People Testing/learning my new DA 50 1.8

Testing/learning my new DA 50 1.8 · 05:59 PM

My wife and I went on a bike ride this afternoon. I'm learning my new 50 1.8 for portraits. I think I could have used higher aperture (maybe 2-2.8) to get sharper result but I wanted to get a good bokeh effect. What do you guys think?

Post processing was done in Lightroom.

photographyguy74 · 01-05-2014, 06:05 PM

It looks like it didn't turn out too bad. Definitely a very shallow depth of field.

**eaglem** · 01-05-2014, 06:11 PM

Originally posted by photographyguy74

It looks like it didn't turn out too bad. Definitely a very shallow depth of field.

I agree..............

agsy · 01-05-2014, 06:11 PM

Originally posted by photographyguy74

It looks like it didn't turn out too bad. Definitely a very shallow depth of field.

Thank you, it's a good start then. I'll experiment some more later with different apertures. I can see how important the proper focusing is.

lesmore49 · 01-05-2014, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by First Poster

My wife and I went on a bike ride this afternoon. I'm learning my new 50 1.8 for portraits. I think I could have used higher aperture (maybe 2-2.8) to get sharper result but I wanted to get a good bokeh effect. What do you guys think?

I agree. I have a 50 mm F 1.4 and as others say....a narrow DOF at under F 2.0. I would experiment with F stops....with a similar portrait. Try different F stops till you see one you like...both in terms of resolution and bokeh. It maybe around F 2.5, 2.8....3.5....somewhere around there.

BTW, I like the composition....very nice.

**rbefly** · 01-05-2014, 06:22 PM

Hello agsy,
That's a fine result for a new lens! I've had mine for less than a year now, but it's already become a favorite candid portrait and longer 'street' carry-around.
I've found that the f/2.8 to f/4.0 range produces smooth, even bokeh and allows a bit more depth-of-field leeway, the max aperture is somewhat unforgiving. It also depends on the distance between the in-focus subject and the background objects.
There's a dedicated thread for this lens on the 'Lens Club' forum, check it out!
Ron

agsy · 01-05-2014, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by lesmore49

I agree. I have a 50 mm F 1.4 and as others say....a narrow DOF at under F 2.0. I would experiment with F stops....with a similar portrait. Try different F stops till you see one you like...both in terms of resolution and bokeh. It maybe around F 2.5, 2.8....3.5....somewhere around there.

BTW, I like the composition....very nice.

Thanks for your feedback, I'll definitely will experiment with different F stops.

agsy · 01-05-2014, 06:34 PM

Thank you Ron, it means a lot. It's actually very exciting to do something different, most of my photos are of landscapes. I'll take a look at the thread. I also think that for the price it's a great little lens, very light small.

Kozlok · 01-06-2014, 03:07 PM

Do calibrate your focus, it makes a surprising difference. I just print a focus target with some lines on it. Works well enough.

lesmore49 · 01-06-2014, 04:09 PM

Also....when taking a portrait...my focus point is on the eye's of the subject. If the eye's are in focus....generally the rest of the subject is in focus.

photographyguy74 · 01-06-2014, 05:16 PM

Originally posted by agsy

Thank you, it's a good start then. I'll experiment some more later with different apertures. I can see how important the proper focusing is.

When you are shooting with very large apertures and working with very shallow depth of field, proper focusing is very critical.

agsy · 01-06-2014, 06:40 PM

Thanks guys for your input. I didn't think to check the focus on my lens yet, I will print a focusing chart. Although I haven't used it yet, I am glad that the K5II is able to save lens profiles for focus adjustment.

Originally posted by lesmore49

Also....when taking a portrait...my focus point is on the eye's of the subject. If the eye's are in focus....generally the rest of the subject is in focus.

I will try your advice next time I get to shooting.

photographyguy74 · 01-06-2014, 06:45 PM

I just saw something in these images that I thought I would point out. A little fill flash would have been helpful because her eyes are a little dark. I'm not saying that she is underexposed. I just think adding some fill flash would make her eyes pop.

agsy · 01-06-2014, 07:55 PM

Originally posted by photographyguy74

I just saw something in these images that I thought I would point out. A little fill flash would have been helpful because her eyes are a little dark. I'm not saying that she is underexposed. I just think adding some fill flash would make her eyes pop.

I see what you are saying. I do have a sigma flash that works with HSS, it helped me out many times during our trips to the national parks. I'll take it along next time.

photographyguy74 · 01-07-2014, 06:02 AM

Originally posted by agsy

I see what you are saying. I do have a sigma flash that works with HSS, it helped me out many times during our trips to the national parks. I'll take it along next time.

