over 50with smooth OOF?

les3547 · 01-23-2011, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by axl

Hi all,
to all of you who have been around a bit here with me, you'll know I'm "bit" of a speed freak and I like my OOF areas to be smooth and buttery to say so. Now FA*24 is not the best in this but 31 is superb. 43 limps a bit again but K50/1.2 saves the day every time needed. Now, I have 77ltd and it's great, I love it and I think the rendering is great, it offers good FOV (IMO) albeit bit long for my preferences, but the OOF even wide open are not as good as from my 31+50/1.2 combo. Is there any lens over 50 (ideally longer than 58 for those who will think of Nokton) that would rival the two above mentioned in terms of OOF rendering?

Thanks for any tips ans pointers...

It seems only one person suggested the Voightlander 90mm but based on reviews, not experience. I have that lens but hadn't experimented with OOF, so I thought this might be an opportunity to give it a try. These shots are, as the Photozone reviewers say, "quick and dirty." I simply walked around my property looking for OOF opportunities.

I have the 58mm VL too which is very nice, as every knows. I didn't expect the 90mm to do as well, but in some ways I think it is better. One can only stop down to f3.5, and also one must look for more distance between the focus area and background that is going to serve as OOF (you can see in my photos when the background was a little close). On the other hand, the 90mm is sharper in the focus area, which creates a more dramatic separation from the OOF area. I think I really like it:

Last edited by les3547; 01-24-2011 at 03:39 PM.

Bart · 01-24-2011, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by les3547

It seems only one person suggested the Voightlander 90mm but based on reviews, not experience...

Well, since I don't own this lens in PK mount, I had no relevant pictures to show.

les3547 · 01-24-2011, 12:38 PM

Originally posted by Bart

Well, since I don't own this lens in PK mount, I had no relevant pictures to show.

That's what I meant my friend (i.e., I assumed you didn't have the lens), I wasn't criticizing but rather trying to explain (rather poorly) that it offered me an opportunity for me to do some OOF testing with the 90mm.

Bart · 01-24-2011, 01:19 PM

Successful tests, I'd say.

erkie · 01-24-2011, 01:42 PM

How about the pentax AF teleconverter on your favorite 50mm or under. As most were designed to but used with a fast 50. Preferably a 1.4 or 1.7 converter. It should retain very similar OOF areas. Image degredation on a 50mm lens is minimal compared to using it on a telephoto lens. I know they have a terrible reputation but I believe that stems from using the for something most were never intended to do. I've never used one on a 50/1.2 but they work well on the 1.4 ilk.

Eric

axl · 01-24-2011, 02:43 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

Yep. I just realized that. I guess all of us had been really busy the past year. for us this year looks to be slow though and hopefully expecting something great while taking the time-off or slow down for awhile and enjoy what had been missed during the past year.

I just don't quite understand eventhough you liked the FA100, that you decided to sell it. I like the K85's sharp isolation and very good blur, but for really nice blur and sharpness the A*85 would be the best option. AF functionality and HSM of the Sigma is really tempting though for overall use. so it's more of a heads-up from here on in and what your preferred use and need will be. budget and availability are also considerations.

well, here it it's all gearing up for hectic year. Mrs is due in May and I have big shop to run next to it...

to FA100, it's my 2nd most regretted sale (right after F50/1.7). The only reason I really sold it was I really needed money for FA77. Now I have chance to buy one again at the good price, but with the Junior on the way, I just can't afford to spend £300 ish at the moment.., but oh I wish I could, that was probably the smoothest OOF I tried on longer lens. But as I said before, the only way of getting it would be getting rid of FA77, there is no other way I'd get money for it

so I have some tough decisions to make...

axl · 01-24-2011, 02:46 PM

Thanks all for all these replies, some good ideas and very constructive discussions. For those who are suggesting the Voigtlander 90/3.5, true it seems to generate some outstanding OOF rendering, but I'm not quite sure about it... but will keep it in mind, although with my preference for SMC labeled glass, the odds are slim

Pentaxor · 01-24-2011, 04:52 PM

Originally posted by les3547

It seems only one person suggested the Voightlander 90mm but based on reviews, not experience. I have that lens but hadn't experimented with OOF, so I thought this might be an opportunity to give it a try. These shots are, as the Photozone reviewers say, "quick and dirty." I simply walked around my property looking for OOF opportunities.

