Pentax K1 Mark ii with 85mm 1.4 Portrait

**Kerrowdown** · 02-23-2022, 08:21 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Digitalis

Typically the kind of thing said before a break-up or a divorce...

I couldn't possible comment... cos Lady Kerrowdown said I couldn't.

Wheatfield · 02-23-2022, 09:03 AM

Originally posted by Medex

I do not talk about OP's shots using f1.4 but about studio shots in general. It is common practice to use f8 for studio shots.
DFA*85/1.4 at f1.4 is very sharp lens and I like it and use it often wide open when I shoot outdoor, but studio shots at this aperture have some specificity due to shorter distances (not all studios are big): you can shoot face looking directly to the camera, but try to turn the head a little and one eye will be out of focus. For this reason (and for other reasons of image postprocessing / editing / photoshoping) many shoot in studio at higher aperture values.

Fair enough. I was speaking to the topic at hand and a claim the OPs shots could have been done with a kit zoom. Maybe they could have if enough other stuff had changed to allow it.
Otherwise, not so much.

**Digitalis** · 02-23-2022, 06:38 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Wheatfield

That's going to be a hard one to match with a kit zoom.

Sure it is, if you have a 24-85mm f/1.4 kit zoom* lying around. IMO the Sigma Art 18-35mm f/1.8 fails to supplant primes even though it is every bit as fast....speed, isn't everything.

* Contax once commissioned Carl Zeiss to make a 28-80mm f/2 zoom to pair with one of their top-of-the-line SLRs. The prototype optically flawless, but so absurdly large and heavy it was described as holding a brick of depleted uranium: eventually contax requested a re-design and reduced the specified aperture down to f/3.8~f/5.6 and this shaved the weight down to 1/8th of the original design. Lesson to be learned here - be careful what you ask for.

**UncleVanya** · 02-24-2022, 08:56 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Digitalis

Sure it is, if you have a 24-85mm f/1.4 kit zoom* lying around. IMO the Sigma Art 18-35mm f/1.8 fails to supplant primes even though it is every bit as fast....speed, isn't everything.

* Contax once commissioned Carl Zeiss to make a 28-80mm f/2 zoom to pair with one of their top-of-the-line SLRs. The prototype optically flawless, but so absurdly large and heavy it was described as holding a brick of depleted uranium: eventually contax requested a re-design and reduced the specified aperture down to f/3.8~f/5.6 and this shaved the weight down to 1/8th of the original design. Lesson to be learned here - be careful what you ask for.

Lol. I love this. I once had a friends sister try to use a flash for a moon shot. Our response was similar. We suggested a flash bright enough for that might burn off the atmosphere nearby. Plus the delay for the light to return would complicate things.

jimr-pdx · 02-24-2022, 02:27 PM

I'm a large fan of the tiny M85/2.
I've never done comparisons since if it sucks it does so in ways I like

I had an opteka 85/1.8 on Nikon and it was ..not good below 2.8 or so.

pschlute · 02-24-2022, 09:00 PM

Originally posted by jimr-pdx

I'm a large fan of the tiny M85/2.

Me too.

02-23-2022, 06:38 PM - 1 Like	#63
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by Wheatfield That's going to be a hard one to match with a kit zoom. Sure it is, if you have a 24-85mm f/1.4 kit zoom* lying around. IMO the Sigma Art 18-35mm f/1.8 fails to supplant primes even though it is every bit as fast....speed, isn't everything. * Contax once commissioned Carl Zeiss to make a 28-80mm f/2 zoom to pair with one of their top-of-the-line SLRs. The prototype optically flawless, but so absurdly large and heavy it was described as holding a brick of depleted uranium: eventually contax requested a re-design and reduced the specified aperture down to f/3.8~f/5.6 and this shaved the weight down to 1/8th of the original design. Lesson to be learned here - be careful what you ask for. Last edited by Digitalis; 02-23-2022 at 06:47 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Does the K1 Mark II still make sense to buy today? Is there an Mark III in the works?	davidphoto	Pentax Full Frame	161	07-18-2023 03:32 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax Battery Grip D-BG6 for K1, K1 Mark II	tscip22	Sold Items	2	09-27-2019 01:56 PM
K1 to K1 Mark II or not II	Kingman	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	39	03-07-2019 10:09 PM
Pentax K1 or Pentax K1 Mark ii	giselag	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	15	01-04-2019 01:36 PM

02-23-2022, 08:21 AM - 1 Like	#61
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,833	Originally posted by Digitalis Typically the kind of thing said before a break-up or a divorce... I couldn't possible comment... cos Lady Kerrowdown said I couldn't.

02-23-2022, 09:03 AM	#62
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,986	Originally posted by Medex I do not talk about OP's shots using f1.4 but about studio shots in general. It is common practice to use f8 for studio shots. DFA*85/1.4 at f1.4 is very sharp lens and I like it and use it often wide open when I shoot outdoor, but studio shots at this aperture have some specificity due to shorter distances (not all studios are big): you can shoot face looking directly to the camera, but try to turn the head a little and one eye will be out of focus. For this reason (and for other reasons of image postprocessing / editing / photoshoping) many shoot in studio at higher aperture values. Fair enough. I was speaking to the topic at hand and a claim the OPs shots could have been done with a kit zoom. Maybe they could have if enough other stuff had changed to allow it. Otherwise, not so much.

02-24-2022, 08:56 AM - 1 Like	#64
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,445	Originally posted by Digitalis Sure it is, if you have a 24-85mm f/1.4 kit zoom* lying around. IMO the Sigma Art 18-35mm f/1.8 fails to supplant primes even though it is every bit as fast....speed, isn't everything. * Contax once commissioned Carl Zeiss to make a 28-80mm f/2 zoom to pair with one of their top-of-the-line SLRs. The prototype optically flawless, but so absurdly large and heavy it was described as holding a brick of depleted uranium: eventually contax requested a re-design and reduced the specified aperture down to f/3.8~f/5.6 and this shaved the weight down to 1/8th of the original design. Lesson to be learned here - be careful what you ask for. Lol. I love this. I once had a friends sister try to use a flash for a moon shot. Our response was similar. We suggested a flash bright enough for that might burn off the atmosphere nearby. Plus the delay for the light to return would complicate things.

02-24-2022, 02:27 PM	#65
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	I'm a large fan of the tiny M85/2. I've never done comparisons since if it sucks it does so in ways I like I had an opteka 85/1.8 on Nikon and it was ..not good below 2.8 or so.

02-24-2022, 09:00 PM	#66
pschlute Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Surrey, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,210	Originally posted by jimr-pdx I'm a large fan of the tiny M85/2. Me too.