I would agree that there appears to be no sharpness problems with the 77. Seems that at least it gives you working room to go softer if you want, but to keep it sharp when needed.
Perhaps the focal length and size also contribute to you liking it as a portrait lens? -- Best regards, Bruce Thursday, April 7, 2005, 8:48:23 AM, you wrote: WR> ----- Original Message ----- WR> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> WR> To: <pentax-discuss@pdml.net> WR> Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 8:51 AM WR> Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery, no softening this time. >>I think Bil was being facetious. I don't see anything soft about the >>unadulterated images. Although it's impossible to determine sharpness >>conclusively from a small web-based image, the look of her eyes suggest >>that these are quite sharp. >> WR> I may have missed the focus slightly on a few of em. WR> Sometimes I forget to breath. WR> Here is a detail from one of the pictures. WR> Again, this is a straight RAW conversion with no USM added, and is at 100% WR> My default settings are on the low side as well, I had the sharpness setting WR> in the converter at 25. WR> http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/pictures/flannery/eye_detail..html WR> I have no sharpness issues with the 77. WR> I find I do like it more as a portrait lens on the digital than I ever did WR> on film. I think film is more sensitive to some of the lens's abilities than WR> the digital sensor. WR> William Robb
