Herb wrote" i'd rather pack the FA* 80-200/2.8 or the FA* 400/5.6 if i possibly > can. Me too, but I can't possibly afford these lenses right now. (Although my A 400/5.6 is pretty darn good.) You play with the toys you have. Paul
> although i see it on my long lenses sometimes too, i don't see it as often > on the FA* and A* ones. i find the bokeh on the FA 80-320/4.5-5.6 > objectionable enough that i don't use it unless i literally have no other > choice. i'd rather pack the FA* 80-200/2.8 or the FA* 400/5.6 if i possibly > can. it takes far more extreme circumstances for it to appear than with the > cheaper lens. as far as i am concerned it is a combination of chromatic > aberration and flare. > > Herb... > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2005 11:09 AM > Subject: Re: PESO" New Year's Day Walkaround > > > > I had the *istD set on center spot autofocus, so I fixed the focus on > > the critter, then reframed the shot. I'm not sure that this phenomena > > should be described as CA either. Every long lens I've ever used > > produces some strange bokeh with extremely out of focus branches > > against a bright sky. I don't find it objectionable. In fact, I find it > > quite interesting. > >
