FA31ltd wide open pics please

axl · 07-30-2009, 12:19 AM

Hi everybody,
can the owners of FA31ltd post some examples of f1.8 here?
The reason I ask is that frequently I don't get what I'd like to get (in terms of sharpness) if I'm shooting f1.8 on distances bigger than 1-1.5m. Now I'd just like to see if I expect too much, or it's my bad focusing techinque, or it's my lens...
thank you

BR
Peter

pschlute · 07-30-2009, 12:37 AM

Originally posted by axl

Hi everybody,
can the owners of FA31ltd post some examples of f1.8 here?
The reason I ask is that frequently I don't get what I'd like to get (in terms of sharpness) if I'm shooting f1.8 on distances bigger than 1-1.5m. Now I'd just like to see if I expect too much, or it's my bad focusing techinque, or it's my lens...
thank you

BR
Peter

I find that my 31mm back focusses a bit on AF, but I use a split prism focus screen and always switch to manual focus with the 31mm.

Here is one at f1.8

axl · 07-30-2009, 02:24 AM

thank you.
My copy seems to be ok in terms of AF precision but at bigger distances- above 2m - the images appear rather soft if shot at wider than f2.8

Bart · 07-30-2009, 04:25 AM

at f1.8 but this was not for bokeh reasons.

Last edited by Bart; 07-30-2009 at 12:47 PM.

David Glazebrook · 07-30-2009, 05:02 AM

very nice Peter.

K McCall · 07-30-2009, 05:50 AM

Hmmm, I started looking at my photos taken at f/1.8 and realized that I really don't use the 31 much for distances over 1.5 meters. Because of my "style," where I like to have one item as the subject, almost everything far away was taken with a much longer lens ("much longer" for me meaning 77mm).

I did have these:

(Taken in a locker room with one (!) overhead fluorescent light, handheld at some ungodly ISO):

You can see the light bleeding through here, although I think I actually upped the highlights in post-processing (I liked the effect). Another taken handheld @ 1/15 and ISO 800:

I am more impressed with the 31's performance within that 1.5 meter range, I think, but then I really have few photos beyond to compare to the MANY within the range.

This one is part of a series of the Bonn subway, but I like the color in this one the best. 31mm was just perfect for the composition I wanted. Handheld at 1/125 and ISO 400:

I think I'm more impressed with the 31's performance within the 1.5 meter range, but then I have so many more photos within that range that it's really not a fair comparison.

k100d · 07-30-2009, 06:09 AM

Keitha, were you the one who did a whole wedding w/ no flash and only the FA31? i remember reading that on DPR long long time ago.

Gooshin · 07-30-2009, 06:21 AM

this is a just-in out of camera jpeg with some funky WB and saturation settings

sharpness is at +1

iso 100

here is the orignal
http://fork.zenfolio.com/img/v5/p526007980.jpg

K McCall · 07-30-2009, 06:22 AM

Almost: I used the FA 31, the FA 43, the FA 70, and the D-FA 100 Macro. I was/am pretty good friends with the bride, and I told her in no uncertain terms that I wasn't comfortable using flash and that I wanted to experiment with things during the shoot. She was really laid-back and agreeable, so I went with it. Generally I hate shooting weddings and the idea that you *have* to get certain shots.

kristoffon · 07-30-2009, 07:16 AM

I think all my 31ltd shots in my flickr set were wide open (exif is available just in case). All available in high res for pixel peeping pleasure.

