[awscreo]

I don't know that I can provide a match for your image.

This is a shot at f2.



This at f2.2.



I don't have many straight wide open, but the full size are on Flickr, I believe. Hope that helps.

Thank you!

[Nicolas06]

Christopher Rankin make lot of portraits with FA85, FA77, K1 and K3. You'll be able to find lot of example on his flickr account: Christopher Rankin | Flickr

You may even notice his photos are quite great not because of sharpness but light, subject, colors, composition...

[awscreo]

The reason for it to exit is there a market like anything that does exist but there infinitely more kitlenses sold or haribo sweets than Zeiss Otus lenses. By all means then we could think that both are much more interresting to most people than f/1.4 lenses... In other words, whatever it is, you'll find somebody interrested anyway.

Doesn't mean it is any interresting generally,outside of the inner circle of that people. overall kitlenses are much more interresting than f/1.4 primes. They sell many time more, make more money and many more time great photo are made with the lens bundled in kit with the camera than the high end, including my FA77.

It's obvious more kit lenses are sold, just like more compacts are sold than pro dslr bodies. I'm not sure how this is related to my original request, which was for someone to share wide open full res shots with 77ltd, so I can compare it with the otus.

---------- Post added 02-24-17 at 05:08 PM ----------

Christopher Rankin make lot of portraits with FA85, FA77, K1 and K3. You'll be able to find lot of example on his flickr account: Christopher Rankin | Flickr

You may even notice his photos are quite great not because of sharpness but light, subject, colors, composition...

I've seen and admired his work in the k-1 thread. Im not denying that light, subject, colors or composition are important. However, for the look that I personally want to achieve, I want a sharp wide open lens, am I allowed to want something that you don't? Funny thing - portraits aren't even something I do all the time, I'm enjoying landscapes more.

---------- Post added 02-24-17 at 05:09 PM ----------

FA77 portraits

f/1.8 (just mucking about after a loooong party a couple of weekends ago )









f/2.0

Thank you so much Sandy)) last one is particularly nice!

---------- Post added 02-24-17 at 05:20 PM ----------

You are free to do what you want so you can print 40x60" and get 1 square inch of the photo in focus except if targeting the sky. If that's you call, well, so be it. Don't forget to have a plan for the gallery that will display your photos and to design a rotation scheme so you can swithc over time

You know if sharpness is that important to you, you are missing it, it isn't FF that going to give the best sensor and lenses too small 24x36 after all still a small format. Far from MF or a chamber...

Lame cheap shots, at least I see that I'm dealing with child now

[Sandy Hancock]

last one is particularly nice!

Cheers. It was made a little more deliberately than the others (but not by much )

[awscreo]

Cheers. It was made a little more deliberately than the others (but not by much )

Classy b&w conversion

[Blue]

What type of drive mechanism (DC, Pulse, SDM) isn' t mentioned.
Nor is the important question, should I buy this or the DA* 55 1.4 which is already available?

Odd to say the least, with a 55 already out there, an 85 or 135 are conspicuous in their absence. Especially the 135 with not a single new lens available between 100 and 200mm and the 100 and 200s being older designs.

They never discuss these things with me.

I would have said they need a 150mm macro.

150mm Macro would be uber cool.

[biz-engineer]

Christopher Rankin make lot of portraits with FA85, FA77, K1 and K3. You'll be able to find lot of example on his flickr account: Christopher Rankin | Flickr You may even notice his photos are quite great not because of sharpness but light, subject, colors, composition...

Yes, sure, subject, lighting , composition are the baseline. At web size (your use case) and small prints, small cameras with small lenses are good enough even if not pixel sharp.
I recently printed from the DFA70-200, resolution is so high, I could sell the photos for advertising on the walls of railway stations and airports. That's pro grade. I guess, the apsc and limited lenses would still well suit the amateur photog, and the K1 and DFA* lenses would well serve professional use. A lot of people nowadays use their mobile phone, the results are not as excellent as with a DSLR, but for many , a carbon copy is enough. Reading some technical discussion in the posts of this forum , hints that the community is very much into the details of images, where the general public could not care less, except when you show a print and everyone wants to have it without knowing why .

---

Last edited by biz-engineer; 02-24-2017 at 11:17 PM.

[Nicolas06]

Yes, sure, subject, lighting , composition are the baseline. At web size (your use case) and small prints, small cameras with small lenses are good enough even if not pixel sharp.
I recently printed from the DFA70-200, resolution is so high, I could sell the photos for advertising on the walls of railway stations and airports. That's pro grade. I guess, the apsc and limited lenses would still well suit the amateur photog, and the K1 and DFA* lenses would well serve professional use. A lot of people nowadays use their mobile phone, the results are not as excellent as with a DSLR, but for many , a carbon copy is enough. Reading some technical discussion in the posts of this forum , hints that the community is very much into the details of images, where the general public could not care less, except when you show a print and everyone wants to have it without knowing why .

You seen advertising on airport and railstations for quite some time but 36 or 50MP FF wiht modern design lenses are quite new. They are by no mean necessary.

We had report from pro shooting for 3mx4m advertisment too... They explain the actual image are not that big, because it doesn't matter.

And you'll find pro working with all range of gear. Remember that:

You Tube

You Tube

What make the photo great isn't the gear. We buy expensive gear because it is the easy part.

