I often talk about “practical” depth of field.

To me, this means depth of field that allows you to (1) use DOF obviously and creatively as a tool and (2) retain story telling elements. Basically, not too much, nor too little.

Below are a set of images taken using the widest aperture of f1.8 on an Olympus 45mm at about 2-3 metres from the focus point. This is about f3.4 on a full frame lens in the same circumstances.

I find this lens has interesting Bokeh. It never fails to catch my eye for better or worse, but rarely lets me down. It needs to be said here, Bokeh is a qualitive term for the rendering of out of focus areas of an image, not just a quantitive one.

The story was one of a team talking about the making of a new venture.

Team meaning more than one.

Connections.

Each image has a clear (and razor sharp) point of focus, but also a secondary element. This element needs to be part of the story, but also not a distraction to the main subject on first viewing.

The image below is a single subject portrait, lens still wide open, but there are background context elements.

The large wall mural, also taken at f1.8, shows the detail retained by the increased distance.

Less DOF in all these cases would have lost these contextual elements to mush. I like silky smooth Bokeh as much as anyone and occassionally employ it as a useful tool, but it rarely offers more than a single dimension creatively.

A one trick pony, sometimes gorgeous, sometimes a shallow trick, but a one trick pony none the less.

What I am saying is, even if I had a larger sensor and/or wider aperture available, I would rarely use it. The 75mm f1.8 is my Bokeh king. A powerful tool that I use sparingly. The proof will be the 50mm f1.8 Lumix lens coming for the larger sensor S5.

Will I go Bokeh crazy or prove my point?