Sorry, I was referring to the fringing. Any bokeh with the two lenses I mentioned is certainly not objectionable IMO.
Kenneth Waller ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2005 9:19 PM Subject: Re: PESO" New Year's Day Walkaround > I'm not sure what we are talking about here. The out of focus branches > are rendered somewhat transparent and diffuse. That's just good bokeh > in my book. Shel reported purple fringe. I haven't seen it, although > there is some color in the background branches. > Paul > On Jan 2, 2005, at 7:53 PM, Kenneth Waller wrote: > > > I don't recall seeing anything like that with my 300 f4.5 FA or 600mm > > f4.0 > > FA on either a film or digital body. > > > > Kenneth Waller > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2005 5:41 PM > > Subject: Re: PESO" New Year's Day Walkaround > > > > > >> 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. > >> > >> > > >
