[jpzk]

You may notice I like to use this lens at motor shows...

Are those all been taken at F1.4 ?

---------- Post added 10-12-14 at 04:34 PM ----------

Lovely pics but your links are are all messed up

Kudo here !

---------- Post added 10-12-14 at 04:35 PM ----------

Two versions. A* 85 f1.4 and FA* 85 f1.4
Both are outstanding lenses. They are different characters though.
I didn't try the A* enough, only a couple occasional shots, but I very like mine FA*.
It's sharp, but it treats skintones with care (unlike recent sigma 85, which is just sharp). Here's couple of shots, I didn't make any retouching.

Excellent: I like the expected "softness" from this lens wide open.
Very flattering rendering for portraits.

[maverickh]

My friend's captivative smile

[Nguyen Nam]

proud to be owned this iron.

[Papa Lazarou]

[Nguyen Nam]

Ms. December, on Flickr



Ms. December, on Flickr



Ms. December, on Flickr

[Nguyen Nam]

Aunt_May, on Flickr

[LeRolls]

Finally decided to upgrade from the wonderful FA 77 to the amazing FA 85. It's been a joy learning the ins and outs of this wondrous piece of glass.





















I look forward to many more beautiful adventures with this lens.

---

Last edited by LeRolls; 06-29-2016 at 12:04 AM.

[pid]

I know, both lenses are wonderful pieces of glass. In which case would you say the FA*85 is better than the FA 77?

[LeRolls]

I know, both lenses are wonderful pieces of glass. In which case would you say the FA*85 is better than the FA 77?

Hmm... a lot of PF members have been asking me this question lately both on the forums and through private message. I've only had the FA 85 for a little over 2 weeks now but I've used it exclusively on 6 shoots trying to get a good feel for it. I am not a lens/camera expert with decades of experience the way Digitalis is but based off of my limited time I would say the following about the 85 over the 77:

-Faster and more accurate AF (higher keeper rate)
-Sharper at equivalent apertures
-Slightly more nuanced/subtle rendering and character to the images (a different kind of pixie dust that I find to be slightly more sophisticated which I understand is somewhat subjective)
-Softer and slightly more appealing bokeh (again somewhat subjective)
-Skin tones are rendered in such a way as not to require as much post-processing as the 77 while still maintaining good sharpness/detail
-The lens coatings seem better too as there is less flaring and better contrast when the subject is backlit

The main negatives are that it is much bigger, heavier, more expensive, and considerably harder to find than the 77. Took me months to find a good working copy on eBay and even then I had to thoroughly clean the contacts with alcohol.

I do consider the 77 to be a marvel of lens engineering and it was my favorite lens for quite some time. There really is nothing else available quite like it from any other manufacturer. I will most definitely be keeping my copy for future use on the K-1 but for now I am going through the honeymoon phase with the 85 and I am loving every minute.

[maverickh]

FA85mm @ f/1.6


Had explored the idea of a photo shoot with my friend Diana, was surprised that she sportingly agreed to do it despite the early schedule and the journey to the garden. Well the result certainly did not disappoint.




---------- Post added 06-30-16 at 10:54 AM ----------

Another legendary lens from Pentax

[LeRolls]

[jake14mw]

Wow LeRolls, I clicked through to your work and it's just off the charts, spectacular stuff! I have a question for you, when you are doing portraits, and you are going for that subject isolating shallow depth of field look, how wide open do you go with the 77 or 85? Are there rules in your head saying something like, you're not going under f2 because the DOF on model herself is too shallow most of the time? Just wondering what your general thought process is like regarding aperture. Thanks.

[ghl]

@LeRolls, I've got to second jake14mw's post. It's been a pleasure watching your work increase in quality over some time now. You obviously work hard at it, and it really shows. Of course, your subject matter in this thread is easy on the eyes to begin with, but your dedication to getting many elements right is impressive. Very nice work!

[LeRolls]

Wow LeRolls, I clicked through to your work and it's just off the charts, spectacular stuff! I have a question for you, when you are doing portraits, and you are going for that subject isolating shallow depth of field look, how wide open do you go with the 77 or 85? Are there rules in your head saying something like, you're not going under f2 because the DOF on model herself is too shallow most of the time? Just wondering what your general thought process is like regarding aperture. Thanks.

@LeRolls, I've got to second jake14mw's post. It's been a pleasure watching your work increase in quality over some time now. You obviously work hard at it, and it really shows. Of course, your subject matter in this thread is easy on the eyes to begin with, but your dedication to getting many elements right is impressive. Very nice work!

You guys are much too kind! Much appreciated.

No real rules per say in regards to DOF. With the 77 I tended to shoot right around the 2.8-3.5 range a lot of the time mostly because it gave me fairly good sharpness while still offering some form of background separation. With the 85 I feel a little more confident and sometimes go as wide open as 1.8 as that lens seems a little more accurate and a bit sharper than the 77.

My distance from the subject as well as the distance of the background elements from the subject will also sometimes dictate the preferred aperture. How much overall interest the background contains and how it plays into the composition will also inform my decision making process. I like my leading lines to be clearly defined and I also like to get a general sense of place if possible. I mostly try to use extremely shallow DOF as an effect to add to the atmosphere or mood of a shot or to maybe inject abstract forms into the composition.

When everything is said and done though I mostly just do what feels right in the moment.

[Nguyen Nam]

You guys are much too kind! Much appreciated.

No real rules per say in regards to DOF. With the 77 I tended to shoot right around the 2.8-3.5 range a lot of the time mostly because it gave me fairly good sharpness while still offering some form of background separation. With the 85 I feel a little more confident and sometimes go as wide open as 1.8 as that lens seems a little more accurate and a bit sharper than the 77.

My distance from the subject as well as the distance of the background elements from the subject will also sometimes dictate the preferred aperture. How much overall interest the background contains and how it plays into the composition will also inform my decision making process. I like my leading lines to be clearly defined and I also like to get a general sense of place if possible. I mostly try to use extremely shallow DOF as an effect to add to the atmosphere or mood of a shot or to maybe inject abstract forms into the composition.

When everything is said and done though I mostly just do what feels right in the moment.

I'm totally agree with Mr. LeRolls about the rule of perfect aperture. Regarding to my choice, I've never exposed at wide open.

DOTA warrior, on Flickr