Hmmm... 85mm - Which is Which ?

Not a proper controlled comparison (aperture is different, time and lighting is a little different) but one of these is with the D-FA* 85 and the other is with the FA* 85...

1. @ 1.4



2. @ 2.5

1 @ 1.4 is the FA* 85mm for sure.

Like its sibling the FA* 200mm f/2.8, I'm sure it is a fabulously sharp lens, but one that shares the same characteristic, when used on a modern DSLR, of being prone to CA in the form of G/P fringing when used at wider apertures. Despite this, easily correctable, performance limitation, nothing would persuade me to part with my copy of the 200mm.

Jon

Ready and waiting to be served-up with egg on my face

Number 1 has to be the FA*85 or I take all the positive things I said about the DFA back.
The one thing that screams D-FA is that plane of focus that's razor thin and razor sharp. I don't see it in the first image.

Although on reviewing the images again for aberrations, the first image doesn't really have much visible CA, while the second one has clear green and orange CA on the edges of the highlighted bokeh balls.

So ? ..........

The FA*85 is indeed no.1 Well done guys

The 2nd image was taken against much stronger backlighting than the first and I dialled down the highlights quite a bit, so that explains the CA

So the photographic question that this raises is: For what sort of photos would the FA*85 be best and for what sort would the D-FA* be best?

Of course, I speak as someone who has neither and has no interest in acquiring either, so don't have to answer the equally important question: Can I afford to have both?

For what its's worth, I actually prefer the first picture, it's seems gentler, softer (in the aesthetic sense) which to my mind suits the flower better (although the different lighting may be a factor here).

Steve

That is the Million Dollar question Steve, give me a bit more time and I may be able to answer it (or maybe not )

I'm in agreement with you on preferring the first photo - but all that really says is that tiny differences in lighting, focus, processing, etc. are what make a final image - the D-FA*85 shot should have the advantage because it is stopped down slightly and it is a state of the art, modern design lens - but in this case the softer lighting has tipped the balance (IMO).

As to your situation with portrait lenses - why would you want anything different to your lovely FA 77mm Limited, it is a truly excellent lens (as you have demonstrated) - I still have (and use) my Silver version from time to time

I hope to do some doggy portrait shots today with the DFA*. It will be an interesting exercise as for a long while the FA* has been my go-to portrait lens.

I don't expect to notice much difference to be honest although for outside shots I am sure the flare resistance and CA control will be much superior in the DFA

HarisF1 wrote: Whilst realising that we will all have different levels of tolerance for visible CA (fringing), I was surprised by your comment, Haris, as to my eyes, and when viewed large on a monitor, as opposed to a smartphone screen, there is a significant amount present and it was this that led me to conclude that lens #1 was the FA*.

I took the liberty of downloading LennyBloke's original and then used the replace colour tool in PSE to make the extent and degree of fringing present around the petals easier to perceive, even without further magnification.




As noted in my original post, however, that which is present could easily be removed in PP, thereby making the most of what is in all other respects a fine image as well as that which I preferred most of the two posted.

Best

Jon

Interesting Jon, I weighed up the two images and decided the DFA wouldn't have so much CA on the bokeh balls! And both lenses would have some CA wide open so it wasn't a clincher for me, but now that you've highlighted it, it's quite clear that there's a difference.