Originally posted by neokind
Thanks so much for the reply. Can I ask a few questions about your photo? Was it shot wide open? Did you push the texture or clarity? I’m only asking because the the busy bokeh on the trees in the background. I’m curious about how it’s wide open bokeh looks.
I have the 55/1.8, which is fabulous and not too big, and the 35 is a hair smaller. My indecisiveness is because the 35/2.8 is so damn small it reminds me of shooting with the Pentax 40 pancake, which was one of my favorite limited lenses. It’s just such a great lens size for street photography. I even wore the 35 with my A7iii on my backpack strap with the Peak Design capture clip while on a long hiking trip in 2019 and never really noticed it when I wasn’t shooting. But 1.8 would really clean up some interior shots, and give me a little more creative latitude with the DOF. Hmm. ��
Very welcome! Sure thing - if you click on the photo it should take you to Flickr where the Exif is visible, but yes it was wide-open and the clarity was bumped by around +20 in this instance, more than I'd normally go. That said, I'd also bumped the exposure by almost 2EV, dropped the highlights by 80 and raised the shadows by around 70 to get to this end result. It really was a poorly-exposed shot to start with.
I think the busy-ness would be reasonably evident regardless of the lens used. The majority of the highlights, especially in the trees, are fairly specular so a bit more outlined than I guess is 'typical'. The bokeh can be busy, there's no denying that, but that's a personal taste discussion I feel.
Example of bokeh close focus with specular highlights @f/1.8:
Example of bokeh close focus without specular highlights @f/1.8:
The Hymer shot is an example of mid-distance @f/1.8.
Example of bokeh mid-far distance @f/1.8: