I find the out-of-focus rendering to be just fine. In most cases, bokeh is a function of what's back there rather than how the lens renders it. Yet both bad and good bokeh are most often considered a function of the lens, when in truth they're a function of the brightness and variation of the scene itself. Some examples of DA50-200 bokeh:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4527667 http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4604194 http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6382714 http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6363497 On Mar 6, 2008, at 11:11 PM, David Savage wrote: > On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Joseph Tainter > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> "I tested the DA 50-200 tonight at 80mm, f4.5. That's one sharp >> lens." >> >> I agree. I don't have it, but I had use of one for a while and >> tested it >> systematically against the old SMC F 70-210. The DA 50-200 held >> its own >> in that test, being just a little weaker at the long end. >> >> Funny thing is, I've seen internal Pentax documents (know ask >> how) that >> say the DA 50-200 is weak at the long end, and they've got to do >> better >> with the forthcoming 75-300. I'm puzzled by that. That little >> telezoom >> strikes me as a very decent performer, and excellent value. > > It's ok for what it is, but the OoF rendering can be odd to say the > least. > > Cheers, > > Dave > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above > and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
