by a single degree or less during the exposure. Think about location of the sensor, location of the IS group, location of the photographed object (which remains focussed) and the location of the object(s) slightly out of focus. A sketch might help

Corollary: If you happen to shake your lens around the nodal point, no "multi-outline-bokeh" will occur

[Don Haines]

Another thing that grinds my gears is when you shoot video without an external microphone... if you forget to turn image stabilization off, you get a wonderful soundtrack of the IS motors... Now that's grinding gears!

[Aglet]

my .02$ for this "multi-outline-bokeh": try shooting these images WITHOUT image stabilisation, and you have solved the problem.
Before further explanation, try to understand how IS works...

These 70-200 zooms have produced plenty of similar effects while mounted on a tripod so IS is not the cause, even if it can contribute a similar effect when it's quite active.

There are also plenty of non-IS lenses also capable of similarly busy, outlined bokeh. In fact it's become a bit of a fad to create as much using certain old Helios lenses.  The 44M in a 50-some mm focal length come to mind.

[ChilledXpress]

Gear grinding of a different sort... 

In reality though... ever since picking up the 5D3 and 1Dx... I hate my 7D!!!

[Aglet]

Gear grinding of a different sort... 

That's kind of funny... and possibly offensive to some people.