I have the 58mm VL too which is very nice, as every knows. I didn't expect the 90mm to do as well, but in some ways I think it is better. One can only stop down to f3.5, and also one must look for more distance between the focus area and background that is going to serve as OOF (you can see in my photos when the background was a little close). On the other hand, the 90mm is sharper in the focus area, which creates a more dramatic separation from the OOF area. I think I really like it:

it does a great job honestly speaking. I believe this holds true with other macros at this focal length. so I wouldn't be surprised at all.

Pentaxor · 01-24-2011, 04:56 PM

Originally posted by erkie

How about the pentax AF teleconverter on your favorite 50mm or under. As most were designed to but used with a fast 50. Preferably a 1.4 or 1.7 converter. It should retain very similar OOF areas. Image degredation on a 50mm lens is minimal compared to using it on a telephoto lens. I know they have a terrible reputation but I believe that stems from using the for something most were never intended to do. I've never used one on a 50/1.2 but they work well on the 1.4 ilk.

Eric

tried the 1.4x with the f1.2 last year. however, I didn't like the results. personally, I wouldn't use it on any lens which doesn't have an outstanding resolution. the macros and FA135 works on it nicely though.

erkie · 01-24-2011, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

tried the 1.4x with the f1.2 last year. however, I didn't like the results. personally, I wouldn't use it on any lens which doesn't have an outstanding resolution. the macros and FA135 works on it nicely though.

Nice to know about the 1.2

And the FA135. I've noticed some striking results with that one.

To be honest most of the 1.4 and 1.7 lenses I've used with converters were Rokkor. Never tried it on the old 58/1.2 .

Eric

Class A · 01-24-2011, 06:12 PM

Originally posted by axl

it's not very small, and it's not SMC, but idea of new 85/1.4 with AF is always tempting

If I were you, I wouldn't bet my bottom dollar that the current Sigma coating isn't a lot better than the old SMC coatings featured by lenses like the M85/2, etc.

With lots of old Pentax glass I noticed colour tinges, as if orange were sucked away. Really hard to get it back to neutral again in PP, not unlike shooting in Sodium light which you can never get right in PP because a lot of the colour information simply isn't there.

There has been a lot of development in lens coatings and I wouldn't be surprised if Pentax went through a lot of improvements since the original "SMC" introduction. But so have other manufacturers and, again, I don't think the old (or new) SMC is better than current Sigma coatings.

Pentaxor · 01-24-2011, 07:47 PM

Originally posted by axl

well, here it it's all gearing up for hectic year. Mrs is due in May and I have big shop to run next to it...

to FA100, it's my 2nd most regretted sale (right after F50/1.7). The only reason I really sold it was I really needed money for FA77. Now I have chance to buy one again at the good price, but with the Junior on the way, I just can't afford to spend £300 ish at the moment.., but oh I wish I could, that was probably the smoothest OOF I tried on longer lens. But as I said before, the only way of getting it would be getting rid of FA77, there is no other way I'd get money for it

so I have some tough decisions to make...

I understand your predicament Peter. same here as well. Mrs. gotta leave work which left us tight on the budget. no mad money to spend so the only way to get some spare is to sell some stuff. before, we could afford to spend $1,000 a month as mad/spending addiction money. with the baby on the way and less significant income, I'm even hesitant on spending even a cent. oh the perks of family life.

axl · 01-25-2011, 03:26 PM

Originally posted by Class A

If I were you, I wouldn't bet my bottom dollar that the current Sigma coating isn't a lot better than the old SMC coatings featured by lenses like the M85/2, etc.

With lots of old Pentax glass I noticed colour tinges, as if orange were sucked away. Really hard to get it back to neutral again in PP, not unlike shooting in Sodium light which you can never get right in PP because a lot of the colour information simply isn't there.

There has been a lot of development in lens coatings and I wouldn't be surprised if Pentax went through a lot of improvements since the original "SMC" introduction. But so have other manufacturers and, again, I don't think the old (or new) SMC is better than current Sigma coatings.

I don't care about sigmas improvements. I used to have Sigma 10-20 until December. And despite it being one of the modern EX DC range, it's coatings didn't stand much chance when compared to those of my FA*24 and even those of my 35 year old K series 50mm! I do appreciate the developments in other brands coatings but even the old SMC glass is still just about as good as you throw at it.

as for the colour tinges, they are one of the reasons why I'm after certain glass... The colours I can get using certain lenses with K10D are were very hard to replicate with Sigma or Tamron lenses I used to own. There is a reason why I want to get what I want to get... it's not just numbers and £, if it was only those, then yes, the Sigma is a great proposition but then, I don't think I'd be with Pentax. I'd be shooting Nikon an enjoying their "budget" line up of 35/1.8, 50/1.8 and 85/1.8....

