[lightbulb]

Thinking of getting one for close up fishing portrait, will it work for me? And how's the Bokeh?

[RioRico]

Do you mean a close-up portrait of a fish, or a fisherperson, or what? Do you mind distortion?

Bokeh is the quality of OOF (out-of-focus) areas. With thick DOF, ain't much OOF, nor bokeh.

If I use my Zenitar 16/2.8 wide-open and get about 10 inches from a smallish subject with a not-too-close background, there's about enough OOF for some bokeh to be visible around my bulging target. But we don't usually use ultrawide lenses for thin DOF and noticeable bokeh. Optics can be cruel that way.

[lightbulb]

Hi Rio thanks!

Like this Catch Magazine

[v5planet]

Lightbulb, you could definitely do such things with the DA15. Here's a shot at ƒ/5.6, one full stop down from wide open:



I would say the bokeh is a little more 'harsh' than whatever lens was used in the example you gave us, but certainly at very close focus distances the DA15 can produce a narrowish depth of field.

[lightbulb]

Wow v5 that is what I hope to see! How close was the camera to the book may I ask?

[v5planet]

Wow v5 that is what I hope to see! How close was the camera to the book may I ask?

I took that photo a year ago now, so it's hard to say for certain, but with wide angle lenses objects are generally much closer than they appear. I would guess I was at, or not very far from the minimum focus distance, which the lens database here on PF reports is 18cm.

[imtheguy]

The da15 can certainly do that but note the fish shots were taken with a FISH EYE. The da15 has virtually no visable distortion like the lens used in your sample. If I were replicating those shots I would use the Pentax da10-17 at around 15mm for the distortion shown on the horizon. I have both lenses and have made that kind of comparison before.

[lightbulb]

Thanks Lee, I am going to try the DA15 first as it is lighter and a prime. But deep inside I wished for a WR DA15 and f2.4 ...

---

Last edited by lightbulb; 03-10-2012 at 07:32 PM.

[AndrewG NY]

Well you could get a DA14/2.8 which is that stop faster and focuses slightly closer w/slightly greater magnification. A bit larger though, and peak resolution in center is probably a bit better on the DA15.

[lightbulb]

Yeah, but with that kind of weight (DA14) I'd bite the bullet and take my chance on DA*16-50. Really the DA15 is the best for now save the lack of WR, f2.4 and rounded aperture.

Thanks for the recommendation though....

[Marc Sabatella]

DOF at these close focus distance is already shallow enough, and the relative difference between subject and background distance great enough, that there would be fairly little difference in going from f/4 to f/2.4, compared to what you might think that meaning for a normal portrait.

[lightbulb]

You are right according to this dof calculator, only advantage is low light ability for wider aperture.

Online Depth of Field Calculator

[lightbulb]

I like the DA35/2.4 bokeh better but overall the DA15 is pretty sharp!

[eddie1960]

the DA 14 can produce some Bokeh(but it's not the nicest in the world) - I generally don't use it for this but i had an example form a single in

[lightbulb]

Nice photo! Maybe the nervous bokeh is getting too much attention from the main subject. I really wish for the next range of Limited Primes come with 9 rounded aperture blades and WR. And of course, the WA one to have the small form factor like the Samsung NX 16 2.4.