Ever since I started shooting DSLRs with APS-C sized sensors I have struggled to find the perfect go-to lens for the majority of my photos. I love the speed and image quality of my old A series 50mm f/1.7 but the lack of autofocus and relatively tight F0V (75mm equiv.) makes it less than ideal for a lot of my shooting. When my friend Stephen said he was sending me his DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited to take for a spin I was pretty sure that it was going to be the lens I have been looking for. I had read all the reviews so I knew that it was a sharp lens with top-notch build quality. All that remained was for me to live with it for a few days…

Pros:

• Razor sharp starting at f/2.8.
• Virtually no flare and very low CAs or fringing.
• Wonderful bokeh (especially during macro use).
• Impeccable Limited build quality.
• Smaller and lighter than most 1:1 macro lenses.
• Durable*
• Ultra close focusing capability.
• Built-in lens hood.
• Excellent bang-for-the-buck.

*I didn’t test this lens’ durability but my friend Stephen did. Within minutes of opening the box he dropped it from a height of 1M onto concrete. The filter mount ring took the brunt of the impact (note silver filed away area in these shots) but the function of the lens was not otherwise affected. Wow!

Cons:

• Slow focusing due to extremely long focal range.
• Lack of focus limit switch (might correct previous point).
• Focus ring spins during autofocus operation.
• Included lens cap falls off too easily.
• Extremely limited stand-off distance at 1:1 magnification (read: “none”).
• Diffraction may be a problem above f/8 with non-macro shots.

Conclusion:

Turns out this is not the do-it-all lens I’ve been looking for. Now, before all you Pentaxians out there start accusing me of bashing Pentax again, let me explain…

The DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited is one of the best macro lenses I have ever used. It absolutely blows everything away within 2 feet of the front of the lens. I love the natural look the 35mm (52.5mm equiv) FoV provides. I can easily see this being one of the best lenses available for shooting products in a studio setting. If I were still walking the floor at Asian electronics trade shows it would be my go-to lens (lots of close-up shots of products held in my hand). However, the things that make this lens so good at what it was designed to do also make it less than perfect for my everyday use. If your primary interest is up-close hand-held macro photography, look no further. Buy this lens. If, like me, you are thinking that this lens might double as a good medium focal length lens for everyday use, please read the rest of my review and decide for yourself:

Build Quality and Size:

Here we see the DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited focused at infinity along side the standard 18-55mm Pentax kit lens…

and here we see the macro lens focused to its closest setting (0.139M)…

and here along side my old A series 50mm f/1.7 lens. The point here? This is a very compact lens. Even when extended for close-up focus. Also, even with the rock-solid aluminum casing it weighs slightly less than the plastic kit lens (7.6oz vs. 7.8oz). There is absolutely no excuse for not being able to find a place in your bag for this lens.

I mentioned the focus ring in the cons. The double row of knurled rings just below where it says “PENTAX-DA 1:2.8 35mm…” in the photo above is the focus ring. It is very nicely damped in manual mode and features Pentax’s nifty Quick-shift Focus System to allow focus fine tuning in AF mode. The double-height ring provides a great grip for your fingers during manual focusing. However, since it takes up so much of the 35’s diminutive body, you have to be careful not to grab it accidentally when holding the camera with two hands (left hand supporting lens) if you don’t want to loose a little skin off your finger tips ;-)

Otherwise, the build quality of this lens is superb. You’ll never question the $480 price tag once you handle one for the first time.

Image Quality:

Uncropped f/2.8 @ ISO 100 shot of dew on leaf (NOT 1:1 magnification).

100% crop from the center of the first image.

The resolving power of this lens is amazing. I’m sure my old 10MP K10D isn’t even coming close to getting the most out of this baby. I’m not going to get into resolution specifics here. There are plenty of other websites that can confirm what I experienced first hand: this is one of (if not the) sharpest lenses you can hang on your K Mount. Here are a few shots I took with it on my Flickr page.

The nine bladed aperture provides wonderful round bokeh at all aperture settings.