Mechan1k · 01-25-2011, 07:02 PM

I'd have a look at the M85 for sure. You may not like using an adaptor though ... but was also going to mention the SMC or Super Tak 85mm f/1.9 ... not the f/1.8 version as that is not as smooth in regards to OOF.

With the Super Tak 85mm f/1.9

My conversion to jpeg was bad on this one

The lens in question

Class A · 01-26-2011, 03:21 AM

Originally posted by axl

I used to have Sigma 10-20 until December. And despite it being one of the modern EX DC range, it's coatings didn't stand much chance when compared to those of my FA*24 and even those of my 35 year old K series 50mm!

How did you notice/check that?
I think it is pretty much impossible to evaluate the difference in coatings when comparing a wide-angle zoom with primes.

Originally posted by axl

I do appreciate the developments in other brands coatings but even the old SMC glass is still just about as good as you throw at it.

If you like colour tinges, then yes it is.
The K50/1.2 was good for B&W but colour images just looked dead awful. Like an aged Agfa photo calendar from the 70's. As in yucky yuck.

Originally posted by axl

I'd be shooting Nikon an enjoying their "budget" line up of 35/1.8, 50/1.8 and 85/1.8....

Not sure what you are on about here. Sigma makes lenses that are far better than these and I'm not talking "numbers and price". Also, Pentax makes very good bodies so there is a point to shoot Pentax bodies with third party glass. Let's appreciate outstanding Pentax glass but let's call a spade a spade when we see one instead of glorifying all things Pentax.

01-24-2011, 12:38 PM	#48
les3547 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Sebastopol, California Photos: Albums Posts: 2,020	Originally posted by Bart Well, since I don't own this lens in PK mount, I had no relevant pictures to show. That's what I meant my friend (i.e., I assumed you didn't have the lens), I wasn't criticizing but rather trying to explain (rather poorly) that it offered me an opportunity for me to do some OOF testing with the 90mm. Last edited by les3547; 01-24-2011 at 12:43 PM.

01-24-2011, 02:46 PM	#52
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183 Original Poster	thanks all Thanks all for all these replies, some good ideas and very constructive discussions. For those who are suggesting the Voigtlander 90/3.5, true it seems to generate some outstanding OOF rendering, but I'm not quite sure about it... but will keep it in mind, although with my preference for SMC labeled glass, the odds are slim

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nature Oof, oof, oof	KarenH	Post Your Photos!	7	10-30-2010 01:36 AM
Smooth sailing	BjornAgain	Monthly Photo Contests	0	09-18-2010 02:00 AM
Abstract OOF	Rense	Post Your Photos!	3	08-31-2010 06:35 PM
Smooth Snow	Nitrok	Post Your Photos!	13	01-24-2009 11:06 AM
OOF & nothing but the OOF!	Akcelik	Pentax DSLR Discussion	38	03-10-2007 09:53 PM

01-23-2011, 03:19 PM	#46
les3547 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Sebastopol, California Photos: Albums Posts: 2,020	Originally posted by axl Hi all, to all of you who have been around a bit here with me, you'll know I'm "bit" of a speed freak and I like my OOF areas to be smooth and buttery to say so. Now FA24 is not the best in this but 31 is superb. 43 limps a bit again but K50/1.2 saves the day every time needed. Now, I have 77ltd and it's great, I love it and I think the rendering is great, it offers good FOV (IMO) albeit bit long for my preferences, but the OOF even wide open are not as good as from my 31+50/1.2 combo. Is there any lens over 50 (ideally longer than 58 for those who will think of Nokton) that would rival the two above mentioned in terms of OOF rendering? Thanks for any tips ans pointers... It seems only one person suggested the Voightlander 90mm but based on reviews, not experience. I have that lens but hadn't experimented with OOF, so I thought this might be an opportunity to give it a try. These shots are, as the Photozone reviewers say, "quick and dirty." I simply walked around my property looking for OOF opportunities. I have the 58mm VL too which is very nice, as every knows. I didn't expect the 90mm to do as well, but in some ways I think it is better. One can only stop down to f3.5, and also one must look for more distance between the focus area and background that is going to serve as OOF (you can see in my photos when the background was a little close). On the other hand, the 90mm is sharper in the focus area, which creates a more dramatic separation from the OOF area. I think I really like it: Last edited by les3547; 01-24-2011 at 03:39 PM.*

01-24-2011, 12:17 PM	#47
Bart Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: WW community of Pentax users Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,646	Originally posted by les3547 It seems only one person suggested the Voightlander 90mm but based on reviews, not experience... Well, since I don't own this lens in PK mount, I had no relevant pictures to show.

