85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM versus Pentax FA 77

Asahiflex · 02-28-2011, 02:39 AM

Originally posted by Class A

PF is Bokeh CA.

That's just where it becomes so visible.

I sometimes don't translate "PF" to "Purple Fringing" but to "Pentax Fringing".

Here's another PF image from the FA 77/1.8...

Yes, that's typical of my FA77. However, the FA77 was used beyond the scope of its intended use. It can be used as a walkaround lens, but it's optimized for portrait distances. This "bokeh CA" is unwanted in the example you linked to, but the other side of the coin is that the lens has a creamy bokeh in other situations. Again: it's just what you prefer. The FA77 is a specialized lens and should be used accordingly.

Class A · 02-28-2011, 04:32 AM

Originally posted by Asahiflex

The FA77 is a specialized lens and should be used accordingly.

I understand. I wasn't trying to diss the FA 77. I'd snap one in a heartbeat if I came across a bargain opportunity.

I was just trying to put the "pretty bad" comment regarding "CAs" into perspective. Apparently the Sigma 85/1.4 has negligible lateral chromatic aberration. Bokeh CA is not CA and cannot be avoided. One can try to minimise it but never completely get rid of it.

Whether or not the Sigma 85/1.4 designers left some issues undercorrected in order to achieve nice FA 77-like bokeh, as Jun Hirakawa apparently did, I don't know but it so far I cannot say that the Sigma 85/1.4 disappointed in any way (there are not so great sample pics around, but one cannot fault the lens for that).

Class A · 02-28-2011, 05:02 AM

Just came across this Sigma 85/1.4 shot on Flickr. Questions?
N.B., would it be OK to inline the photo here?

Or have a look at the smoothness of the bokeh circles in this night shot. Just a hint of brighter rim. I'm impressed.

Pentaxor · 02-28-2011, 11:14 AM

Originally posted by Asahiflex

Yes, that's typical of my FA77. However, the FA77 was used beyond the scope of its intended use. It can be used as a walkaround lens, but it's optimized for portrait distances. This "bokeh CA" is unwanted in the example you linked to, but the other side of the coin is that the lens has a creamy bokeh in other situations. Again: it's just what you prefer. The FA77 is a specialized lens and should be used accordingly.

I think it would be uncommon for fast 85's not to display such thing. also the desired effect one lens try to achieve. the A* 85 for example has to sacrifice PF in exchange for sharpness. the Sigma I would think has to sacrifica LoCa for balanced sharpness and OOF blur quality.

Jewelltrail · 02-28-2011, 12:07 PM

Originally posted by nater

Not sure if folks noticed, but there's a review of the Canon/Nikon mount version of the Sigma 85mm on lenstip.com:

Sigma 85 mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM review - Introduction - Lenstip.com

Tx--all things considered, Sigma 85 looking special--well worth the $$. I may just get me one.

Pentaxor · 02-28-2011, 01:22 PM

just receive an email from B&H. Sigma 85 is now in stock for the K-mount. the problem is, I'm also contemplating on getting the x100 next month.

Asahiflex · 02-28-2011, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

just receive an email from B&H. Sigma 85 is now in stock for the K-mount. the problem is, I'm also contemplating on getting the x100 next month.

Oh, so now you're backing out

Pentaxor · 02-28-2011, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by Asahiflex

Oh, so now you're backing out

Not Really. I just don't have mad money for both right now. Wife quit her job, Baby on the way. I can't even afford a damn replacement flash right now. and it sucks. it's like the first half of 2009 all over again.

Asahiflex · 02-28-2011, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

Not Really. I just don't have mad money for both right now. Wife quit her job, Baby on the way. I can't even afford a damn replacement flash right now. and it sucks. it's like the first half of 2009 all over again.

At least you got your priorities right! BTW, I once was in the same position, but time flies. And remember, it's only a lens

Pentaxor · 02-28-2011, 02:31 PM

Originally posted by Asahiflex

At least you got your priorities right! BTW, I once was in the same position, but time flies. And remember, it's only a lens

true. I can always get it in the future.