So sure you can buy whatever you want/need no issue with that. Some still use chamber and film and scan, because it beat all the rest hand down for sharpness, details and there the interresting rendering. Some guy shoot the olympics with it even one could think the AF isn't that great.

One can take the biggest/heavier/most expensive lens, this is just a few clicks away to buy. There no issue.

But this doesn't change much. It just that you know for sure if the picture isn't great it can be the gear as you have the best out there, but that's it.

Knowing that, what make sense is to buy gear with an interresting set of compromize. You said it yourself, you go for f/2.8 zooms on FF because you think you really don't need more on such format. So you get conveniance, great quality without having to bother with few extremely expensive primes.

For some it will be get a few small/light prime that provide all the quality you need, keep the overall bag small and benefit that even with a DSLR, if you have a small lens people don't notice. You are unobstrusive.

For some, what count the most is to have the best gear so if there something bigger/heavier/more expensive and with more extreme characteristics, it's for them. That were the manufacturers lead us, as well as reviewers because it what make them money. And as consumer, it is the worst situation to be in because it is the most expensive where you always need more. But ok, that another way to experience it. And as long as you can pay for it, there no issue. That or something else...

[biz-engineer]

They explain the actual image are not that big, because it doesn't matter. And you'll find pro working with all range of gear. Remember that:

Yes, you are talking like an amateur. I understand you, want a consumer camera.

You seen advertising on airport and railstations for quite some time but 36 or 50MP FF wiht modern design lenses are quite new. They are by no mean necessary.

Oh yes, not necessary but when there is choice, the 36Mpx is selected over the cheapo.

I can feel the difference between our generations. You are in your 30s, you don't know studying without computer and mobile phone, when facebook was born you were still at university. So for you, 1Mpixels is enough (posting on facebook) and the smartphones what can imitate bokeh are for you. When are you stepping out of photography?

[Rondec]

You seen advertising on airport and railstations for quite some time but 36 or 50MP FF wiht modern design lenses are quite new. They are by no mean necessary.

We had report from pro shooting for 3mx4m advertisment too... They explain the actual image are not that big, because it doesn't matter.

And you'll find pro working with all range of gear. Remember that: Lara Jade, Cheap Camera Challenge - YouTube

What make the photo great isn't the gear. We buy expensive gear because it is the easy part.

So sure you can buy whatever you want/need no issue with that. Some still use chamber and film and scan, because it beat all the rest hand down for sharpness, details and there the interresting rendering. Some guy shoot the olympics with it even one could think the AF isn't that great.

One can take the biggest/heavier/most expensive lens, this is just a few clicks away to buy. There no issue.

But this doesn't change much. It just that you know for sure if the picture isn't great it can be the gear as you have the best out there, but that's it.

Knowing that, what make sense is to buy gear with an interresting set of compromize. You said it yourself, you go for f/2.8 zooms on FF because you think you really don't need more on such format. So you get conveniance, great quality without having to bother with few extremely expensive primes.

For some it will be get a few small/light prime that provide all the quality you need, keep the overall bag small and benefit that even with a DSLR, if you have a small lens people don't notice. You are unobstrusive.

For some, what count the most is to have the best gear so if there something bigger/heavier/more expensive and with more extreme characteristics, it's for them. That were the manufacturers lead us, as well as reviewers because it what make them money. And as consumer, it is the worst situation to be in because it is the most expensive where you always need more. But ok, that another way to experience it. And as long as you can pay for it, there no issue. That or something else...

I'm not totally sure what your goal is, Nicolas. I think everyone knows that photographs are more than just gear and that good light, a beautiful subject and great composition are more important than the cost of your gear or number of megapixels. But surely you shouldn't judge people who are constantly searching for better performance, either with regard to camera bodies or glass.

If people have the money to buy a new camera body or lens and they want it, surely they don't have to justify it to the internet, even if they are just a hobby photographer. At the same time, I think Pentax understands that the holes in their line up now are in the high end prime department and so they are going to be filling those in. It makes sense to me, even though I probably won't purchase any of these lenses -- although I say that and once images begin to come out from them, I may have trouble holding back (LBA is a tough master).

[willeisner]

One lens for the picture I like is A * 85mm 1.4
Very sharpness open. Even at 36mp if I find an image I post here.

[BATMON]

Wil this FF lens "work" on a APS-C?

[Kunzite]

Of course it will. APS-C is no different than using the K-1 in APS-C crop mode.

[ffking]

Wil this FF lens "work" on a APS-C?

Of course it will. APS-C is no different than using the K-1 in APS-C crop mode.

possibly limited backwards compatibility though?

[pres589]

It may actually work better as the edges will be cropped due to the reduced image circle that APS-C covers. So the edges, where more softness or distortion lives vs. the center, are brought in closer to that center.

---------- Post added 02-25-17 at 12:30 PM ----------

There are lenses that are described as "for crop bodies" that work on full frame. Off the top of my head, the DA 35 f2.4, DA 40 Ltd, DA 40 XS, DA*55, DA 70 Ltd all work without any modifications on full frame. The DA60-250 requires modifications to the rear element baffle (not the glass, the plastic surround) to work on full frame. There are also zooms that work through some but not all of their range on full frame like the DA 10-17 FE.

This has been discussed at length in other threads.