It also provides nice 18 pointed starbursts when stopped down for long exposure night shots (if you are so inclined to use it for such things). They are not quite a clean as the ones that come off of the DA* 16-50 f/2.8 but they are certainly an improvement over the kit lens.

The DA 35mm Macro has a built-in retractable lens hood. Without the hood this lens produces almost no flare. Compare the example above with this similar one shot with the DA* 16-50 f/2.8:

Even though Pentax thoughtfully includes an excellent built-in lens hood with the DA 35mm Macro it doesn’t need one!

Handling:

The DA 35mm Macro requires you to get very close to your subjects to achieve maximum magnification. Here is the shot I took above while focusing at 1:1 on my kit lens with the 35 Macro:

Very close indeed. This is fine for shooting flowers, products and other static and aproachable subjects. If you want to shoot creatures that might not appreciate a lens pressed up in their face you might want to look elsewhere. The only real problem I had with this was the camera blocking light from my subjects. Being so close with the lens to the subject you’d pretty much need a studio and strobes to get enough light in there.

I’ve had experience with longer macro lenses that put you farther away from the subject and I have to say I prefer the up-close DA 35mm Macro. The wider FoV gives a more natural 3D look to the images and makes it easier to lock in focus while shooting hand-held.

This incredible focus range (infinity to 0.139M) is the DA 35 Macro’s Achilles heel. It is very deliberate and accurate when shooting macro but becomes slow and laborious when taking snap shots. If the camera misses the focus point it will usually run all the way to one extreme of the focal range and then back to the focus point where (hopefully) it will lock on. If not, it will continue on to the opposite end of the focus range before heading back to try again. On a normal lens this “focus hunting” can be a bit annoying as the lens “ziiiip-ziiiips” back and forth before locking focus. On the DA 35 Macro focus hunting goes more like “ziiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiip, ziiiiiiiiiiiiiiip, ziiiiiip, ziiip-zip.” I missed a ton of snap shots with the kids while this lens oscillated back and forth the focus scale on me.

Don’t misunderstand me. I’m not saying the focus isn’t accurate. As all Pentaxians apparently already know, their DSLRs do not have the fastest autofocus system. The DA 35 Macro exacerbates this problem considerably. Its deliberate focusing is an important feature for shooting critical macro shots in controlled conditions but is also the main reason why it isn’t a replacement for standard lenses for every day use. IMO there’s nothing wrong with being good at what you do and sticking to it.

That being said, it is not to say that the DA 35mm Macro can’t be used for every day shooting. When more deliberate shooting is possible all the things that make this such a great macro lens also make it an excellent portrait lens. Most people do not recommend a lens this wide for portrait use. I found it to be great for portrait shots where you want the feeling of being up close and personal while getting a bit more of the scene into the shot for context. Like this:

Of course what’s working for me here most are the 35mm focal length and the sharpness. If you are willing to give up the macro performance there are other lenses that can likely better serve as wide angle portrait lenses.

The only head scratcher for me with the DA 35mm Macro is Pentax’s choice in lens cap. The included cap is machined from aluminum and velvet lined. While this gives it a distinctly premium look and feel, it kept falling off the lens while in my bag. Also, it is easily knocked off while the camera is hanging on your shoulder strap. When I buy one of these lenses I will add a spring clip style 49mm lens cap to my order.

Pentax K10D with DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited lens.

So, the DA 35mm Macro does what it does and does it quite well. Just don’t expect it to do all things equally as well. If you need/want and excellent macro lens then you’d be hard pressed to do much better. If you are looking for a good normal lens for taking those every day shots do what I did and pick up an FA 35mm f/2 AL while you still can. It was a close call for me. I had $500 to spend so I could have gotten the macro lens, but I decided to go with the slightly faster FA lens instead. So far I am quite pleased with my decision- though I really miss the DA 35mm Macro’s build quality and ability to get in close. I can easily justify getting the DA 35mm Macro for use as a dedicated macro/studio lens later on to round out my lens collection.

Some sample shots I took with the DA 35mm Macro while testing it for this review.