MikePerham · 02-28-2011, 04:55 PM

Personaly I find the FOV of the 85 too narrow for a "protrait" lens. I had the FA77 and found that too narrow ...think if I wanted a dedicated portrait lens I would go for the DA* 55. There was a reason the 85s were popular as portrait lenses with 135 film ...but that FOV is now coverd with the 55mm lens. I found that 135 or so a bit long for portraits when using 135 film and couldn't get in close enough.

yeatzee · 02-28-2011, 09:26 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

true. I can always get it in the future.

But than who is going to test it, give us good samples, and induce LBA?

Pentaxor · 02-28-2011, 10:04 PM

Originally posted by yeatzee

But than who is going to test it, give us good samples, and induce LBA?

if you can give me some money, I would be happy to test it for you.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 02-28-2011, 10:47 PM

Originally posted by Class A

PF is Bokeh CA.

I don't think so. PF is more than just the purplish fringing component of bokeh fringing that occurs in front of the focal plane. If you get it all around the focal plane, it no longer has anything to do with bokeh fringing. Bokeh fringing is purple in front and green behind the focal plane. PF can appear behind the focal plane as well; it doesn't discriminate

Here's an example:

Jewelltrail · 02-28-2011, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Pentaxor: true. I can always get it in the future.

Yes, & its likely to be less expensive then too--like Asahiflex says, way to balance the priorities.

I almost purchased 1 tonight, but am struggling with several options:

1) buy K5
2) buy 70-200 Tammy
3) buy Siggy 85
4) buy 50-135

I truly am torn, and am still researching other systems too. Money is way too hard to get to jump on a purchase--at least for me.

Quote:

MikePerham Personaly I find the FOV of the 85 too narrow for a "protrait" lens.

This can often be true, but more often, for me, 85 is great for portraits, in or outdoors.

02-28-2011, 04:32 AM	#62
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by Asahiflex The FA77 is a specialized lens and should be used accordingly. I understand. I wasn't trying to diss the FA 77. I'd snap one in a heartbeat if I came across a bargain opportunity. I was just trying to put the "pretty bad" comment regarding "CAs" into perspective. Apparently the Sigma 85/1.4 has negligible lateral chromatic aberration. Bokeh CA is not CA and cannot be avoided. One can try to minimise it but never completely get rid of it. Whether or not the Sigma 85/1.4 designers left some issues undercorrected in order to achieve nice FA 77-like bokeh, as Jun Hirakawa apparently did, I don't know but it so far I cannot say that the Sigma 85/1.4 disappointed in any way (there are not so great sample pics around, but one cannot fault the lens for that). Last edited by Class A; 03-30-2011 at 07:19 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 vs SMC Pentax-M 85mm F2, which one to choose?	YJD	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	110	09-09-2012 11:11 PM
Pentax FA 20-35 versus DA 16-45	Pentaxor	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	10-28-2009 12:34 PM
Sigma 10-20 mm F/4-5.6 EX DC HSM NOT HSM for Pentax?	Chilichoco	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	05-24-2007 04:57 PM

02-28-2011, 02:39 AM	#61
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795	Originally posted by Class A PF is Bokeh CA. That's just where it becomes so visible. I sometimes don't translate "PF" to "Purple Fringing" but to "Pentax Fringing". Here's another PF image from the FA 77/1.8... Yes, that's typical of my FA77. However, the FA77 was used beyond the scope of its intended use. It can be used as a walkaround lens, but it's optimized for portrait distances. This "bokeh CA" is unwanted in the example you linked to, but the other side of the coin is that the lens has a creamy bokeh in other situations. Again: it's just what you prefer. The FA77 is a specialized lens and should be used accordingly.

02-28-2011, 05:02 AM	#63
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Just came across this Sigma 85/1.4 shot on Flickr. Questions? N.B., would it be OK to inline the photo here? Or have a look at the smoothness of the bokeh circles in this night shot. Just a hint of brighter rim. I'm impressed.

