See below (warning: original jpeg photos, large in file size):-
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/35mm/k10d/image/ex_07.jpg
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/35mm/k10d/image/ex_08.jpg
My observation and opinion is simply that the taste and style of the image rendition of these two images is in-line with the previous published photos by Ned Bunnell and very similar to the Tokina's sister models. So, again, I am disappointed (but indeed it is not out of expected). Particularly, the cool and somehow "incorrect" colours and the non-smooth bokeh are the two utmost things which I don't like.
Previous Related Articles:-
Unfavourable Colour Response of Quite Some Recent Pentax Lenses
Scary Tokina 16-50/2.8 Official Sample Photos
You are kidding, right?
ReplyDeleteNope. I am serious.
ReplyDeleteRicehigh, I'm not one of your automatic critics -- it's often quite legitimate to be concerned about negative aspects of something you care about -- but it is a little hard to take you seriously on this one. Those are some gorgeous pictures.
ReplyDeleteThe comment about the color is particularly weird, since I doubt you were there to see the actual colors of the scene -- but also because surely these have been postprocessed pretty carefully for maximum positive effect. (That is, the largest factor in the colors is: how did an artist at Pentax choose them to be?)
And can you give an example of what you'd consider *better* bokeh in a similarly difficult situation of bright sky behind a tree?
Matthew, you're right that we don't know exactly about the actual colours of the real scenes and the subjects. But as I've said, it's about the taste and style, as you've also pointed out similarly, that is, it could be something that is intentionally chosen by Pentax (by their artist or not, I think, however).
ReplyDeleteIn fact, I've explained more about the unfavourable colour issue in my last article in more details, of which the link I have posted in my this blog entry. I hope you can understand more for what I am actually referring to after reading it.
As for the bokeh, both sample photos don't look pleasing to my eyes. Anyway, and again, sometimes it can be subjective when we come to the bokeh thing. But, shouldn't that Pentax have already chosen two of the best photos amongst many as the only and first officially published sample picture for each of their Star zooms?
To be honest, I didn't get your last color critique post either.
ReplyDeleteFor example, look at your suggested comparison of the bee macro pictures. One you took and then post-processed in various ways, and the other someone else took of a different bee and different flowers under different lighting -- and then processed in who-knows-what other way. (And, to compound things, yours is two stops faster in ISO, one stop smaller aperture, and a slightly shorter exposure.)
All we can really say is that you like how the other guy's picture came out better after post-processing -- hard to single out the lens as to blame there.
The other concrete comparison you suggest is similarly apples-to-oranges (although this time with a completely different subject and on the K100D vs. the K10D). There, it kind of seems that you've got a hypothesis to start, instead of looking at all of the data and drawing an overall conclusion, you're picking out a few random examples which happen to support your predetermined idea.
If I look through the example images for various recent lenses on pbase, for example, I don't at all see an overall pattern that supports the specific color issues you mention in your earlier post. And as I mentioned before, I think the colors in the example pics look great, but neither of us are in a position to say what's actually correct for those scenes.
I think I have to agree to disagree.
ReplyDeleteActually, even direct and totally exact apple to apple and orange to orange comparisons are not available, the (colour) tendency and the different colour representations can actually be seen. Nevertheless, to do such more strict comparison tests is not something very difficult, what we need to do is to shoot the same different subjects with different lenses at (almost) the "same" time and compare, then we shall know.
Anyway, I can see the points that you have made. Thanks for sharing your opinions and I do treasure the friendly, sensible and open discussions with you here.
Common, PLEASE, close your weeping blog about pentax...and shoot with 5D.
ReplyDeleteAs for 16-50 - it has good bokeh (for zoom lense) and another colours than 16-45. Motor and WP.
As for 50-135 is the gem, one of the best portrait tele-lense now, Tokina is the same. All photomagazines (and photo web-sites)which tested 50-135 from Tokina gave high grade for image quality.