All I want for Christmas is bokeh

[Dao]

OP, you can do it with your P&S camera. It is going to be a little harder.

- Use the telephoto side, longer the focal length.
- Use a wider aperture (if possible).
- Have the subject closer to the camera. (Macro mode in P&S allow you to focus closer)
- Have the background far far away from the subject if possible. (In your photo, the background is kind of close to the subject)


I just took this photo with my cell phone.

 

[enzodm]

Be it circles, octagons, hearts, or any other design.

this is the imprecise way people sometimes refers to bokeh. Really, this is only how highlights are rendered.

 

[nickzou]

OP, you can do it with your P&S camera. It is going to be a little harder.

- Use the telephoto side, longer the focal length.
- Use a wider aperture (if possible).
- Have the subject closer to the camera. (Macro mode in P&S allow you to focus closer)
- Have the background far far away from the subject if possible. (In your photo, the background is kind of close to the subject)


I just took this photo with my cell phone.

Check.
Check.
Check (except this particular camera has no macro mode).
And... kinda check (it was inside the house).

 

[enzodm]

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?

Your friend is always a DoF calculator, since what you want is (relatively) shallow DoF: Depth of Field Table (browse through cameras and compare the two you want. Use real focal length, not 35mm equivalent).

 

[DiskoJoe]

Panasonic LUMIX DMC-GF2 12.1 MP Digital Camera - Black | eBay

 

[jake337]

bridge P&S with an optical zoom. You can now pick up a olympus micro 4/3rds used for between $200-300 bucks.

 

[KmH]

Bokeh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The English spelling bokeh was popularized in 1997 in Photo Techniques magazine, when Mike Johnston, the editor at the time, commissioned three papers on the topic for the March/April 1997 issue; he altered the spelling to suggest the correct pronunciation to English speakers, saying "it is properly pronounced with bo as in bone and ke as in Kenneth, with equal stress on either syllable".[SUP]

[/SUP]

 

[Destin]

I disagree with using a longer focal length to get bokeh in a P&S. They have VARIABLE aperture lenses, so that your f/3.2 lens at the widest setting becomes f/6.3ish at the longest setting. Since the longest actual (not 35mm equiv.) focal length (due to the small sensor size) is often less than 30mm, you aren't getting enough of a difference in focal length to make up for the difference in aperture. You're better off shooting wide and allowing the camera to choose the widest aperture possible.

 

[Dao]

I disagree with using a longer focal length to get bokeh in a P&S. They have VARIABLE aperture lenses, so that your f/3.2 lens at the widest setting becomes f/6.3ish at the longest setting. Since the longest actual (not 35mm equiv.) focal length (due to the small sensor size) is often less than 30mm, you aren't getting enough of a difference in focal length to make up for the difference in aperture. You're better off shooting wide and allowing the camera to choose the widest aperture possible.

Example:

Canon S95 (f/2 - f/4.9, 6mm - 22.5mm)

DoF at 6mm with f/2 = 0.85ft when subject is 2 ft away
DoF at 22.5mm with f/4.8 = 0.13ft when subject is 2 ft away.

So the DoF with the longer focal has a shallower DoF than the shorter focal length.

 

[jake337]

I disagree with using a longer focal length to get bokeh in a P&S. They have VARIABLE aperture lenses, so that your f/3.2 lens at the widest setting becomes f/6.3ish at the longest setting. Since the longest actual (not 35mm equiv.) focal length (due to the small sensor size) is often less than 30mm, you aren't getting enough of a difference in focal length to make up for the difference in aperture. You're better off shooting wide and allowing the camera to choose the widest aperture possible.

I quess somewhat true, but one must remember how fast one reaches hyperfocal focus point at with a smaller focal length lens.If you want to look up an example for yourself. Look up the canon sx30 is. Its optical zoom range is4.3-150.5mm f2.7-5.8.If you think you'll have a shallower DOF at 4.3mm f2.7 vs 150.5mm f5.8, go for it.According to a DOF calculater, this camera has a DOF of .05 feet when shooting at 150mm @ f8 from 10 feet. And has aDOF of 4.3 feet when shooting 4.3mm @ f2.8 from 10 feet, Also showing focus from 33 feet to infinity at 4.3mm @ f2.8

 

[o hey tyler]

I disagree with using a longer focal length to get bokeh in a P&S. They have VARIABLE aperture lenses, so that your f/3.2 lens at the widest setting becomes f/6.3ish at the longest setting. Since the longest actual (not 35mm equiv.) focal length (due to the small sensor size) is often less than 30mm, you aren't getting enough of a difference in focal length to make up for the difference in aperture. You're better off shooting wide and allowing the camera to choose the widest aperture possible.

No.

You get less depth of field on the long end of a kit lens at f/5.6, than you do at the wide end at f/3.5 at the close focusing distance. So even though the variable aperture is a factor on a P&S, you're not going to get more DoF when you zoom in.

 

[mjhoward]

Lot of misinformation going on in this thread...

 

[jake337]

The kicker is framing and size of your subject. Although you can get a shallower DOF at longer focal lengths, the distance to subject needed to frame a full person would be rediculous. I'm sure there is a sweet spot in every bridge that allows shallow enough DOF to render a decent OOF background while maintain while still being able to frame for a portrait.

 

[KmH]

I disagree with using a longer focal length to get bokeh in a P&S. They have VARIABLE aperture lenses, so that your f/3.2 lens at the widest setting becomes f/6.3ish at the longest setting. Since the longest actual (not 35mm equiv.) focal length (due to the small sensor size) is often less than 30mm, you aren't getting enough of a difference in focal length to make up for the difference in aperture. You're better off shooting wide and allowing the camera to choose the widest aperture possible.

Example:

Canon S95 (f/2 - f/4.9, 6mm - 22.5mm)

DoF at 6mm with f/2 = 0.85ft when subject is 2 ft away
DoF at 22.5mm with f/4.8 = 0.13ft when subject is 2 ft away.

So the DoF with the longer focal has a shallower DoF than the shorter focal length.

But because of the longer focal length, but same focus point distance, the subject is larger in the image frame.
Often the photographer will then back away from the subject increasing the focus point distance to keep the subject scale the same, resulting in having the same DOF but with the background magnified by the longer focal length.

 

[orlovphoto]

The Photo Palace Bus by Anton Orlov — Kickstarter

We've got your bokeh
Shoot with a Rolleiflex 2.8C Planar or a Zeiss Planar 85 1.4 on Canon 5D or Contax RTSIII - that'll give you some bokeh. Or a Summicron 50 rigid.

Support the

The Photo Palace Bus by Anton Orlov — Kickstarter!