About the shots for this post: I shot the studio shots for this post using Fuji’s new F200EXR point-and-shoot camera. I’m not a big fan of PnS cameras but this little wonder has definitely gotten my attention. These shots are straight out of the camera at ISO 800. The camera’s various manual controls allowed me to get the exposure and WB right while the high ISO capability meant I could still go hand-held to knock the shots out quickly. BTW, this shot of the F200EXR was taken with the DA 35mm Macro. See what I mean about it being ideal for product photography?

Another box of goodies arived today. This time it’s some more loaner gear for me to put to the test. What we have here is a Pentax FA 50mm f/1.4 lens, Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro lens and a Sigma EM-140 DG TTL ring flash kit. Stay tuned…

Mr. UPS brought my new Pentax FA 35mm f/2 AL lens today. It has an equivalent field of view on my K10d of 52.5mm, making it the closest you can get to a real “fast fifty” FoV on a Pentax DSLR. This lens has been discontinued by Pentax so I figured I’d better snap one up while I could. I paid $330 from B&H with free shipping. Good thing I acted when I did because it’s now not even listed on their site any more…

I’ll be testing it over the next few days for my review. Here’s a shot of the kit (shot in my kitchen studio):

I’m really digging the lens hood (and thus planning a new center-pinch lens cap purchace).

I have been thinking a lot lately about lenses and I thought I’d share some of my thoughts. I’m planning on doing a more specific lens comparison but I will save that for a later date. For now I just want to talk about my general thoughts about lenses and their applications. Why is this important? Well, as you begin to expand your collection of lenses you will soon learn that what you have really invested in is a lens system and not a camera system. Quality glass (lenses) will last a lifetime and will likely outlast the latest whiz bang technology of the latest DSLR you just bought. Hopefully by sharing my thoughts and experiences some of you will have an easier time of navigating the confusing quagmire that comes along with upgrading your DSLR’s optics and make the most out of your investment.

For this discussion I am going to primarily refer the standard 35mm film focal lengths of lenses. I will add APS-C (1.6X) focal length or 35mm equivalents in brackets [ ] where appropriate. In general, if I say 50mm I mean 50mm focal length on a 35mm film camera or full frame sensor DSLR. The reason I am doing it this way is that the 35mm equivalent focal length of a lens describes its field of view (FoV) more accurately than APS-C (or DX) format measurement does. If any of this is confusing to you I strongly suggest reading the Wikipedia page on the APS-C format before continuing.

What would I buy?

Let’s imagine for a moment that money is no object and I could fill my camera bag with whatever I wished. What would that be? While we’re in dreamland, let’s assume that the camera I’ll be shooting with all this fictional glass is Canon’s awesome new 5D Mark II. Here are the lenses I’d want to have available and why (I’m sure I could find similar choices for Nikon but I know the Canon stuff better):