01-24-2011, 01:19 PM	#49
Bart Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: WW community of Pentax users Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,646	Successful tests, I'd say.

01-24-2011, 01:42 PM	#50
erkie Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Missouri Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 407	How about the pentax AF teleconverter on your favorite 50mm or under. As most were designed to but used with a fast 50. Preferably a 1.4 or 1.7 converter. It should retain very similar OOF areas. Image degredation on a 50mm lens is minimal compared to using it on a telephoto lens. I know they have a terrible reputation but I believe that stems from using the for something most were never intended to do. I've never used one on a 50/1.2 but they work well on the 1.4 ilk. Eric

01-24-2011, 02:43 PM	#51
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by Pentaxor Yep. I just realized that. I guess all of us had been really busy the past year. for us this year looks to be slow though and hopefully expecting something great while taking the time-off or slow down for awhile and enjoy what had been missed during the past year. I just don't quite understand eventhough you liked the FA100, that you decided to sell it. I like the K85's sharp isolation and very good blur, but for really nice blur and sharpness the A*85 would be the best option. AF functionality and HSM of the Sigma is really tempting though for overall use. so it's more of a heads-up from here on in and what your preferred use and need will be. budget and availability are also considerations. well, here it it's all gearing up for hectic year. Mrs is due in May and I have big shop to run next to it... to FA100, it's my 2nd most regretted sale (right after F50/1.7). The only reason I really sold it was I really needed money for FA77. Now I have chance to buy one again at the good price, but with the Junior on the way, I just can't afford to spend £300 ish at the moment.., but oh I wish I could, that was probably the smoothest OOF I tried on longer lens. But as I said before, the only way of getting it would be getting rid of FA77, there is no other way I'd get money for it so I have some tough decisions to make...

01-24-2011, 04:52 PM	#53
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by les3547 It seems only one person suggested the Voightlander 90mm but based on reviews, not experience. I have that lens but hadn't experimented with OOF, so I thought this might be an opportunity to give it a try. These shots are, as the Photozone reviewers say, "quick and dirty." I simply walked around my property looking for OOF opportunities. I have the 58mm VL too which is very nice, as every knows. I didn't expect the 90mm to do as well, but in some ways I think it is better. One can only stop down to f3.5, and also one must look for more distance between the focus area and background that is going to serve as OOF (you can see in my photos when the background was a little close). On the other hand, the 90mm is sharper in the focus area, which creates a more dramatic separation from the OOF area. I think I really like it: it does a great job honestly speaking. I believe this holds true with other macros at this focal length. so I wouldn't be surprised at all.

01-24-2011, 04:56 PM	#54
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by erkie How about the pentax AF teleconverter on your favorite 50mm or under. As most were designed to but used with a fast 50. Preferably a 1.4 or 1.7 converter. It should retain very similar OOF areas. Image degredation on a 50mm lens is minimal compared to using it on a telephoto lens. I know they have a terrible reputation but I believe that stems from using the for something most were never intended to do. I've never used one on a 50/1.2 but they work well on the 1.4 ilk. Eric tried the 1.4x with the f1.2 last year. however, I didn't like the results. personally, I wouldn't use it on any lens which doesn't have an outstanding resolution. the macros and FA135 works on it nicely though.

01-24-2011, 05:13 PM	#55
erkie Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Missouri Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 407	Originally posted by Pentaxor tried the 1.4x with the f1.2 last year. however, I didn't like the results. personally, I wouldn't use it on any lens which doesn't have an outstanding resolution. the macros and FA135 works on it nicely though. Nice to know about the 1.2 And the FA135. I've noticed some striking results with that one. To be honest most of the 1.4 and 1.7 lenses I've used with converters were Rokkor. Never tried it on the old 58/1.2 . Eric

01-24-2011, 06:12 PM	#56
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by axl it's not very small, and it's not SMC, but idea of new 85/1.4 with AF is always tempting If I were you, I wouldn't bet my bottom dollar that the current Sigma coating isn't a lot better than the old SMC coatings featured by lenses like the M85/2, etc. With lots of old Pentax glass I noticed colour tinges, as if orange were sucked away. Really hard to get it back to neutral again in PP, not unlike shooting in Sodium light which you can never get right in PP because a lot of the colour information simply isn't there. There has been a lot of development in lens coatings and I wouldn't be surprised if Pentax went through a lot of improvements since the original "SMC" introduction. But so have other manufacturers and, again, I don't think the old (or new) SMC is better than current Sigma coatings.

01-24-2011, 07:47 PM	#57
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by axl well, here it it's all gearing up for hectic year. Mrs is due in May and I have big shop to run next to it... to FA100, it's my 2nd most regretted sale (right after F50/1.7). The only reason I really sold it was I really needed money for FA77. Now I have chance to buy one again at the good price, but with the Junior on the way, I just can't afford to spend £300 ish at the moment.., but oh I wish I could, that was probably the smoothest OOF I tried on longer lens. But as I said before, the only way of getting it would be getting rid of FA77, there is no other way I'd get money for it so I have some tough decisions to make... I understand your predicament Peter. same here as well. Mrs. gotta leave work which left us tight on the budget. no mad money to spend so the only way to get some spare is to sell some stuff. before, we could afford to spend $1,000 a month as mad/spending addiction money. with the baby on the way and less significant income, I'm even hesitant on spending even a cent. oh the perks of family life.

01-25-2011, 03:26 PM	#58
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by Class A If I were you, I wouldn't bet my bottom dollar that the current Sigma coating isn't a lot better than the old SMC coatings featured by lenses like the M85/2, etc. With lots of old Pentax glass I noticed colour tinges, as if orange were sucked away. Really hard to get it back to neutral again in PP, not unlike shooting in Sodium light which you can never get right in PP because a lot of the colour information simply isn't there. There has been a lot of development in lens coatings and I wouldn't be surprised if Pentax went through a lot of improvements since the original "SMC" introduction. But so have other manufacturers and, again, I don't think the old (or new) SMC is better than current Sigma coatings. I don't care about sigmas improvements. I used to have Sigma 10-20 until December. And despite it being one of the modern EX DC range, it's coatings didn't stand much chance when compared to those of my FA*24 and even those of my 35 year old K series 50mm! I do appreciate the developments in other brands coatings but even the old SMC glass is still just about as good as you throw at it. as for the colour tinges, they are one of the reasons why I'm after certain glass... The colours I can get using certain lenses with K10D are were very hard to replicate with Sigma or Tamron lenses I used to own. There is a reason why I want to get what I want to get... it's not just numbers and £, if it was only those, then yes, the Sigma is a great proposition but then, I don't think I'd be with Pentax. I'd be shooting Nikon an enjoying their "budget" line up of 35/1.8, 50/1.8 and 85/1.8....

01-25-2011, 07:02 PM	#59
Mechan1k Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 2,891	I'd have a look at the M85 for sure. You may not like using an adaptor though ... but was also going to mention the SMC or Super Tak 85mm f/1.9 ... not the f/1.8 version as that is not as smooth in regards to OOF. With the Super Tak 85mm f/1.9 My conversion to jpeg was bad on this one The lens in question

01-26-2011, 03:21 AM	#60
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by axl I used to have Sigma 10-20 until December. And despite it being one of the modern EX DC range, it's coatings didn't stand much chance when compared to those of my FA*24 and even those of my 35 year old K series 50mm! How did you notice/check that? I think it is pretty much impossible to evaluate the difference in coatings when comparing a wide-angle zoom with primes. Originally posted by axl I do appreciate the developments in other brands coatings but even the old SMC glass is still just about as good as you throw at it. If you like colour tinges, then yes it is. The K50/1.2 was good for B&W but colour images just looked dead awful. Like an aged Agfa photo calendar from the 70's. As in yucky yuck. Originally posted by axl I'd be shooting Nikon an enjoying their "budget" line up of 35/1.8, 50/1.8 and 85/1.8.... Not sure what you are on about here. Sigma makes lenses that are far better than these and I'm not talking "numbers and price". Also, Pentax makes very good bodies so there is a point to shoot Pentax bodies with third party glass. Let's appreciate outstanding Pentax glass but let's call a spade a spade when we see one instead of glorifying all things Pentax.