>>2687879> But to everyone else that actually has an interest in photography (not gear, mind you) it's just a gimmick that has little use when taken to the extreme.No, really, most people like small or big round bokeh in the out of focus areas better than the usual blur smears.They're not the "useful" areas of an image as such, but that's irrelevant.
>...you don't want a small DOF with product shots. You want sharp, crisp photos that have the whole object in focus (in 99% of cases).Anon, you rarely are using the bokeh for the subject, but if you ever do, it is most likely on a product.
Really though, bokeh is for the out of focus areas, and most bokeh-heavy lenses are well aware that the rest of the image needs to be sharp.
> If all you care about is IQ, then maybe. But it's the same subject, composition and light, so it's still the same shitty photo to everyone that hasn't just started out or only masturbates to gear.It is a better picture by the IQ, which matters to practically everyone. With no further downsides.
By the way, lights, backgrounds and so on also are generally fixed by having the right gear.
> No, they make for boring ass snapshits that present to everyone that you just got your first DSLR or barely get out of your basement. [...]You make it sound as though you'll be photographing only your pets 24/7 if you ever get a good lens, but that is just not realistic.
Besides, find me a pro photographer that never shot their pets.