• 17-40mm f/4 L wide angle zoom. Why if money is no object would I choose the 17-40 f/4L over the faster 16-35 f/2.8L? Simple, the extra speed the 2.8 provides is not worth the extra weight.  A super wide lens like this is something I’m most likely to carry around with me while traveling and the lighter it is the more likely I’ll take it with me. Also, the idea of wide angle shots is usually to capture as much detail as possible (think streetscape, landscape or 5-year-old birthday party action) so a larger aperture is just going to work against you. I’m sure there are specific situations where the extra speed of the 16-35 f/2.8 would come in handy but for me I’d most likely choose the slower and lighter option here and just dial up the ISO as needed in low light situations. The only caveat here is if I was shooting an APS-C body. Then the 16-35mm [26-56mm] would make a logical upgrade for the standard 18-55 kit lens. See my comments below for APS-C wide angle lens thoughts.
• 35mm f/1.4 L wide angle prime. I really like having a fast wide angle lens for available light shots of the kids around the house and for other times when a 50mm lens just doesn’t provide quite enough FoV to capture a scene the way I want to. In fact, while a 50mm lens best reproduces the magnification the human eye sees, a 35mm lens better represents the field of view our eyes can see (in focus). Having never owned a fast 35mm I can only guess but I bet it would end up being my standard lens mounted on my camera 90% of the time. Becomes a medium angle lens [56mm] on an APS-C camera.
• 24-105 f/4 IS L zoom. This is a close call. The 24-70 f/2.8 L is a very tempting choice. I have rented both lenses and they are both superb. The 24-105 f/4 is the one I’d put in my bag though because money is no object here and I’m going to have all these other lenses to choose from. Huh? Well, if I could only have one lens it would be the 24-70 f/2.8 L. Easy. However, if I’m going to be toting around a bag full of glass the 24-105 f/4 just makes more sense. It is lighter (see argument for 17-40 above), has a wider zoom range (better for “walking around”) and has IS. There are times when a slower shutter speed (1/30-1/4 second) is what you need to capture action and IS is the only way to get get these shots w/o the hassle of a tripod. The 24-105 focal range means I would have a stabilized lens that covers all wide to medium telephoto applications. Also an awesome all-purpose [38-168mm] lens on APS-C bodies (though lacking a bit on the wide end).
• 50mm f/1.4 USM prime. Here I go again cheaping out even though money is no object. Yes, Canon’s 50mm f/1.2L is the Mother of All fiddies. However, from what I can tell it is not that much better than the non-L 50 1.4 but it is that much bigger and heavier (and somewhat slower to focus). I know this whole weight thing is getting long in the tooth, but for the way I shoot it is important. When I travel I typically head out on foot to explore which means I have to carry my gear on my person. After spending an entire days lugging an overloaded camera bag around Hong Kong and Paris I can tell you that less is definitely more. The main problem is that you get to these wonderful places and you are faced with making the choice of picking one or two lenses and hoping for the best- or lugging your entire kit with you. I’ve done both and can say that whatever the choice the weight of what you carry always remains an issue. Studio, sports and landscape “trunk” photographers are the only ones that don’t have issues with how much stuff weighs. As for me, I carry my camera almost everywhere (including on my bike) so I want to find the best balance between size and performance. Here, the 50 1.2 just doesn’t make sense for me. YMMV. See fast prime suggestions for APS-C cameras below.
• 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro. You can’t beat a dedicated macro lens. I like the 100 f/2.8 on a full frame body as it provides the right mix of magnification and stand-off distance from the subject. I like to shoot most of my macro shots at arm’s length. Canon’s 50mm f/2.5 Macro is OK but I have found that I often have to get too close with the camera to get the magnification I want (often blocking out the available light). Meanwhile, Canon’s 180mm f/3.5 L Macro is an awesome lens but its longer focal length pretty much requires a tripod to get decent results. APS-C photographers should check out Canon’s EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro.
• 70-200 f/2.8 IS L zoom. This is one of photography’s greatest lenses. Perfect for portraiture, sports action, school plays, wildlife, the occasional macro shot, and pulling in details in just about any situation. The f/2.8 version gets the nod over the f/4 version even though it is larger and heavier. You’ll need the speed to catch those low light shots and the shorter DoF will make your subjects pop. My bet is that you’ll rarely shoot this lens at anything other than wide open. Works great on both full frame and APS-C bodies.
• 400mm f/2.8 IS L super telephoto. Here’s where the “money is no object” part really pays off. I have always wanted a fast super telephoto for getting in tight to stuff you can’t get up close to. I’m thinking sports car racing, school plays, African safaris, and the occasional full moon. Not a lens I would carry around in my bag but definitely one I’d like to have if the situation warranted it. I’d skip the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 IS L in favor of lens speed and ultimate image quality. Have an APS-C camera? Then your 1.6X crop factor makes this monster a 640mm f/2.8 equivalent for no extra charge ;-)

OK, so back to reality for a second. Most of us are amateurs and can not justify dropping $15K on our camera gear. Therefore, what should you take away from all of this?