02-28-2011, 11:14 AM	#64
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Asahiflex Yes, that's typical of my FA77. However, the FA77 was used beyond the scope of its intended use. It can be used as a walkaround lens, but it's optimized for portrait distances. This "bokeh CA" is unwanted in the example you linked to, but the other side of the coin is that the lens has a creamy bokeh in other situations. Again: it's just what you prefer. The FA77 is a specialized lens and should be used accordingly. I think it would be uncommon for fast 85's not to display such thing. also the desired effect one lens try to achieve. the A* 85 for example has to sacrifice PF in exchange for sharpness. the Sigma I would think has to sacrifica LoCa for balanced sharpness and OOF blur quality.

02-28-2011, 12:07 PM	#65
Jewelltrail Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Rhode Island Photos: Albums Posts: 4,180	Originally posted by nater Not sure if folks noticed, but there's a review of the Canon/Nikon mount version of the Sigma 85mm on lenstip.com: Sigma 85 mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM review - Introduction - Lenstip.com Tx--all things considered, Sigma 85 looking special--well worth the $$. I may just get me one.

02-28-2011, 01:22 PM	#66
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	just receive an email from B&H. Sigma 85 is now in stock for the K-mount. the problem is, I'm also contemplating on getting the x100 next month.

02-28-2011, 01:56 PM	#67
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795	Originally posted by Pentaxor just receive an email from B&H. Sigma 85 is now in stock for the K-mount. the problem is, I'm also contemplating on getting the x100 next month. Oh, so now you're backing out

02-28-2011, 02:21 PM	#68
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Asahiflex Oh, so now you're backing out Not Really. I just don't have mad money for both right now. Wife quit her job, Baby on the way. I can't even afford a damn replacement flash right now. and it sucks. it's like the first half of 2009 all over again.

02-28-2011, 02:23 PM	#69
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795	Originally posted by Pentaxor Not Really. I just don't have mad money for both right now. Wife quit her job, Baby on the way. I can't even afford a damn replacement flash right now. and it sucks. it's like the first half of 2009 all over again. At least you got your priorities right! BTW, I once was in the same position, but time flies. And remember, it's only a lens

02-28-2011, 02:31 PM	#70
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Asahiflex At least you got your priorities right! BTW, I once was in the same position, but time flies. And remember, it's only a lens true. I can always get it in the future.

02-28-2011, 04:55 PM	#71
MikePerham Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Prince George, BC Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 642	Personaly I find the FOV of the 85 too narrow for a "protrait" lens. I had the FA77 and found that too narrow ...think if I wanted a dedicated portrait lens I would go for the DA* 55. There was a reason the 85s were popular as portrait lenses with 135 film ...but that FOV is now coverd with the 55mm lens. I found that 135 or so a bit long for portraits when using 135 film and couldn't get in close enough.

02-28-2011, 09:26 PM	#72
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	Originally posted by Pentaxor true. I can always get it in the future. But than who is going to test it, give us good samples, and induce LBA?

02-28-2011, 10:04 PM	#73
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by yeatzee But than who is going to test it, give us good samples, and induce LBA? if you can give me some money, I would be happy to test it for you.

02-28-2011, 10:47 PM	#74
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by Class A PF is Bokeh CA. I don't think so. PF is more than just the purplish fringing component of bokeh fringing that occurs in front of the focal plane. If you get it all around the focal plane, it no longer has anything to do with bokeh fringing. Bokeh fringing is purple in front and green behind the focal plane. PF can appear behind the focal plane as well; it doesn't discriminate Here's an example:

02-28-2011, 11:39 PM	#75
Jewelltrail Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Rhode Island Photos: Albums Posts: 4,180	Quote: Pentaxor: true. I can always get it in the future. Yes, & its likely to be less expensive then too--like Asahiflex says, way to balance the priorities. I almost purchased 1 tonight, but am struggling with several options: 1) buy K5 2) buy 70-200 Tammy 3) buy Siggy 85 4) buy 50-135 I truly am torn, and am still researching other systems too. Money is way too hard to get to jump on a purchase--at least for me. Quote: MikePerham Personaly I find the FOV of the 85 too narrow for a "protrait" lens. This can often be true, but more often, for me, 85 is great for portraits, in or outdoors.