[Nicolas06]

Generally the bokeh is pretty good when the background is distant. With my original example the background was quite close.
This latest shot was wide open...f/5.6 @ 450mm.

Cheers,
Terry

I would say the previous shot with the 2 birds also got sharpened or at least contrast/micro contrast heavily adjusted. This typically affect the bokeh quality.

[tduell]

I would say the previous shot with the 2 birds also got sharpened or at least contrast/micro contrast heavily adjusted. This typically affect the bokeh quality.

Not much sharpening at all in that image...pretty much the default Darktable setting for RAW.

Cheers,
Terry

[Rupert]

My 2 cents.....I don't have the Pentax but do have the new HSM OS Bigma 50-500 and had the older one for about 10 years, which is very close to the new one in IQ...very close.....sometimes I think even better?

Just from my viewing of the 150-450 shots I think the edge goes to it in sharpness. I think the Bigma beats it in bokeh. The Bigma can regularly deliver some very nice bokeh...and that often makes all the difference in the final result. Though I have seen some nice bokeh at times from the 150-450.

In comparing, most of my shots are at high ISO values and most of what I see from the 150-450 are much lower. That makes it hard to compare evenly.

Pretty ordinary bokeh from the Bigma at ISO 1600.


Again at ISO 1600


At 3200


It improves at ISO 800


ISO 800


ISO 6400 is pretty rough, but the bokeh is still nice.


ISO 6400


Sometimes the bokeh is the best part...even at ISO 1600


Even at 3200 I loved this bokeh!


Lots more Bigma shots here with EXIF......
https://www.flickr.com/photos/129469263@N03/albums/72157651162955781/page1

All my shots are handheld and 99% are through my office windows. If I could get down to ISO 400 a few times it would make a difference...as would a tripod and shooting in the open air. (Yes...I am lazy!)

Still....if I was gambling, I'd bet on the 150-450 for detail and sharpness, but the Bigma can deliver too given the right circumstances. The prices are close enough, the Bigma extra reach is not all that much.....it could be a tough choice? I might eventually get a 150-450 just to satisfy my curiosity....but for now the Bigma serves me well enough.

Best Regards!

[normhead]

I'm not seeing busy bokeh, some of the out of focus objects are quite close to the birds.

Back on topic.

I had a Bigma, now gone to another Pentaxian, and now have a 60-250. IQ of the Bigma from 50 to about 300~350 is very good, but I think the 60~250 has an edge across the overlapping FL's. AF of the 60~250 is probably better, but I never did a side-by-side comparison of this feature. However, I have used the 60~250 (not the Bigma) at dog agility trials. When a dog is coming toward you over a jump, it's moving too fast for the AF to follow. The point of focus winds up let's say on the bar of the jump, but the dog's face, on which the red spot lit up, is already 15 inches closer to you and out of focus. Sometimes the AF would refuse to lock on a dog coming toward me over a jump (I eventually switched to pre-focusing manually and got more consistent results. The 60~250 is reasonable to hand-hold - - the Bigma really wants at least a sturdy monopod, but is happiest on a tripod. I'm skeptical that an additional 50mm and loss of one f-stop is a good trade-off. Money being no issue (but it always is) I would recommend considering the 150-450 which I think all tests and owner-evaluations indicate has IQ superior to the Bigma and almost on a par with the 60~250 over the shared focal lengths. It, like the Bigma, is best on a tripod or at least a monopod. No matter how steady you think you are, hand-holding such a heavy lens will cause some body-motion image degradation at any focal length above about 200~250mm.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/309408-pent...-50-500-a.html

There are some really sharp BIgma photos in the image library usually taken around 200mm at 500mm, the Bokeh is definitly not better than the DA 150-450 at 450mm
Borrowing an example of Bigma bokeh


Those Bigma Images at 500mm an ƒ6.3 remind me a lot of my Sigma 70-300 and are not near as smooth as the previously posted example.
tduell's image.


Rupert, all of your photos have a subject that's close and a far away background, it is possible to get decent bokeh from a point and shoot with that scenario, Show us a couple where the background isn't completely obliterated.

I'm actually quite impressed with the out of focus areas in tduell's 150-450 image, it's is quite smooth. If you look at the difference between my DA*60-250 and one taken with the Sigma 18-250, you'll see the same kind of difference.

---

Last edited by normhead; 03-27-2016 at 06:39 PM.

[noelpolar]

I would say the previous shot with the 2 birds also got sharpened or at least contrast/micro contrast heavily adjusted. This typically affect the bokeh quality.

Generally, where the bird or thing is dominate in the shot I'll use a brush to limit most adjustments to the specific subject to keep the "bokeh" soft for this reason......



Kookaburra by Noel Leahy, on Flickr


White Faced Herron by Noel Leahy, on Flickr

[biz-engineer]

I'd tend to agree on the softer bokeh that goes with a bit softer of the bigma. The difference is probably not huge, only a small difference that give a difference of image rendering in the same conditions. Bokeh depends very much on the relative distance to subject and subject distance to background. The better way to compare would be the have the lenses set with the same aperture, same distances.

[Rupert]

Rupert, all of your photos have a subject that's close and a far away background, it is possible to get decent bokeh from a point and shoot with that scenario, Show us a couple where the background isn't completely obliterated.

Here you go Norm...the tree was less than 6 feet away...it is ugly because that's how you get ugly bokeh, you have ugly backgrounds.....which is the purpose of extending the distance and not picking ugly backgrounds!
Bigma 50-500 f6.3 @500mm


If any P&S can deliver nice bokeh...why are we here??? We need to be in the Toy Camera thread!

Regards!

Let me add.....One thing Mrs Rupert said when she bought me the K1..." I hope this is the camera that will finally put an end to those blurry backgrounds."
So maybe bokeh is somewhat subjective to the particular viewer????

[biz-engineer]

Still....if I was gambling, I'd bet on the 150-450 for detail and sharpness, but the Bigma can deliver too given the right circumstances. The prices are close enough, the Bigma extra reach is not all that much.....it could be a tough choice? I might eventually get a 150-450 just to satisfy my curiosity....but for now the Bigma serves me well enough.

Thanks for those multiple examples of nice photographs with smooth bokeh, good choice of background indeed.

I'm actually quite impressed with the out of focus areas in tduell's 150-450 image, it's is quite smooth. If you look at the difference between my DA*60-250 and one taken with the Sigma 18-250, you'll see the same kind of difference.

I checked some real life test images from 150-600's (Tamron and Sigma): 100% crops show that there are actually not so sharp at 600mm (I can do achieve the same sharpness with my DA300+TC + slight crop), but if you look at the whole images, the subjects look look sharper relative to surrounding out-of-focus background, the reason is 600/f6.3=95mm > 450/f5.6 .

[normhead]

Here you go Norm...the tree was less than 6 feet away...it is ugly because that's how you get ugly bokeh, you have ugly backgrounds.....which is the purpose of extending the distance and not picking ugly backgrounds!
Bigma 50-500 f6.3 @500mm


If any P&S can deliver nice bokeh...why are we here??? We need to be in the Toy Camera thread!

Regards!

Let me add.....One thing Mrs Rupert said when she bought me the K1..." I hope this is the camera that will finally put an end to those blurry backgrounds."
So maybe bokeh is somewhat subjective to the particular viewer????

I guess the concept is a little more difficult than I thought it was.

If any P&S can deliver nice bokeh...why are we here??? We need to be in the Toy Camera thread!

It's easier with a larger format, please, any student in first year photography who couldn't produce that kind of bokeh with a point and shoot failed my third assignment. Learning to do something that on a format on which it's more difficult really in grains the process when you are learning. Then when they moved up to 35mm film, they already had a handle on the concept.

Who's laughing now?

[VoiceOfReason]

I guess the concept is a little more difficult than I thought it was.



It's easier with a larger format, please, any student in first year photography who couldn't produce that kind of bokeh with a point and shoot failed my third assignment. Learning to do something that on a format on which it's more difficult really in grains the process when you are learning. Then when they moved up to 35mm film, they already had a handle on the concept.

Who's laughing now?

I can make bokeh with my Samsung Galaxy S6. It is easy enough if you have a close subject and distant background.

