On Jul 28, 7:09 am, Rita Ä Berkowitz ritaberk2O04 @aol.com wrote:
David J. Littleboy wrote:
The bokeh in the first one is only half bad: the disks have bright
edges (which is classic bad bokeh), but at least they're disks and
not pentagons, as my Fuji GS645S produces.

Sadly the 85/1.2 really isn't a stellar performer in the bokeh department.
He would have definitely done much better with the 85/1.4 Nikkor and an
adapter ring. Then again, he could have pulled this shot off with much
better results if he had used the Larry Thong Lightbottle with this.

http://www.geocities.com/ritaberk2007/best_mates.htm

Getting off topic now, but it is interesting to note that 16-9.net
said this.....

"So what have we learned? The fact that the Zeiss 21mm is the finest
of its type is no surprise. What might come as a shock if you haven't
scrutinised the MTF charts is that a healthy Canon 17-40mm f4 L is
better than a Canon 16-35mm Mark I, and makes an evenly matched
challenger to the Nikon 17-35mm f2.8 for the title of 'best ultrawide
zoom'."

Full test here http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/canon...40vn1735a.html

Cheers

Rusty
http://www.pixelpix.com.au
http://blog.pixelpix.com.au