[Scorpio71GR]

Bokeh isn't something I strive for normally. Usually I am trying to go for depth of field.
DA*16-50 @50mm f2.8


Bigma bokeh even at f11 500mm


More Bigma bokeh f8 at 500mm the eagle is a captive and is inside a cage.

[Surnia]

FA43 bokeh can be really disturbing at times. This is not FA31 or FA77. The FA43 is a moody lens, capable of the best and the worst. But actually to me while I would have prefered a different bokeh it not that bad actually.

Beside, I got that from FA50 one day:

The bokeh may not be smooth, but I love how it rendered the circles. The edges just seem to work with those colours really well.

Having said that, I do like what my M100/4 does.

[Rupert]

The bokeh may not be smooth, but I love how it rendered the circles.

Looks great to me too!

Bokeh isn't something I strive for normally. Usually I am trying to go for depth of field.

Nice! Love the butterfly!

timb64 Is he stove ready? Nice shot!

Early morning fog...this little girly was waiting on the Cheater Branch for feeding time.

Bigma bokeh.


Regards!

[pepperberry farm]

lens isn't known for its bokeh, but I think this turned out nice:

[arv]

Much better.

As for the FA43... especially on APSC, a short tele just needs to have nicer bokeh than that. I don't think I'd ever want that lens... just not my personal taste... even Sigma's frog egg bokeh isn't quite as bad...

i don't think people get it for the weird bokeh it provide at time. They get it because when the condition are right, it make your subject pop like no other. I guess ig the lens was just bad Leica wouldn't have licenced it from Pentax.

For example on the shoot you dislike because of the bokeh, if you look at the part of the subject in focus, not only it is very constrasty and sharp but it really look 3D. You feel the relief of the painting. You could almost touch it. Not many lenses would do that and FA43 is maybe the one that do it most in Pentax. arv wasn't lucky on the bokeh itself maybe the postprocessing accentuated it, maybe it should have shoot f/4 to still get some bokeh, even more pop, but to not see the disturbing parts. But really as this the picture is interresting. It look like an impressionnist painting.

But I agree with you, as such I find it difficult to justify a moody lens counting that FA77 tend to give great results all the time. subjects pop, more than with 99% of the lenses out there, but less than a great FA43 shoot.

To tell the truth, I knew what I'll get before the shot - harsh light, busy background at a short distance, wide opened semifast lens with normalish FOV - and Voilà!
Do not blame the lens - in PP I helped it a little bit .
I have one with FA 50mm at f1.4 as well

[paulh]

Did someone say "Sigma frog egg" ? Sig 28-90:

[ChristianRock]

i don't think people get it for the weird bokeh it provide at time. They get it because when the condition are right, it make your subject pop like no other. I guess ig the lens was just bad Leica wouldn't have licenced it from Pentax.

For example on the shoot you dislike because of the bokeh, if you look at the part of the subject in focus, not only it is very constrasty and sharp but it really look 3D. You feel the relief of the painting. You could almost touch it. Not many lenses would do that and FA43 is maybe the one that do it most in Pentax. arv wasn't lucky on the bokeh itself maybe the postprocessing accentuated it, maybe it should have shoot f/4 to still get some bokeh, even more pop, but to not see the disturbing parts. But really as this the picture is interresting. It look like an impressionnist painting.

But I agree with you, as such I find it difficult to justify a moody lens counting that FA77 tend to give great results all the time. subjects pop, more than with 99% of the lenses out there, but less than a great FA43 shoot.

I get what you are saying. The FA 43 is more of a specific use kind of lens, and I did notice how contrasty and sharp the in-focus area is. No question about that.

(I'm just not sure it is fair to say Leica licenced it - it was Pentax who chose to offer it in Leica mount, that is what I know...)

I will try to get a similar type shot from my M 50 1.7. It might not be quite as contrasty wide open (or even stopped down) but it is sharp even wide open. My F 50 1.7 might match this at around f2. And the bokeh is very pleasing on these 50 1.7 lenses - at least by comparison to the FA 43! On a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is the FA 43 and 10 is the DA*55 the 50 1.7 lenses are probably around an 8.
The hard part will be to find something as colorful to shoot...

[Scorpio71GR]

Nice! Love the butterfly!

Thanks Rupert, I still can't figure out how the bokeh came out like that. There was weeds and grass everywhere. You always get such nice bokeh with your Bigma shots.

[arv]

This is the FA 43? I've never seen a Pentax lens with bokeh like that.

I was inspired by this utak shot :)

A.

[Scorpio71GR]

More Bigma bokeh f8 @ 300mm

[Nicolas06]

I get what you are saying. The FA 43 is more of a specific use kind of lens, and I did notice how contrasty and sharp the in-focus area is. No question about that.

(I'm just not sure it is fair to say Leica licenced it - it was Pentax who chose to offer it in Leica mount, that is what I know...)

I will try to get a similar type shot from my M 50 1.7. It might not be quite as contrasty wide open (or even stopped down) but it is sharp even wide open. My F 50 1.7 might match this at around f2. And the bokeh is very pleasing on these 50 1.7 lenses - at least by comparison to the FA 43! On a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is the FA 43 and 10 is the DA*55 the 50 1.7 lenses are probably around an 8.
The hard part will be to find something as colorful to shoot...

if we juge bokeh from its smooth characteristics FA43 is not great but doesn't get 1, except if some lenses get -5 or something. Some are really worse. And if the DA55 get 10, then the Fuji 56mm f/1.2 APD get at least 15 and FA31 12-13. And 85mm f/1.4 likely get not far from it.

Now that just the bokeh. For sharpness and constrast, if the max is 10, 50mm f/1.7 lenses are more arround 4-5 f/2.8 and bellow and DA55 is maybe only 6-7 for appertures larger than f/2.8.

For flare resistance and CA the M50 f/1.7 is what 2-3 ?

Just to say to say that any lens has to be used to its strength to make it shine! Sometime one doesn't fit with it while other really love it !

I never managed to find my FA50 f/1.4 usable bellow f/2.8 and even at f/5.6 and up it is quite sharp but far from perfect. Color shift on the bokeh (purple and green), soft and lacking contrast under f/2.8, monstruous CA in many occasion. Bokeh outlines on specular lights.

I tryed the FA77 and never looked back. But some consider the FA50 to have one of the best rendering of all lenses out there We are indeed different.

[Rupert]

Do not blame the lens - in PP I helped it a little bit

I really like that cow!

Did someone say "Sigma frog egg" ? Sig 28-90:

That is a lovely shot Paul! Do you have more like that?

More Bigma bokeh f8 @ 300mm

Nice goat...creamy bokeh!

lens isn't known for its bokeh, but I think this turned out nice:

Yes, it did!

You always get such nice bokeh with your Bigma shots.

Not always.....I have to shoot wide open and keep the background at a good distance from the subject. Fortunately, the Bigma 50-500 is not half bad wide open.

Been working on hanging some new colorful dead leaves far behind my Cheater Branches......I am hoping for some nice new bokeh......tomorrow I'll get a chance to see how it works?

Regards!

[Scorpio71GR]

Nice goat...creamy bokeh!

Thanks Rupert, I was lucky to be able to get so close. That is great think about telephotos if you can get close enough the background is totally isolated.

Been working on hanging some new colorful dead leaves far behind my Cheater Branches......I am hoping for some nice new bokeh......tomorrow I'll get a chance to see how it works?

When out in the woods I try my best to position myself for a good background. Sometimes it is just impossible.

[acoufap]

DA18-135 + DA TC1.4x

[FlorinR]

Some Christmas tree bokeh ...