[minahasa]

Oh good, I've got one of those coming in the post, nice.

This lens is new to me, too, just a few days.I think it's a good lens, not f2.8 fast, but the sharpnes, color tone and bokeh is good. here's more:

---

Last edited by minahasa; 04-09-2012 at 07:53 PM.

[Eagle_Friends]

DA 15mm f4

[Col]

DA 15mm f4

Yes I think we'll have to call that Bokeh distracting

[Eagle_Friends]

Yes I think we'll have to call that Bokeh distracting

Can't tell if you approve or disapprove...

[Col]

Can't tell if you approve or disapprove...

I suppose disapprove. I meant that it is so busy that it continually pulls the eye away from the main subject.

Still I love the 15mm, but have to accept that wide and max f/4 the lens was not designed for isolating a single subject... unless it was already isolated!

[Eagle_Friends]

I suppose disapprove. I meant that it is so busy that it continually pulls the eye away from the main subject.

Still I love the 15mm, but have to accept that wide and max f/4 the lens was not designed for isolating a single subject... unless it was already isolated!

I think it looks wonderful. More like an acrylic painting than a more typical water painting effect of most fast aperture lenses wide open. Definitely not the typical Bokehlicious style. To each their own.

[Eagle_Friends]

FA 77mm f1.8 Loving this lens so far.

[PPPPPP42]

Minahasa that flower pic is awesome, the colors involved are amazing and the way the flower jumps out from the buttered on background and stabs you in the eyes is perfect.

And to jump in on the Eagle_Friends debate, I like the pics, 2nd is better, the first is a little loud in the upper background the way it is cropped, the second the background sorta compliments it like the extra crap they put in a flower center piece on a table though there is a lot going on. That lens looks tricky to use for bokeh though, the choice of subject and composition would have to be done so nothing too visually obnoxious is in the background because the parts in focus don't stand out very clearly from the background (see minahasa 1st pic above though not so much 2nd pic for example of opposite where focused part stands out like crazy), and it would be better to have the focused part larger with that lens to compensate I think, or leave some additional room behind it before the background starts if possible. Your EXIF data is removed from those but if you had to stop down a lot to compensate for the sunny day that may have pushed your depth of field too wide. If you use a ND filter to get a wider aperture it will really narrow the amount that is in focus and significantly blur the background into something much softer that I think you will like better. I really do like the composition on the second one though, what aperture was it shot at?

EDIT: the pics you just posted though are perfect.

[Eagle_Friends]

f4 for both

[Ken T]

D FA 100mm Macro

[paulh]

Eagle Friends & Ken T: beautiful shots above ^^

*istD + Quantaray 28-90 (x-posted)

[Col]

I think it looks wonderful. More like an acrylic painting than a more typical water painting effect of most fast aperture lenses wide open. Definitely not the typical Bokehlicious style. To each their own.

Indeed that's why I sought out a Helios M44-2 all those examples of that funky Bokeh! Mine appears to be broken, certainly a f/4

No wait a minute there it goes...

[twilhelm]

My recently acquired Vivitar 28 2.8 (yesterday) some test shots from this morning. First 3 at 2.8, #4 at 3.5.
All shot with the *Ist Dl

[ramseybuckeye]

D FA 100mm f/2.8 WR Macro

[jurysi]

One with the Zeiss 25mm 2.8: