[Driline]

Not sure if this will help, but Here's one I took at F4 with the DA*200. Outside evening shot lit with stage lights.

[fwcetus]

Just to clarify something... Looking mostly for heavy background blur and isolation of the subject. Samples are very good but I need sample images wide open mostly. Need to see how is the compression and isolation of the subject with busy and not so busy backgrounds. subject can be anything... flower, person, animal, etc. and wide open please.

OK, sorry.

[RAART]

Not sure if this will help, but Here's one I took at F4 with the DA*200. Outside evening shot lit with stage lights.

Gets close by... this is not bad, Need similar picture wide open to see bokeh and strength of the blur.

[D1N0]

Pentax doesn't have any primes between 100 and 200 and the 100 is a macro. There is the Samyang/Rokinon 135mm F2. At has an a A-contact but no AF being Samyang. You can use catch in focus with it.

[RAART]

OK, sorry.

why you are apologising? It should be me as I was not specific enough... Do not worry about this.

---------- Post added 06-27-16 at 02:24 PM ----------

Pentax doesn't have any primes between 100 and 200 and the 100 is a macro. There is the Samyang/Rokinon 135mm F2. At has an a A-contact but no AF being Samyang. You can use catch in focus with it.

this is my problem... That's the reason I asked for if there are any alternative around 200mm, faster/and 2.8 primes.

Canon has it, Nikon has it, and I do not want to switch systems.

If Samyang brings another fast telephoto lens, longer than 135mm and add AF (screwdrive is fine with me) that will be it...

[normhead]

This is another example from the net taken with 200mm lens and this is somewhere there where I want to go but still not exactly...



---------- Post added 06-27-16 at 01:50 PM ----------

I'm guessing this is 200 mm 5.6 on a full frame which would be 135 ƒ4 on APS_c. If true that would mean you could do even narrower DoF and blur with a DA* 50-135 ƒ2.8 on an APs-c camera.

[D1N0]

The 200mm F2 lenses from canon and nikon aren't exactly cheap. 2.8 is the best you will get for a reasonable price. Hence my advice to resort to a 70-200. On aps-c maybe the 50-135. Pentax will probably introduce a new 200mm F2.8 in 2017.

[RAART]

The 200mm F2 lenses from canon and nikon aren't exactly cheap. 2.8 is the best you will get for a reasonable price. Hence my advice to resort to a 70-200. On aps-c maybe the 50-135. Pentax will probably introduce a new 200mm F2.8 in 2017.

Yes, I know (Nikon 200mm F2 goes for around 1600$ used for the first version)...
I owned 180mm 2.8 from Nikon and it was cheaper than zoom 80-200mm back in the days and image quality was much better than zoom.

I plan to upgrade in time to K-1 therefore must be FF lens and as I mention earlier need more compact, less intimidating and lighter lens than zoom.

Part of my question was also in regards of the "new" 200mm Pentax lens. I guess that I need to get first current 200mm and afterwords the new one. Hope that Pentax will keep the same price for the new one.

Any samples wide open from DA*200mm?

---------- Post added 06-27-16 at 04:05 PM ----------

I'm guessing this is 200 mm 5.6 on a full frame which would be 135 ƒ4 on APS_c. If true that would mean you could do even narrower DoF and blur with a DA* 50-135 ƒ2.8 on an APs-c camera.

The plan is to upgrade in time to K-1...

[UncleVanya]

I did not wanted to look for manual focus but if I do not find what I am looking for than maybe a lens with "a" contacts, like pentax-a or tamron with adaptall-2 but lens needs to be better than current DA*200mm in every regard especially wide open performance.[COLOR="Silver"]

So wait - you don't think the DA* 200 is good enough wide open? Why not, what have you seen that leads you to that? I think it is a great lens - not quite as good as the FA* 80-200 but close.

I don't have any portraits handy that were taken at f/2.8 - a few at f/4 but not f/2.8. Here's a picture of the chain that the front swing hangs from. The background is grass and an asphalt driveway etc. I'm not entirely certain I hit critical focus on this one, I never did the fine tune af adjustment.

[RAART]

So wait - you don't think the DA* 200 is good enough wide open? Why not, what have you seen that leads you to that? I think it is a great lens - not quite as good as the FA* 80-200 but close.

I don't have any portraits handy that were taken at f/2.8 - a few at f/4 but not f/2.8. Here's a picture of the chain that the front swing hangs from. The background is grass and an asphalt driveway etc. I'm not entirely certain I hit critical focus on this one, I never did the fine tune af adjustment.

You misinterpreted what I wanted to say. I do think that DA*200 is good enough but did not see performance wide-open while most people shoot stopped down. While I wanted to shoot in the evening or during the golden hour and do not want to use flashes, just available light, therefore every single streak of the light has to count. Wide-open to get most of the light, background blur, bokeh, etc.

[UncleVanya]

You misinterpreted what I wanted to say. I do think that DA*200 is good enough but did not see performance wide-open while most people shoot stopped down. While I wanted to shoot in the evening or during the golden hour and do not want to use flashes, just available light, therefore every single streak of the light has to count. Wide-open to get most of the light, background blur, bokeh, etc.

Ok - now I got it. Did the chain picture help - my guess is the bokeh is fine but the chain doesn't provide enough detail to know if that is sharp enough - true?

[RAART]

Ok - now I got it. Did the chain picture help - my guess is the bokeh is fine but the chain doesn't provide enough detail to know if that is sharp enough - true?

Yes, you got it...

---------- Post added 06-27-16 at 04:45 PM ----------

The funny thing is that most people use this lens for wildlife and I wanted it as a portrait lens, while I used to use it very, very often back in the days (I meant same FL). Not limited to that only but also for full body shots (mostly children) and similar. I might use at some point to shoot occasionally some bird but this is Normhead terrain where he excels.

[UncleVanya]

Yes, you got it...

---------- Post added 06-27-16 at 04:45 PM ----------

The funny thing is that most people use this lens for wildlife and I wanted it as a portrait lens, while I used to use it very, very often back in the days (I meant same FL). Not limited to that only but also for full body shots (mostly children) and similar. I might use at some point to shoot occasionally some bird but this is Normhead terrain where he excels.

Most people don't do portraits on a crop sensor with a 200mm lens - that has the field of view of a 300. How many portrait photographers run around with 300mm lenses doing their craft on full frame - not many I'd wager. Granted I do have some shots like this with 200, 300 and 400mm but most of those were shot at closer to f/8. The backgrounds on those shots are also very far away so the f/8 merely enhances the subject without doing much to the bokeh.

Here are a few I just popped off this afternoon. Sorry I didn't have a human subject. Subjects were in the shade and the background is both in direct sun and shade to give lots of different contrast. The first 3 are from just under 10' and the gargoyle head to toe is about a head and shoulders size for portrait shots. All shots processed from RAW in DXO Optics. Minor lighting adjustments - no additional work done.






This below shows foreground bokeh. For this I shot the gargoyle pic but focused on the grass in the distance.


Tree face stand-in from about 15'

[RAART]

This below shows foreground bokeh. For this I shot the gargoyle pic but focused on the grass in the distance.

This is an excellent example... Thanks!

---------- Post added 06-27-16 at 05:36 PM ----------

Most people don't do portraits on a crop sensor with a 200mm lens - that has the field of view of a 300. How many portrait photographers run around with 300mm lenses doing their craft on full frame - not many I'd wager.

for sure I know one... ME! :

[mholford]

Well... the only 200mm lens faster then the DA*200 is the venerable K200 F2.5

Sadly not AF, not even aperture contacts. But with the green button quite usable and entertaining.
This is wide open, showing pretty nice subject isolation.