Originally posted by paperbag846 
Great shot John! It's that sort of look that I wanted the 1.4 for... a beautiful softness
.
I think that the term "soft" carries a negative connotation that is unwarranted. There is "fuzzy soft", which simply looks lo-fi, and then "creamy soft" which looks like the image you just posted. I find this sort of softness very desirable.
Originally posted by timo I agree. It is often maligned. It applies to other lenses too. With the K501.2 which I had before it was stolen, it was one of the lens's most appealing characteristics. The K105 2.8 is horrible at 2.8 if you want clinical precision, but very appealing if you want a mood.
Thanks very much.
I've been using cat whiskers as a benchmark for bokeh blooming(some sort of CA). And I noticed with the 50/1.4, that if you close in to close-in at wide apertures, that it can exhibits a green OOF color in some of the finer OOF detail areas(such as hair). So if I had one complain it would be that with regards to a weakness with my particular copy. At which point it seems to clear-up at/or around
f/4.
Other than that, I think the A50/1.4 is a fine candidate and alternative to a 1.2 for portrait softness. Granted. it's no 77ltd, but it can fill in the void quite nicely.
PS. for that snap, I was aproximately 6 feet from the subject(cropped a bit).
Similar Threads 