You could have just used your camera's built-in flash. All you would have had to do is dial in some negative flash exposure compensation (I'd say that a good place to start would be minus one).

agsy
	View full profile
	Contact via private message
	Find other posts by agsy
	Find threads started by agsy
	Find threads in which agsy has posted

01-05-2014, 06:22 PM	#6
rbefly Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Denver, Colorado Photos: Albums Posts: 2,030	Good Job! Hello agsy, That's a fine result for a new lens! I've had mine for less than a year now, but it's already become a favorite candid portrait and longer 'street' carry-around. I've found that the f/2.8 to f/4.0 range produces smooth, even bokeh and allows a bit more depth-of-field leeway, the max aperture is somewhat unforgiving. It also depends on the distance between the in-focus subject and the background objects. There's a dedicated thread for this lens on the 'Lens Club' forum, check it out! Ron

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Should I replace my K 55 1.8 with the DA 50 1.8?	aardbat	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	11-12-2013 07:56 PM
For Sale - Sold: K-5, 16-50,50-135,65-250, Sigma 17-50, 50 1.4, 50 1.8, Tamron 90 2.8, Flashes	virarfast	Sold Items	8	04-04-2013 02:30 PM
Testing my new DA 300-can it get sharper	Shanti	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	36	01-15-2013 06:26 AM
Nature testing out my new FA 77mm 1.8 limited	angelo9978	Post Your Photos!	8	11-15-2011 09:10 PM
Testing my second DA*50-135mm	Duh_Vinci	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	35	12-25-2008 04:25 PM

01-05-2014, 06:05 PM	#2
photographyguy74 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Davenport, Iowa Photos: Albums Posts: 331	It looks like it didn't turn out too bad. Definitely a very shallow depth of field.

01-05-2014, 06:11 PM	#3
eaglem Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Perth Western Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 43,159	Originally posted by photographyguy74 It looks like it didn't turn out too bad. Definitely a very shallow depth of field. I agree..............

01-05-2014, 06:11 PM	#4
agsy Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 551 Original Poster	Originally posted by photographyguy74 It looks like it didn't turn out too bad. Definitely a very shallow depth of field. Thank you, it's a good start then. I'll experiment some more later with different apertures. I can see how important the proper focusing is.

01-05-2014, 06:15 PM	#5
lesmore49 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western Canada Posts: 12,349	Originally posted by First Poster My wife and I went on a bike ride this afternoon. I'm learning my new 50 1.8 for portraits. I think I could have used higher aperture (maybe 2-2.8) to get sharper result but I wanted to get a good bokeh effect. What do you guys think? I agree. I have a 50 mm F 1.4 and as others say....a narrow DOF at under F 2.0. I would experiment with F stops....with a similar portrait. Try different F stops till you see one you like...both in terms of resolution and bokeh. It maybe around F 2.5, 2.8....3.5....somewhere around there. BTW, I like the composition....very nice.

01-05-2014, 06:23 PM	#7
agsy Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 551 Original Poster	Originally posted by lesmore49 I agree. I have a 50 mm F 1.4 and as others say....a narrow DOF at under F 2.0. I would experiment with F stops....with a similar portrait. Try different F stops till you see one you like...both in terms of resolution and bokeh. It maybe around F 2.5, 2.8....3.5....somewhere around there. BTW, I like the composition....very nice. Thanks for your feedback, I'll definitely will experiment with different F stops.

01-05-2014, 06:34 PM	#8
agsy Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 551 Original Poster	Thank you Ron, it means a lot. It's actually very exciting to do something different, most of my photos are of landscapes. I'll take a look at the thread. I also think that for the price it's a great little lens, very light small.

01-06-2014, 03:07 PM	#9
Kozlok Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Albuquerque Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,148	Do calibrate your focus, it makes a surprising difference. I just print a focus target with some lines on it. Works well enough.

01-06-2014, 04:09 PM	#10
lesmore49 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western Canada Posts: 12,349	Also....when taking a portrait...my focus point is on the eye's of the subject. If the eye's are in focus....generally the rest of the subject is in focus.

01-06-2014, 05:16 PM	#11
photographyguy74 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Davenport, Iowa Photos: Albums Posts: 331	Originally posted by agsy Thank you, it's a good start then. I'll experiment some more later with different apertures. I can see how important the proper focusing is. When you are shooting with very large apertures and working with very shallow depth of field, proper focusing is very critical.

01-06-2014, 06:40 PM	#12
agsy Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 551 Original Poster	Thanks guys for your input. I didn't think to check the focus on my lens yet, I will print a focusing chart. Although I haven't used it yet, I am glad that the K5II is able to save lens profiles for focus adjustment. Originally posted by lesmore49 Also....when taking a portrait...my focus point is on the eye's of the subject. If the eye's are in focus....generally the rest of the subject is in focus. I will try your advice next time I get to shooting.

01-06-2014, 06:45 PM	#13
photographyguy74 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Davenport, Iowa Photos: Albums Posts: 331	I just saw something in these images that I thought I would point out. A little fill flash would have been helpful because her eyes are a little dark. I'm not saying that she is underexposed. I just think adding some fill flash would make her eyes pop.

01-06-2014, 07:55 PM	#14
agsy Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 551 Original Poster	Originally posted by photographyguy74 I just saw something in these images that I thought I would point out. A little fill flash would have been helpful because her eyes are a little dark. I'm not saying that she is underexposed. I just think adding some fill flash would make her eyes pop. I see what you are saying. I do have a sigma flash that works with HSS, it helped me out many times during our trips to the national parks. I'll take it along next time.

01-07-2014, 06:02 AM	#15
photographyguy74 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Davenport, Iowa Photos: Albums Posts: 331	Originally posted by agsy I see what you are saying. I do have a sigma flash that works with HSS, it helped me out many times during our trips to the national parks. I'll take it along next time. You could have just used your camera's built-in flash. All you would have had to do is dial in some negative flash exposure compensation (I'd say that a good place to start would be minus one).