This one in particular was shot wide open and quite close - in full view you can see the tiny details in the focus zone

k100d · 07-30-2009, 07:28 AM

i did a test once to see the difference from f1.8 to f4 and the difference in visual sharpness was not very substantial, however there was a jump in contrast

CheddarGav · 07-30-2009, 12:42 PM

I currently "dual-shoot" with Nikon and Pentax for weddings, and I quite often take the majority of shots with just primes - but I find I have to fall back on my nasty Nikon 18-70 for the wide group shots. Other than the groups, I usually put the DA70 on the K20 and a Sigma 30 1.4 on my D80 - I must say that my purchasing of the DA21 hasn't stopped the FA43 lust, it just depends on whether I can get in there before the go up (they have doubled at 90% of online retailers

Originally posted by K McCall

Almost: I used the FA 31, the FA 43, the FA 70, and the D-FA 100 Macro. I was/am pretty good friends with the bride, and I told her in no uncertain terms that I wasn't comfortable using flash and that I wanted to experiment with things during the shoot. She was really laid-back and agreeable, so I went with it. Generally I hate shooting weddings and the idea that you *have* to get certain shots.

axl · 07-30-2009, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by Gooshin

this is a just-in out of camera jpeg with some funky WB and saturation settings

sharpness is at +1

iso 100

here is the orignal
http://fork.zenfolio.com/img/v5/p526007980.jpg

this is the kind of picture I was after, and thanks for the link to original Gooshin.
I will compare it to my findings.

anybody else has similar kind of shot at 1.8?

Gooshin · 07-30-2009, 03:22 PM

ohh and that was off a K20, therefore pixel peeping would be off-setting, if you DL the original, i would suggest re-sizing it to the K10 specs.

Bart · 07-31-2009, 12:05 PM

Well, I went through my 'archives' and I finally found this one:

Original size.

I have some indoor shots at f1.8 (churches) but this was the only one I found resembling anything simular to what you asked for.
And this one is with K10D.

Why did I use f1.8 here? Simple mistake

ps it would seem that Zenfolio is somewhat slow on my side of the world, lately

07-30-2009, 12:19 AM	#1
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	FA31ltd wide open pics please Hi everybody, can the owners of FA31ltd post some examples of f1.8 here? The reason I ask is that frequently I don't get what I'd like to get (in terms of sharpness) if I'm shooting f1.8 on distances bigger than 1-1.5m. Now I'd just like to see if I expect too much, or it's my bad focusing techinque, or it's my lens... thank you BR Peter

07-30-2009, 07:16 AM	#10
kristoffon Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Brazil Posts: 532	I think all my 31ltd shots in my flickr set were wide open (exif is available just in case). All available in high res for pixel peeping pleasure. This one in particular was shot wide open and quite close - in full view you can see the tiny details in the focus zone Last edited by kristoffon; 07-30-2009 at 07:32 AM.

07-30-2009, 12:42 PM	#12
CheddarGav Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: UK Posts: 53	Using purely primes, kudos to you Keitha! I currently "dual-shoot" with Nikon and Pentax for weddings, and I quite often take the majority of shots with just primes - but I find I have to fall back on my nasty Nikon 18-70 for the wide group shots. Other than the groups, I usually put the DA70 on the K20 and a Sigma 30 1.4 on my D80 - I must say that my purchasing of the DA21 hasn't stopped the FA43 lust, it just depends on whether I can get in there before the go up (they have doubled at 90% of online retailers Originally posted by K McCall Almost: I used the FA 31, the FA 43, the FA 70, and the D-FA 100 Macro. I was/am pretty good friends with the bride, and I told her in no uncertain terms that I wasn't comfortable using flash and that I wanted to experiment with things during the shoot. She was really laid-back and agreeable, so I went with it. Generally I hate shooting weddings and the idea that you have to get certain shots.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nature Some wide open Tulips	JeffJS	Post Your Photos!	6	04-18-2010 07:37 AM
77/1.8 wide open...	igor	Post Your Photos!	14	08-17-2009 05:36 AM
Ice wide open	gawan	Post Your Photos!	16	02-21-2009 10:40 AM
Which 50/1.4 is best wide open?	Big I	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	08-05-2008 09:23 AM
DA 18-55 wide open	Ash	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	16	01-03-2008 08:30 PM

07-30-2009, 12:37 AM	#2
pschlute Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Surrey, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,198	Originally posted by axl Hi everybody, can the owners of FA31ltd post some examples of f1.8 here? The reason I ask is that frequently I don't get what I'd like to get (in terms of sharpness) if I'm shooting f1.8 on distances bigger than 1-1.5m. Now I'd just like to see if I expect too much, or it's my bad focusing techinque, or it's my lens... thank you BR Peter I find that my 31mm back focusses a bit on AF, but I use a split prism focus screen and always switch to manual focus with the 31mm. Here is one at f1.8

07-30-2009, 02:24 AM	#3
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183 Original Poster	thank you. My copy seems to be ok in terms of AF precision but at bigger distances- above 2m - the images appear rather soft if shot at wider than f2.8

07-30-2009, 04:25 AM	#4
Bart Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: WW community of Pentax users Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,646	at f1.8 but this was not for bokeh reasons. Last edited by Bart; 07-30-2009 at 12:47 PM.

07-30-2009, 05:02 AM	#5
David Glazebrook Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Blue Mountains, NSW Photos: Gallery Posts: 217	very nice Peter.

07-30-2009, 05:50 AM	#6
K McCall Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Dallas, TX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 808	Hmmm, I started looking at my photos taken at f/1.8 and realized that I really don't use the 31 much for distances over 1.5 meters. Because of my "style," where I like to have one item as the subject, almost everything far away was taken with a much longer lens ("much longer" for me meaning 77mm). I did have these: (Taken in a locker room with one (!) overhead fluorescent light, handheld at some ungodly ISO): You can see the light bleeding through here, although I think I actually upped the highlights in post-processing (I liked the effect). Another taken handheld @ 1/15 and ISO 800: I am more impressed with the 31's performance within that 1.5 meter range, I think, but then I really have few photos beyond to compare to the MANY within the range. This one is part of a series of the Bonn subway, but I like the color in this one the best. 31mm was just perfect for the composition I wanted. Handheld at 1/125 and ISO 400: I think I'm more impressed with the 31's performance within the 1.5 meter range, but then I have so many more photos within that range that it's really not a fair comparison.

07-30-2009, 06:09 AM	#7
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	Keitha, were you the one who did a whole wedding w/ no flash and only the FA31? i remember reading that on DPR long long time ago.

07-30-2009, 06:21 AM	#8
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	this is a just-in out of camera jpeg with some funky WB and saturation settings sharpness is at +1 iso 100 here is the orignal http://fork.zenfolio.com/img/v5/p526007980.jpg

07-30-2009, 06:22 AM	#9
K McCall Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Dallas, TX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 808	Almost: I used the FA 31, the FA 43, the FA 70, and the D-FA 100 Macro. I was/am pretty good friends with the bride, and I told her in no uncertain terms that I wasn't comfortable using flash and that I wanted to experiment with things during the shoot. She was really laid-back and agreeable, so I went with it. Generally I hate shooting weddings and the idea that you have to get certain shots.

07-30-2009, 07:28 AM	#11
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	i did a test once to see the difference from f1.8 to f4 and the difference in visual sharpness was not very substantial, however there was a jump in contrast

07-30-2009, 03:17 PM	#13
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by Gooshin this is a just-in out of camera jpeg with some funky WB and saturation settings sharpness is at +1 iso 100 here is the orignal http://fork.zenfolio.com/img/v5/p526007980.jpg this is the kind of picture I was after, and thanks for the link to original Gooshin. I will compare it to my findings. anybody else has similar kind of shot at 1.8?

07-30-2009, 03:22 PM	#14
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	ohh and that was off a K20, therefore pixel peeping would be off-setting, if you DL the original, i would suggest re-sizing it to the K10 specs.

07-31-2009, 12:05 PM	#15
Bart Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: WW community of Pentax users Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,646	Well, I went through my 'archives' and I finally found this one: Original size. I have some indoor shots at f1.8 (churches) but this was the only one I found resembling anything simular to what you asked for. And this one is with K10D. Why did I use f1.8 here? Simple mistake ps it would seem that Zenfolio is somewhat slow on my side of the world, lately