• Buy the best lenses you can afford. It will outlast your camera and you’ll never find yourself second guessing a lens purchase. If you find you don’t use a lens enough to justify keeping it, you’ll also find that pro-quality glass earns top-dollar on the used market. If you are thinking of dropping $180 on a Canon 28mm f/2.8 to get a wide angle prime do yourself a favor and save your pennies until you can step up at least to the $420 28mm f/1.8 USM. What you will gain in ultimate image quality and versatility will pay off many times over in your photographs. That 28 2.8 will end up in a drawer somewhere collecting dust as soon as you realize that its useless below f/4 anyway. Trust me. I know.
• Do your research. This may directly contradict what I just said as you will find bargains out there. The non-L 50 1.4 I mentioned above is one example. In fact, at only $90 brand new Canon’s 50mm f/1.8 II is probably the best value in lenses anywhere. (Check out dpreview.com’s new review of the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II.) That being said, do your research so you know what you are getting. Personally, I would wait and save up for the 50 1.4 just to get the speed and silence of the USM focus motor. Also, the 50 1.4’s 8 bladed diaphragm produces far superior bokeh and starbursts when stopped down than the 50 1.8’s 5 bladed diaphragm. Buy the 50 1.8 II and you’ll be perfectly happy with it until you shoot one of the USM lenses. Then you’ll start beating yourself up. The best places to research are websites that actually test equipment. I prefer the-digital-picture.com, photozone.de, and dpreview.com because they use standardized testing procedures. There are blogger/photographers (like me) who “test” lenses and write their opinions about them. Take those with a grain of salt but they are usually pretty useful. Be wary of discussion forums and Amazon.com review ratings and the like. These are typically very unreliable sources for quality information.
• Pick up a fast prime lens. My recommendation is a 50mm equivalent focal length at f/1.8 or faster. If you are shooting an APS-C sensor camera this is going to be tough. Technically you’ll need a 31mm lens to get an equivalent 50mm focal length. Sigma is one of the only lens manufacturers making a lens like this. Their 30mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM looks like it fits the bill perfectly. However, it’s relatively pricey ($500) and tests say it is very soft off center. Pentax’s SMCP-FA 31mm f/1.8 AL Limited is an ideal choice for Pentax shooters but at $800 you’ve got to be mighty deep into Pentax. 35mm focal length lenses are probably your best bet. Unfortunately, truly fast versions are usually pricey and hard to come by (see the $1,200 35mm f/1.4 L above). If you can’t find a 30-35mm f/1.8 or faster lens do what most everyone else does and put your money into a fast 50mm. It’ll end up being a bit long on an APS-C sensor camera [80mm] but at least you can start exploring the Wonderful World of Bokeh and available light photography.
• Consider an ultra wide angle zoom. I’m not talking fisheye. I am talking at least 15-17mm on the wide end, though. A super wide angle lens opens a whole new world of photography for less money than most lens investments. I’ve already shared my feelings above about Canon’s 17-40 f/4L and 16-35 f/2.8L lenses for full-frame applications. However, neither of these fit the bill for an APS-C body. Look for something around 10mm [16mm] on the wide end. There are a number of choices depending on your camera so do your homework. I hear Canon’s EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 USM is superb. I’ve owned Sigma’s 10-20 f/4-5.6 EX DC lens and thought it was great.
• Avoid super zooms. These are the 18-200mm+ do-it-all lenses that are so popular at camera stores and on-line discounters. Sure, the idea of one lens for every situation seems like a good idea, but the reality of making such a lens results in some pretty significant compromises in lens speed, image quality and usability. While prime lenses will always give you the best ultimate image quality they may not be the right choice for every situation. However, you will be much better off if you limit the range of your zooms and follow suggestion number one above. In my experience you can get very decent results from mid-level primes but anything other than top-of-the-line zooms are likely to suffer in more than one area (speed, sharpness, vignetting, chromatic aberrations, etc).
• Save up for that super telephoto. Don’t waste your money on bargain brand telephoto lenses. There are a lot out there (Phoenix) but most of them aren’t worth the plastic they are made of. If dropping $5K on a lens doesn’t seem like it will ever fit into your plan then…
• Rent before you buy. So, if you’re following my advice and buying the high dollar glass maybe you should take it for a test drive before you take the plunge. There are a number of camera equipment rental services out there. I have only rented locally while I am traveling so I can’t recommend any of the on-line services, but I hear good things about many of them. Also, renting is a great way to get those awesome once-a-year close-up Christmas school program photos of Jr. from the back row of the gymnasium. No sense putting that $5K lens in the closet until next year, right?

