Hi Alek, Bokeh is how the areas of the picture that are not in focus are rendered. Whether a lens has good bokeh or not is generally a personal preference. Most people prefer a less distracting background than the pictures that are shown in Fred's link below.
I have this same lens and have taken some very nice portraits with it also, but I have also taken some that look just like Fred's examples also. In my experience, with this lens, is that I have to be very careful to choose a non-competing background (no out of focus specular highlights, for sure) for this lens to be usuable. Much more so than any other lens I own. It does make a good landscape/hiking lens when I am more likely using it focused close to infinity. Hope this helps, William in Utah. 12/10/2002 3:27:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >But I shot some portraits and they looked very good.So where is the problem?How to >describe bokeh in other words? >Alek > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał: >>> Yep, but at the same time, the lens is reknown to have a harsh >>> bokeh. Which is not important to all of us and certainly not to >>> N*k*n users. >> >>Yes, the K 105/2.8 is a sharp lens, but (unfortunately) so is its >>bokeh: >> >>http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/k105f28/ >> >>[Make sure you're sitting down before you click on the "Some plants >>at f/2.8" link - <g>.] >> >>In general, I like the ol' SMC K lenses a lot. I liked this lens, >>too, ~except~ for its bokeh. However, bokeh is important to me in a >>100-ish lens, which I would often be using for portraits, so I sent >>my K 105/2.8 on to another home... >> >>Fred >> >--------------r-e-k-l-a-m-a----------------- > >Masz dość płacenia prowizji bankowi ? >mBank - załóż konto >http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank > > >
