Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-12-2012, 11:39 AM   #2866
Forum Member




Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 95
Since i think you're all so serious, i'll post a picture which isn't very good, but it's kinda fun, especially when it describes pretty well why i never play with sticks with my dog:

EDIT: Uploaded the picture...erhm.

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5  Photo 

Last edited by morpho; 04-12-2012 at 11:45 AM.
04-12-2012, 08:26 PM   #2867
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 691
QuoteOriginally posted by steliost Quote
And my own version of the model, still I like more the version of prosto, which thank you for shared with us this wonderful photo ...
Sorry for my english...
It reminds me of the image quality of the movie Violet where Mikovich the super lady model was in it. I like it!
04-13-2012, 12:02 AM   #2868
Junior Member
Prosto's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 37
wow...thank you all guys for your tries and opinions. and steliost: thank you, too. your treatment seems the most interesting to me. I don't know how but suddenly reminded me "The Mullholland Drive" mood. I hope this girl doesn't read pentaxforum since they all hate being exposed unprocessed...and thanks for watching.
Attached Images
 
04-13-2012, 01:02 AM   #2869
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,546
I deleted my feeble PP attempt off of Flickr and will delete my posts here to as they should now show no images. I hope I didn't offend anyone.

With all of these great Prosto shots using the 85 F1.4 I dug out my iPhone DOF calculator and came up with this:

55mm @ 2meters from subject @ F.1.4 DOF = 74.93
85mm @ 3.09 meters from subject @ F/1.4 DOF = 74.87 (85/55=1.54 and 2x1.54=3.09)

My question is:

If you took the same shot with both lenses at those distances the subject should be the same size in the shot although the background would be different. Is there any real difference in the result? I know that's an ignorant question but as I don't have an 85mm lens I haven't tied it. I will try it with my zoom though at F2.8 and compare the different backgrounds tomorrow.

Earlier today I set up my Sigma 50 and DA55 so that the camera was 1.1x further from the subject for the 55. I found that the Bokeh of the DA55 @ F/2.5 was pretty much identical to the 50 @ F/1.8. An interesting scenario because it means you can stop down the Pentax a bit to sharpen up the image. I assume a 85mm F/1.4 lens would be even better for this.

Any comments would be appreciated?

PS: I think I'll try it with my FA77 @1.8. Sorry for the BS guys but I'm still learning and trying to figure things out as fast as I can.. lol

04-13-2012, 02:14 AM   #2870
Junior Member
Prosto's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 37
QuoteOriginally posted by bossa Quote
...........

My question is:

If you took the same shot with both lenses at those distances the subject should be the same size in the shot although the background would be different. Is there any real difference in the result?
..............
well...all I know that you should take into the consideration the censor density or the print size also. I don't have any of the 50/1.4 right now (hesitating about the legacy 55/1.4 or sigma 50/1.4) to give you a straight comparison. But many people assume bokeh to be the same as DOF. Extremely thin DOF doesn't exactly mean pleasant bokeh and vise versa. I used to own Olympus 35-100/2.0 and 150/2.0. It's equiv.to 70-200/4.0 and 300/4.0 (focal length and DOF wise), and I can tell for sure that none either of my customers or friends (canon users) could even apriximately guess the DOF eqiuv.on a FF looking at the pictures. But there was no way the pictures were simiar to canon 70-200/4.0. I mean it's all very relative assuming the distortions are corrected if present. There are so many other characteristics besides DOF which affect the look of the background.

As for the Samyang 85/1.4 lense...it can be very soft wide open and give you very dirty colors depending on the lighting conditions - which I dislike. And..can be reasonably sharp at 1.4 and excessively sharp at 2.0 for portraits with good light. It took me sometime to adjust my prosessing accordingly to manage it's character. But any 85/1.4 has something special - it's weaknesses and strong sides. It's just this kind of lense. But it's certainly a must have for portraiture since you have some space behind to step away from the model. 50mm even on a crop doesn't always give you that special look. It makes faces bigger, etc.

I'm not really fond of technical part of the shooting. I mean I have to learn my minimum to get the idea and somewhat predict the result. But I enjoy shooting much more. One of the reasons I left russian forum. Many people are whining there that they need this or that camera or lense to fullfill their needs. And Pentax is the only brand that has to do it... Etc.

So..I dunno if I've answered your question...If not - it's not becuase I didn't want to, but becuase I don't know myself; if yes - well, it's still unintended

Two more files with this lens on K-5 just to compare with the other shot:

http://www.filedropper.com/ost0920 - f 1.4

http://www.filedropper.com/ost0938 - f 2.0
04-13-2012, 02:17 AM   #2871
Forum Member
steliost's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens Greece
Photos: Albums
Posts: 57
QuoteOriginally posted by lightbulb Quote
It reminds me of the image quality of the movie Violet where Mikovich the super lady model was in it. I like it!
Thank you!

QuoteOriginally posted by Prosto Quote
wow...thank you all guys for your tries and opinions. and steliost: thank you, too. your treatment seems the most interesting to me. I don't know how but suddenly reminded me "The Mullholland Drive" mood. I hope this girl doesn't read pentaxforum since they all hate being exposed unprocessed...and thanks for watching.
Ha, ha... Thanks prosto, certainly not in my mind this movie when I was editing the photo, "The Mullholland Drive"


I wanted to give a warm atmosphere and I think somehow I managed ... As I said above, your version is the best as well as your knowledge and your experience in image processing is very professional...

Thanks again for your wonderful portraits that you share with us ...

ps. Ιf you want to erase my post, just tell!
04-13-2012, 02:42 AM   #2872
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,546
QuoteOriginally posted by Prosto Quote
well...all I know that you should take into the consideration the censor density or the print size also. I don't have any of the 50/1.4 right now (hesitating about the legacy 55/1.4 or sigma 50/1.4) to give you a straight comparison. But many people assume bokeh to be the same as DOF. Extremely thin DOF doesn't exactly mean pleasant bokeh and vise versa. I used to own Olympus 35-100/2.0 and 150/2.0. It's equiv.to 70-200/4.0 and 300/4.0 (focal length and DOF wise), and I can tell for sure that none either of my customers or friends (canon users) could even apriximately guess the DOF eqiuv.on a FF looking at the pictures. But there was no way the pictures were simiar to canon 70-200/4.0. I mean it's all very relative assuming the distortions are corrected if present. There are so many other characteristics besides DOF which affect the look of the background.

As for the Samyang 85/1.4 lense...it can be very soft wide open and give you very dirty colors depending on the lighting conditions - which I dislike. And..can be reasonably sharp at 1.4 and excessively sharp at 2.0 for portraits with good light. It took me sometime to adjust my prosessing accordingly to manage it's character. But any 85/1.4 has something special - it's weaknesses and strong sides. It's just this kind of lense. But it's certainly a must have for portraiture since you have some space behind to step away from the model. 50mm even on a crop doesn't always give you that special look. It makes faces bigger, etc.

I'm not really fond of technical part of the shooting. I mean I have to learn my minimum to get the idea and somewhat predict the result. But I enjoy shooting much more. One of the reasons I left russian forum. Many people are whining there that they need this or that camera or lense to fullfill their needs. And Pentax is the only brand that has to do it... Etc.

So..I dunno if I've answered your question...If not - it's not becuase I didn't want to, but becuase I don't know myself; if yes - well, it's still unintended

Two more files with this lens on K-5 just to compare with the other shot:

http://www.filedropper.com/ost0920 - f 1.4

http://www.filedropper.com/ost0938 - f 2.0

Thanks for the response. I am not confusing DOF and Bokeh though. My idea was to discount DOF by showing that they were in fact the same for both lenses where the subject was the same size in the image and thus try to get a better idea of what was happening in the Bokeh alone. Obviously the background would be bigger with the longer focal length lens. I'll do some tests with my 77 and 55 to see it for myself and if they're worth reporting I will create a new thread.

Cheers

PS: I can't download those pictures. I think I am supposed to download an application and I already have enough of those. Thanks for trying.
04-13-2012, 03:06 AM   #2873
Junior Member
Prosto's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 37
QuoteOriginally posted by bossa Quote
Thanks for the response. I am not confusing DOF and Bokeh though. My idea was to discount DOF by showing that they were in fact the same for both lenses where the subject was the same size in the image and thus try to get a better idea of what was happening in the Bokeh alone. Obviously the background would be bigger with the longer focal length lens. I'll do some tests with my 77 and 55 to see it for myself and if they're worth reporting I will create a new thread.

Cheers

PS: I can't download those pictures. I think I am supposed to download an application and I already have enough of those. Thanks for trying.

Oh- I see now. The perspective. It obvoisly should be different. More space behind the model - the more obvious the effect is. The longer focal length you use - the more compressed background you get. Objects on the long distances don't appear to be smaller. I'm not sure if it's that drastic if 50mm compared to 85. But the effect is certainly there.

04-13-2012, 06:58 PM - 2 Likes   #2874
Junior Member
Prosto's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 37
A little bit of love story here. Thanks for watching.
Attached Images
 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5  Photo   
04-13-2012, 07:03 PM   #2875
Veteran Member
joe.penn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,902
Awesome set @Prosto
04-14-2012, 05:12 AM   #2876
Senior Member
trublubiker's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Hunter Valley NSW AUSTRALIA
Posts: 144
Not quite the same as the previous models, but still posed for me.

Taken with the K5, Sigma 105, ISO100, f8, 1/180s and an AF500FTZ with diffuser, (in manual mode) and additional diffusion through a piece of milk container, flash bounced from the leaves above the frog.


04-14-2012, 06:45 AM   #2877
Veteran Member
cbope's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 664
QuoteOriginally posted by steliost Quote
And my own version of the model, still I like more the version of prosto, which thank you for shared with us this wonderful photo ...
Sorry for my english...
Very nice treatment, though a bit too warm for my taste. I think Prosto's original is also very good, but I agree with others that maybe the PP is pushed just a bit too far especially on the face. I like to see a little "character" in the models, and not the fake-ness that comes from a bit too much PP.

In any case, all of these portraits are better than what I can do...
04-14-2012, 03:15 PM - 2 Likes   #2878
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Beerse
Posts: 94
Another few mediocre shots:



Last edited by Vorture; 04-14-2012 at 03:27 PM.
04-14-2012, 04:00 PM   #2879
Pentaxian
jimH's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: South Central Nebraska - USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,422
QuoteOriginally posted by Vorture Quote
Another few mediocre shots:

Very nice!
04-14-2012, 10:42 PM   #2880
Junior Member
Prosto's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 37
.....
Attached Images
 
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
bottom, camera, color, dslr, esp, flickr, gas, hill, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, pentax k-5, perspective, photos, pictures, post, shadow, shots, sigma, sigma 30mm, town, vegas
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K5 AF Tests jpzk Pentax K-5 140 05-11-2011 02:10 PM
DA* 60-250mm tests.. Mystic Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 04-27-2009 01:11 PM
Resolution Tests YarPcola Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 05-07-2008 05:09 PM
Tamron 17-50 f2.8 tests AlexL Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 04-14-2008 06:33 AM
First P-D FA 100mm tests... Duh_Vinci Post Your Photos! 5 03-19-2007 11:34 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:59 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top