I hope this helps clear up the mystery of lens selection a bit for those of you who are just starting to wade into the hobby. Feel free to post specific questions in the comments or drop me an email. Those of you who are more experienced please take a moment to share your thoughts on the subject as well.

I thought 14mm was as wide as one could go on a full-frame lens. Imagine my surprise when Ken Rockwell posted his review of the extremely rare Nikon 13mm f/5.6 rectilinear fisheye. Check it out. No barrel distortion what so ever. It is truly amazing stuff.

Thanks, Ken!

Sometimes cool pictures just come from thinking outside the box a bit. Here I was sitting in front of the Christmas tree contemplating what kind of unique Christmas tree bokeh photo I could take when I thought of my recent experience capturing bokeh with my pocket camera. I got to thinking that my 50mm f/1.7 lens might make a good subject for a shot, rather than simply the tool for capturing them.

The set-up for this shot was pretty simple. I placed my Pentax K10D DSLR with the 50 attached on the coffee table in front of the Christmas tree. Next, I set my Panasonic Lumix FX07 on the table in front of the K10D and framed up the shot. I wasn’t happy with the vertical angle so I placed a quarter under the front edge of the bottom of the Lumix to prop it up a bit.

As you may be able to see, I also dialed in -2/3EV in exposure compensation. I’ll save it for another post, but understanding and properly using exposure compensation is one of the most important steps to good photography. Anyway, at this point all that was left was to do was fire, download, crop, and post.

In my opinion, the photo turned out pretty nice. I may try and re-shoot it with my K10D and 18-55 kit lens (with the 50mm not attached to the camera). If I do I’ll post the result here.

UPDATE:

Re-shoot with the K10D and processed through Lightroom. This was one of those shots where when you see the image for the first time you say “whoa”. Pretty cool stuff!

Behind the scenes:

Photo stats: ISO 100, f/5.6, 55mm, 4.0sec, IS off (tripod), 2 sec self timer release. Cropped, adjusted white balance and added a bit of sharpening in Lightroom.

It seems that many Flickrites out there are struggling to get good bokeh shots. The good news is that shooting bokeh is one of the easiest photographic techniques to learn. Unfortunately, it is also one of the hardest to master. Here I will attempt to get you started with the basics. You’ll have to do the mastery part on your own :-)

Bokeh (pronounced: “boke-aay” or “boke-uh”- I prefer the latter) is the out of focus or blurry areas of a photograph. Wikipedia has a much more detailed description of the definition of bokeh that’s worth a read. On Flickr I find most people use the term to specifically describe out of focus highlights in a photo. For the purposes of this how-to we’ll focus (pun intended) on out of focus highlight bokeh.

The photo above made the Front Page of Flickr’s Explore last week. I wish I could say that this was a difficult and challenging shot that called upon all of my skills as a photographer. The truth is this was one of the easiest shots I took that night. These small aperture long exposure shots were a lot more difficult to get right:

The secret to shooting bokeh lies in its definition: out of focus highlights. You need three things to shoot bokeh: pin point highlights, a large aperture and a short focal distance. When I say pin point highlights I mean small light sources. Trying to shoot a large area of light like a window or fluorescent light does not typically produce the type of bokeh “balls” that we are looking for here. Small lights like Christmas twinkle lights are an obvious source, but any light source that is far enough away will become infinitely small and can produce bokeh. I find street and car lights in the distance at night make wonderful bokeh.

Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7 SMC

Next, we need a large aperture. For the novice, the aperture is the opening in the lens that controls the amount of light that makes it through the lens and shutter to the film/sensor. The smaller the f number (or f-stop) the larger the opening. This is usually expressed as f/5.6, f/4, f/2.8, f/1.4, etc. Read more about aperture here.  Typically the larger the aperture the larger the bokeh. Fast lenses below f/2.8 like my 20 year old manual focus Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7 SMC are ideal for shooting bokeh (and is the lens I use for most of my bokeh shots on Fickr).

