improving bokeh - Page 3

Urmas R. · 03-12-2009, 02:32 AM

I like the mood in your photo, Digitalis! The DOF is so narrow there.

Digitalis · 03-12-2009, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by Urmas R.

I like the mood in your photo, Digitalis! The DOF is so narrow there.

yep with an 11mm extension tube f/1.4 becomes extremely difficult to focus at .45m and not to mention the coma,LoCA...the only thing missing is flare,and light fall off. But this is a Pentax lens even the old ones are surprisingly resistant to flare.

legacyb4 · 04-08-2009, 12:05 AM

Just took possession of an A-50mm F1.4 and was trying out some stuff to see how far I could squeeze the DOF; you really have to watch your backgrounds because what you see in the viewfinder is sometimes not what you expected to get when the picture is taken (curvy surfaces are the worst since it's really difficult to tell just where you start to lose focus on a subject).

aweir · 04-08-2009, 12:38 AM

Those lenses have crazy weird names.

Question..with a 1:1 macro lens, is an extension tube still necessary?

My DA 100mm f/2.8 macro should be here any day. What kind of bokeh can I expect from this lens? Is it comparable to all these foreign ones?

Originallt posted by Rawhead: "I personally use a D FA 100mm f2.8 macro regardless of its shittititude"

Oh come now, this is a $400+ lens!

Digitalis · 04-08-2009, 04:56 AM

aweir
no to the first question,yes to the second, and I'll add that it's bokeh is VERY good. The only thing I would complain about is the build quality of the DFA 100mm f/2.8 macro.

*arpaagent* · 04-08-2009, 07:31 AM

Here is some interested bokeh for you. With a Tokina AT-X Pro AF 28-70mm f2.6-2.8 zoom lens. These are wide open f2.8 at 70mm. The lens suffers quite a bit at f2.8 70mm in terms of sharpness, but it sure does produce some interesting bokeh. I would call it smeary. Somewhat pleasing, although I am still undecided...these are pretty much just test shots.

What do you guys think of the bokeh here?

-Jim