First portrait with my new 70-200L USM f/2.8

[max3k]

This is the non-IS version I

my wife

 

[MWG]

Lovely bokeh

 

[misstwinklytoes]

Very nice.

 

[KmH]

Lovely bokeh

For me, the bokeh (the characteristics of the circle of confusion the out-of-focus image area a lens produces) looks somewhat jittery and doesn't really have that highly desirable, smooth, cream cheese type of quality, but for sure the background is nicely OOF - if somewhat 'busy' and bright as the background for a portrait.

The image is nicely lit.

I don't much care for the flesh fold in her neck caused by her shoulders being to close to perpendicular to the image sensor relative to her turned head.

 

[chaosrealm93]

nicee

 

[Postman158]

I personally like it.

 

[Ryan L]

It could be the constrasty black and white, but her face looks overly smooth, and her eyes also look a bit oversharpened to me. I am not a fan of her hand position, fingers always look large in pictures, I would try to keep the fingers together and inconspicuous. I feel like I am being an ass, but this is a photo forum. I also dont like her hair pulled back up top. She looks like she has a cone head. Sorry, its all things that could be corrected next time though. On the positive note, like KMH said exposure is good, DOF is good, nicely seperated from the background, and you have a beautiful wife to model for you. I think if her hair was down it would look nice.

 

[Robin Usagani]

Care to put a sample of bokeh taken with longer lens that you consider nice Keith? This one looks pretty good to me.

Lovely bokeh

For me, the bokeh (the characteristics of the circle of confusion the out-of-focus image area a lens produces) looks somewhat jittery and doesn't really have that highly desirable, smooth, cream cheese type of quality, but for sure the background is nicely OOF - if somewhat 'busy' and bright as the background for a portrait.

The image is nicely lit.

I don't much care for the flesh fold in her neck caused by her shoulders being to close to perpendicular to the image sensor relative to her turned head.

 

[KmH]

Care to put a sample of bokeh taken with longer lens that you consider nice Keith? This one looks pretty good to me.

Used that way, you're not actually referring to bokeh, you're referring to DOF, or more specifically background compression. http://blog.groundupphotos.com/2009/06/26/photography-lesson-3.aspx

Bokeh is not blur. Bokeh is a visual quality of the blur. That visual quality is a function of a lens property known as the "circle of confusion": Circle of confusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Dao]

That visual quality is a function of a lens property known as the "circle of confusion": Circle of confusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From what I learned CoC is not related to the visual quality of a lens. CoC related to recording medium, and the medium the the image is going to present with and the viewing distance. It is used to determine if certain point is consider in focus or not. And hence Dof is directly related to CoC.

For example, 35mm CoC is 0.029mm. If I use the same lens and put it in a Canon cropped body, the CoC changed to 0.019mm. You see, it is not a lens property. It is defined based on the sensor size, enlargement, printing size as well as viewing distance. If I keep enlargement, printing size and viewing distance constant, changing the sensor size affect the CoC. (So it affect the DoF as well).

 

[jaomul]

Nice portrait

 

[Robin Usagani]

I know what a bokeh is. I want to see what you consider a nice bokeh.

 

[Derrel]

I think it's a very nice picture of her. She looks great. The B&W looks good too.

 

[Evesdilemma]

Very pretty