[normhead]

I can make bokeh with my Samsung Galaxy S6. It is easy enough if you have a close subject and distant background.

Exactly, when I'm talking about how smooth or busy the bokeh is we need objects close enough for there to be a difference. You can absolutely obliterate the back ground with any camera, it's the intermediate areas that are slightly out of focus but still show some detail where you define whether the bokeh is busy or not.

Like this


And this..


A $400 lens and a $1200 lens. You pay a lot of a little bit of improvement.
I look at tduell's image, and I see immediately why this is a $2400 lens in Canada. I look at the Bigma image I posted above and the bokeh looks really busy and distracting, more like the $400 image, also a cheaper Sigma lens. But hey, that's just me. If you don't see it, don't pay for it. You'll save a ton.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/227006-lens-comparison.html

[VoiceOfReason]

Exactly, when I'm talking about how smooth or busy the bokeh is we need objects close enough to for there to be a difference. You can absolutely obliterate the back ground with any camera, it's the intermediate areas that are slightly out of focus but still show some detail where you define whether the bokeh is busy or not.

Like this


And this..


A $400 lens and a $1200 lens. You pay a lot of a little bit of improvement.
I look at tduell's image, and I see immediately why this is a $2400 lens in Canada. I look at the Bigma image I posted above and the bokeh looks really busy and distracting, more like the $400 image, also a cheaper Sigma lens. But hey, that's just me. If you don't see it, don't pay for it. You'll save a ton.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/227006-lens-comparison.html

I wanted maximum sharpness and speedy AF. The AW was simply a bonus. I know that in both previous aspects when pixel peeping the 150-450 kills my old Sigma 150-500 HSM. That is why I sold it after getting the Pentax lens. I was able to do a direct comparison and it was no contest on my 4k monitor at home. I imagine the 50-500 would be similar.

[y0chang]

Many telephoto zooms have nervous bokeh on objects only slightly OOF, the reason being is that there is a lot of aberration correcting lenses in the optical formula to create sharpness and contrast though out the zoom range. This create hard edges on the OOF highlights. You can mitigate this by having the back ground so oof that it all blurs away. All big telezooms even the mighty canon 100-400mm mark ii have this issue.

[Rupert]

Generally, where the bird or thing is dominate in the shot I'll use a brush to limit most adjustments to the specific subject to keep the "bokeh" soft for this reason......

Those are very fine shots Noel! Both of them!

Thanks for those multiple examples of nice photographs with smooth bokeh, good choice of background indeed.

Thank you, appreciated!

I look at the Bigma image I posted above and the bokeh looks really busy and distracting, more like the $400 image, also a cheaper Sigma lens. But hey, that's just me. If you don't see it, don't pay for it. You'll save a ton.

Mrs Rupert would love your image best. Which goes back to the age old Lesson #!......Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I would have failed your lesson Norm, and most of the others too......If I like a shot, I like it, not much else matters. It can be my shot, your shot, or anyone's shot. The first rule for me is...Do I like it? Some of my favorite shots by others are pretty crummy......by "standards".......but excellent by likability. We can't overlook that equation when judging a shot.

One of my Mom's famous Cherry pies.....maybe a little too brown on one edge? You can bet I didn't hit the delete button and trash that pie!

Did I like it? Damn right I did, every bite and I didn't share!


Regards!

[Caat]

The Bigma's strengths lie in its flexible range and in its very nice bokeh. I am speaking only about the EX DG version - I have not used the newest version.

However, it suffers from chromatic aberration and is not super amazing wide open - especially between 400 and 500mm. It's AF is also pretty poor in general. It gets the job done, but it's not one for fast moving subjects. Nevertheless, if you stop it down past f/6.3 it can and does produce excellent results.

I would be surprised if it surpassed the D-FA in any area but then it is a lot cheaper and does give you the extra range. I imagine it will fall into the 'good enough for most' category.

In reference to Sigma's other zooms which go up to 400 or 500mm, my understanding is that the Bigma has also been noticeably better than any of the others.

But the thing to remember with all extreme telephotos is that before the lens the biggest influence on image quality is technique, technique, technique. Very stable tripods or masses of light are essential when shooting at 500mm on a lens that's likely to be f/5.6+.