That is not to say that one can not get great bokeh using lenses with a smaller maximum aperture like the typical kit lenses sold with most entry level DSLRs. The trick is to make sure you are using the largest aperture possible (smallest f number). To do this I recommend switching your camera into Aperture Priority mode (typically labeled “A” or “Av” on the program mode dial) and dialing in the smallest f number possible. With most kit lenses this will be f/3.5. Here is another Explore bokeh photo of mine shot with my kit lens at f/3.5:

The other reason that you want the largest possible aperture your lens is capable of is to ensure that your bokeh is round and not faceted. You see, most lenses use 5-7 straight aperture blades to create the variable opening in the lens. Bokeh takes on the shape and size of the lens opening so smaller apertures will produce smaller, faceted and generally less pleasing bokeh. There are exceptions to this rule as most high end lenses use curved aperture blades that keep the aperture opening round at all f stops. However, if you’re shooting with a $1,500 Canon L series lens I trust you already know how to shoot bokeh ;-)

Aperture openings on a 6 bladed lens (mouse over for setting):

Bokeh shots at different aperture settings with this lens (mouse over for setting):

The last component to getting good bokeh shots is the focus distance used. I have found that the shorter the focus distance to the foreground subject, the better the background bokeh I will get. The idea is to get as much distance between the subject and the bokeh producing highlights. Also, the closer you are focused to the camera the shorter the depth of field (DOF) will be. This ensures those lights way off in the background will be nice and blurred out.

The focal length of the lens is also a consideration. Depth of field is basically a function of focal length, distance to subject and aperture. At a given aperture and distance longer focal lengths result in shorter DOF. A short DOF is what we need to effectively blur the background highlights to produce bokeh. Getting close to the foreground subject and zooming to the longest setting on your lens will likely put you where you need to be to capture killer bokeh.

Here we have an example of close focus on the foreground subject coupled with a wide open aperture and longer focal length to create bokeh from small lights in the background:

When I took this shot I was at the minimum focus distance for my 50mm 1.7 lens (about 18-20″). The white (gold colored here) twinkle lights were on another Christmas tree approximately 8-10′ behind the light bulb and branch I focused on. The other smaller colored bokeh highlights were from other lights on the same tree that I focused on.

TUTORIAL:

Now that I’ve rambled on ad nauseam about all the intricate details of capturing bokeh, let’s get on to the part where you actually go do it!

For DSLR users (point ‘n shooters will have to wait for another tutorial):

1. Set your camera to Aperture Priority mode (A or Av on the program dial).
2. Select the smallest possible aperture (f) number for your lens (should be ≤f/4).
3. Switch your camera to manual focus and manually adjust the focus to the closest setting.
4. Zoom your lens to somewhere around 50mm.
5. Find some nice points of light at a distance of 10′ or greater from the camera (your Christmas tree is the perfect subject this time of year).
6. Fire away!

If you get a shutter speed that’s too slow (ie: less than 1/30 second), try bumping the ISO up to 400 or more. If you do the Christmas tree thing what you should get is something like this:

Depending on how dark the background is (darker usually = better) you might have to dial in some exposure compensation to get your bokeh to really pop. This image looks like it came out fine without any, but I often have to dial in +2/3 to +1 EV for my 50mm 1.7 on my Pentax K10D.

Next, try putting a subject of some sort in front of the camera at the minimum focus distance (or there about) with the bokeh highlights in the background. It’ll take a little playing around with subject matter and lighting (both foreground and background) but in no time you should be shooting bokeh like a pro! For more examples, be sure to check out my bokehliscious set on Flickr.

Please let me know in comments if this is helpful to you and/or if you have any questions or suggestions. Also, feel free to post links of your bokeh attempts for everyone to enjoy. Thanks for stopping by.

Happy bokeh-ing!

UPDATE: This is my single most popular post on my blog. Please let me know what else you would like for me to share about bokeh!