Hi Fred, Mark Dalal mentioned that he didn't care for the bokeh of his 105/2.8 either, and, like you, said it was quite harsh. However, I've not experienced this with any of my 105/2.8 lenses, but I realize that I generally don't use them for close up work, as in your examples. The one time that I did get very close, when photographing a mailbox in the shape of a cat, the bokeh I got was nowhere near as poor as your results, but again, I may not have been as close to the subject as you were to yours. I may try some more shots today or tomorrow.
Fred wrote: > > > The 120K is the big brother of the legendary 105/2.8K. Every bit > > as good, according to those who have owned both. > > Well, I owned a "legendary" K 105/2,8 for a short time (having > bought it and then sold it recently). My number one complaint was > the harsh bokeh. When I got back my first roll of film that had a > few K 105/2.8 shots on it, I was ~shocked~ to see these: > > http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/k105f28/105brs28.jpg (@f/2.8) > > http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/k105f28/105brs80.jpg (@f/8) > > (Caution - Do NOT look at these immediately after eating !!!) -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
