Bokeh - Prime v Zoom

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Rainbow One

Rainbow One

Member
Member's gallery
Will a prime lens shooting at f5.6 or f8 be better than a zoom lens at the same f stop.

eg let’s say 300PF which is a f4 Lens will its bokeh be better than say 200-500 f5.6 when both shooting at f8 ?
 
Member's gallery
I've always understood that bokeh quality is a function of the number and shape of aperture blades. This would lead me to conclude that if the two lenses have the same number of blades, shaped the same, bokeh between them should then be about the same.

But I'll let someone more knowledgeable than me confirm this.
 
Good question. Nasim does not seem to think so. More of a round aperture blade vs. straight aperture blade thing, as Rassie said. Still waiting for othr replies....

photographylife.com

How to Obtain Maximum Bokeh for Creamy Backgrounds

In photography, bokeh represents the character of out-of-focus highlights. Read this guide to understand how to get maximum bokeh effect in your photos.
photographylife.com photographylife.com

photographylife.com

Understanding Bokeh for Beginners - Photography Life

Bokeh, also known as “Boke” is one of the most popular subjects in photography and videography, because of the way it affects the picture. Here is what you need to know.
photographylife.com photographylife.com

photographylife.com

Prime vs Zoom Lenses - Everything You Need to Know

In this beginner guide, we talk about prime and zoom lenses in detail, explaining their differences, along with image samples and comparisons.
photographylife.com photographylife.com
 
Member's gallery
This subject is close to my heart and i am a little obsesses with clean backgrounds. It is probably the reason I have never invested in high end zooms and always preferred primes. In the last year or two I have been using the 300 & 500pf lenses and I think they are fantastic. However, I can't bring myself for sell either my 500f4 or 300f2.8 as these lenses have always produced the best results for me. If I was working from a hide, I would always favour the older heavy, faster lenses.
The 300f2.8 I have, produces beautiful backgrounds and I have always been told it is the way the blades operate that produce this.
As examples, the two pictures below are taken with 500f4 and I doubt I could get similar results with my 500pf. (The backgrounds have not been edited in any way)
Dumfries-0045-studio.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
DSC_6932-Edit.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
ingweDave said:
This subject is close to my heart and i am a little obsesses with clean backgrounds. It is probably the reason I have never invested in high end zooms and always preferred primes. In the last year or two I have been using the 300 & 500pf lenses and I think they are fantastic. However, I can't bring myself for sell either my 500f4 or 300f2.8 as these lenses have always produced the best results for me. If I was working from a hide, I would always favour the older heavy, faster lenses.
The 300f2.8 I have, produces beautiful backgrounds and I have always been told it is the way the blades operate that produce this.
As examples, the two pictures below are taken with 500f4 and I doubt I could get similar results with my 500pf. (The backgrounds have not been edited in any way)View attachment 13816View attachment 13817
Click to expand...
I should have added, I would prefer the 500pf over a zoom at the same aperture but I have not great proof of this.
 
Member's gallery
Rainbow One said:
Will a prime lens shooting at f5.6 or f8 be better than a zoom lens at the same f stop.

eg let’s say 300PF which is a f4 Lens will its bokeh be better than say 200-500 f5.6 when both shooting at f8 ?
Click to expand...

In my experience, the answer to that question has been a big ol' "Depends".

Usually your framing, shooting position and what's behind the subject will impact the background blur more than if you are using a zoom or a prime.

That being said, I have found in my experience that optical construction of a lens can impact the quality of background (just look at the meyer gorlitz trioplan 100mm f/2.8, or the Sigma 105mm OIS swirly bokeh), VR can impact quality of background and use of TCs can impact the quality of background (e.g: when I had the 70-200mm f2.8 and used it with the TC14, it's background quality was worse than the 300mm f4).
 
Member's gallery
ingweDave said:
I should have added, I would prefer the 500pf over a zoom at the same aperture but I have not great proof of this.
Click to expand...
Dave, your images are beautiful. Having said that I suspect in this case whatever was in the background was far enough away to provide such a smooth bokeh. Below are examples shot recently with my Nikkor 200-500mm F/5.6. The bird feeder is on the deck near the back door, the background is the forest behind my property, currently a winter brown color. With a background that far away any bokeh should be nice and smooth and I don't think one can differentiate here between bokeh quality of zoom vs prime. We would need to evaluate backgrounds that are close enough to the lens not to be this smooth in order to see if there is a difference.

Here's what I know: Both my and your lenses are F/5.6, and both are E lenses, so can we assume the same aperture mechanism was used in both? If so, that makes a case for bokeh to be mostly the same between them.



Z62_9229.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


_Z629040.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Hi Rassie. I tend to agree with you and having faster lenses, for separation and more distance to the background is key. I am no expert but was intrigued by how much better it was with the 300 f2.8. More knowledgeable people than me had said this was partly down to the petals. I will have to compare the 300 f2.8 with the 300 pf. I would love to justify selling the more expensive lenses. (So I could use that for new native mirrorless ones ;) )
 
Member's gallery
As Rassie said, positioning of the background is the most important factor. Going back to your original question, all things being equal, I believe primes do give a better bokeh. I also think different lenses have different bokehs.
 
Member's gallery
i guess that the images shown is this thread shares some features. Long focal length, back ground fairly far away from the subject, back ground mostly uniform in color and light.
The long focal length and the far away back ground secures a significant subject isolation and bluring of the back ground. If you compare a 500 mm prime with a zoom at 500 mm both at f/7.1 on the same body, images will sport the same DoF and background bluring. When you have a more or less even back ground without pointed lights the shape of the blades will have minimal effect. If you introduce a distinct point of light in the back ground e.g. a ray of sun through leaves number of blades and number of blades will kick in, by producing stars and lightning shapes in the image.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top