question on bokeh

[briandee]

this picture was taken with 400mm at 2.8

is this bokeh natural ? or a photo shop job ? i mean the picture looks realy awsome but will a 400mm at 2.8 blur the background this much ?

not my photo..........

NCAA FOOTBALL: San Jose State at Stanford on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[lputman]

Yes, a 400 f/2.8 can blur the background that much and I would say that photo has not had the background photoshopped.

[zappo]

No, I'm sure that's not photoshoped. I ran around through my city last evening searching for places that would make up a nice bokeh. Actually it doesn't to much to get the background real blurry. Try for yourself! ( And look here)

[lputman]

Here's my example using a 70-300 f/4-5.6 on an XTi....no way near the same quality but I didn't do any post.


Aperture: f/7.1
Focal Length: 200 mm

[LoveDSLR]

Natural but not as awesome as the bokeh from a 200 f/2 (IMO).

[briandee]

hhmm just makes me wonder because my photo at 200mm and 2.8 has some bokeh but not nearly as blurred out as others i see.

[zappo]

There might be two simple reasons:
- You were not as close as the other photographer to the subject
- The other subject is farther away from the background

On your next tour try to get the background as much blurred as possible, you will learn pretty fast how this works.

[Ray Dockrey]

You have to also take into account to that some lenses have better bokeh than others.

[lputman]

Originally Posted by zappo

There might be two simple reasons:
- You were not as close as the other photographer to the subject
- The other subject is farther away from the background

This is so true. You can even look through all of those photos for that game and see differences in the bokeh.

[ecate78]

Hello!

I am new to dps and photography, can anyone explain me what's a "bokeh"! Thanks a lot!