I tend to agree, but bokeh was never realy a problem for my use. I use it for candid portraits and panorama shots. So, to me sharpness and reslolution is the main issue. Like this: http://gallery13117.fotopic.net/p13541985.html
Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Fred [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 6. april 2005 23:28 Til: Jens Bladt Emne: Re: K 2.8/105mm >> What would a reasonable price be for a K 105/2.8? > I'm not sure, Henri. I think it's even more rare than the K 2.5/135mm. I'm going to say that it's a ~lot~ more rare than the K 135/2.5. > It's quite sharp wide open: Yes, it is. > I believe the prformance is about the same as the K 2.5/135mm. But it's > actually a very nice portrait FL and it focuses from appr. 1,2 m. It might have similar resolution (the 105 might even be a tad sharper wide open), but there is one major difference between the two lenses, and that's their bokeh. The K 135/2.5 has (in my opinion) a very nice bokeh rendering, while the K 105/2.8 shows (in my opinion) a rather harsh bokeh. http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/k105f28/ I had one of these for a short time a few years ago, and, while I ordinarily tend to love the ol' K-era primes, I disliked the bokeh from this lens so much that I gladly sold it. Some people on the PDML love this lens, however, so, as is said, YMMV. Actually, I was rather surprised by the bokeh quality when I first used the lens. Sandwiched between the K 85/1.8 and the K 135/2.5, I expected the lens to perform similarly. But, the sample I had (in eBay "minty" condition) simply was not an endearing lens for my tastes (while the other two most definitely are). Fred
