All I want for Christmas is bokeh

[nickzou]

So this image is something I shot with my parent's Casio Exilim somethingrather... Since there was no manual controls, I set it to "Portrait mode" which I assume is like... wide aperture, zoomed in as far as the lens would let me, sat the camera on a tripod, turned off the flash and actuated the shutter. Yeah yeah lots of noise, yeah yeah, crappy DR. But I did manage to kinda get bokeh. Is this basically the limit of compacts and their ability to produce bokeh? I found a Samsung EX 1 for a really good price, I'm assuming being one of dem classy compacts the sensor is slightly larger, the lens at its tele end is 2.4 (as opposed to the 5.9 on this camera), I should be able to get better bokeh right? At least marginally better bokeh?

I know it is impractical to want bokeh from a compact but I'm not really willing to budge on the size of the camera. I WANT something small (but I also want bokeh teehee!).

 

[BeT]

I think you mean Depth of Field.

 

[nickzou]

No, I don't just mean depth of field. I'm assuming the Schneider-Kreuznach is capable of rendering somewhat nicer bokeh than the Exilim lens.

 

[Destin]

I think you mean Depth of Field.

Having a thin DOF results in Bokeh. His terminology is correct.

OP, you want bokeh out of a P&S, you have to remember that the lenses are almost always variable aperture. Wider zoom + closer to the subject will give you better bokeh than longer zoom/farther away.

Just borrowed my mom's Nikon P&S to take a test shot:

I'd say you can get decent bokeh, just need to really work to get it.

 

[nickzou]

That's pretty nice actually, what Nikon is it?

 

[Destin]

That's pretty nice actually, what Nikon is it?

It's a Nikon S203. Got it for her as a Christmas gift like 3 years ago for $70 on black friday.

 

[Vtec44]

Put in in macro mode

 

[Josh66]

I think you mean Depth of Field.

Having a thin DOF results in Bokeh. His terminology is correct.

"Bokeh" is not something that can be 'attained' - it is always there. Bokeh is a measure of the quality of the out of focus regions. It can be 'good' or 'bad' but it is always there...

His terminology is not correct...

 

[ConradM]

+1 on macro mode... This is an old pic from my canon SD780IS.

 

[GrantH]

I see no bokeh.

 

[enzodm]

I see no bokeh.

"In photography, bokeh (Originally

/ˈboʊkɛ/,[SUP][1][/SUP]

/ˈboʊkeɪ/ boh-kay, and also sometimes heard as

/ˈboʊkə/ boh-kə,[SUP][2][/SUP] Japanese: [boke]) is the blur,[SUP][3][/SUP][SUP][4][/SUP] or the aesthetic quality of the blur,[SUP][5][/SUP][SUP][6][/SUP][SUP][7][/SUP] in out-of-focus areas of an image, or "the way the lens renders out-of-focus points of light."[SUP][8][/SUP]"
from Bokeh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Ron Evers]

I know it is impractical to want bokeh from a compact but I'm not really willing to budge on the size of the camera. I WANT something small (but I also want bokeh teehee!).

Get a micro four thirds camera & a Minolta 58mm f1.2 or 1.4 lens.

 

[Judobreaker]

I think Macro mode works well.
Shot this one 2 years ago with my Lumix FZ-18.

 

[GrantH]

I see no bokeh.

"In photography, bokeh (Originally

/ˈboʊkɛ/,[SUP][1][/SUP]

/ˈboʊkeɪ/ boh-kay, and also sometimes heard as

/ˈboʊkə/ boh-kə,[SUP][2][/SUP] Japanese: [boke]) is the blur,[SUP][3][/SUP][SUP][4][/SUP] or the aesthetic quality of the blur,[SUP][5][/SUP][SUP][6][/SUP][SUP][7][/SUP] in out-of-focus areas of an image, or "the way the lens renders out-of-focus points of light."[SUP][8][/SUP]"
from Bokeh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

With the full definition in mind, there is zero aesthetic quality to her slightly blurred background. Also, typically when spoken of, bokeh is the design within the background of a shallow DOF image. Be it circles, octagons, hearts, or any other design. I see neither qualities in this image.

 

[Dao]

It is blur in Japanese, and most of the people means the quality of the blur. Whether is it good or bad, still a blur or bokeh.