View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 3704 Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:06 am Post subject: CANON FD 1.2/85mm L wide-open on NEX C3 |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
Maja Keuc, Klumpanje 2012
_________________ ---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Hmm, really strange results, at first I thought they were out of focus but looking closely I can see the odd little bit of hair or other detail that does look in focus.
This shows why shooting fast lenses wide open is a bad idea, you get really soft results where only a tiny portion of the frame is in focus.
Sorry to be critical but these are not good. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor
Joined: 23 Oct 2010 Posts: 524 Location: WA, USA
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote:
Interesting set.
I like the flare very much. Did you use a hood? I am curious if the flare can be controlled by using a hood.
I think it is very hard to get a shot that looks sharp under all the crazy lighting they use at such concerts. Do these look sharper in B&W? I found that for some of my shots that was the case:
Color:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/laurentiucristofor/6293925768
B&W:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/laurentiucristofor/6293403103
Notice the difference it makes for the drums, which seem to glow in the color version, but look more sober in the B&W version. My shots were taken with the Cosina 55/1.2 wide open. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hoanpham
Joined: 31 Jan 2011 Posts: 2575
Expire: 2015-01-18
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 5:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
hoanpham wrote:
Interesting flares. Strange result regarding sharpness. My copy is super sharp, even wide open. Also, i think your position might be too close for a 85 at f1.2 to cover the minimum dof for portraits. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RTI
Joined: 15 Jul 2011 Posts: 282 Location: Moldova, Chisinau
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 5:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
RTI wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
Hmm, really strange results, at first I thought they were out of focus but looking closely I can see the odd little bit of hair or other detail that does look in focus.
This shows why shooting fast lenses wide open is a bad idea, you get really soft results where only a tiny portion of the frame is in focus.
Sorry to be critical but these are not good. |
Good fast lenses are meant to shoot wide open with them. And 85/1.2 is better then good, it's superb and proved to deliver awesome results wide-open.
Images look a bit blurred because the subject was moving, and the flares are quite nasty. _________________ Cameras: Canon 5DIII, Zorki-4, Canon AE-1
MF:Rokkor 58/1.2, Rokkor MC 58/1.4, Yashica ML 50/1.7, M39 Jupiter-9 (silver 1955), Zuiko 35-70/3.6
AF: Sigma Art 35/1.4, Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC, |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
RTI wrote: |
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
Hmm, really strange results, at first I thought they were out of focus but looking closely I can see the odd little bit of hair or other detail that does look in focus.
This shows why shooting fast lenses wide open is a bad idea, you get really soft results where only a tiny portion of the frame is in focus.
Sorry to be critical but these are not good. |
Good fast lenses are meant to shoot wide open with them. And 85/1.2 is better then good, it's superb and proved to deliver awesome results wide-open.
Images look a bit blurred because the subject was moving, and the flares are quite nasty. |
It's bad technique to shoot this type of subject wide open, stop it down to 2.8 and turn up the ISO and results would be a lot better. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RTI
Joined: 15 Jul 2011 Posts: 282 Location: Moldova, Chisinau
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
RTI wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
RTI wrote: |
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
Hmm, really strange results, at first I thought they were out of focus but looking closely I can see the odd little bit of hair or other detail that does look in focus.
This shows why shooting fast lenses wide open is a bad idea, you get really soft results where only a tiny portion of the frame is in focus.
Sorry to be critical but these are not good. |
Good fast lenses are meant to shoot wide open with them. And 85/1.2 is better then good, it's superb and proved to deliver awesome results wide-open.
Images look a bit blurred because the subject was moving, and the flares are quite nasty. |
It's bad technique to shoot this type of subject wide open, stop it down to 2.8 and turn up the ISO and results would be a lot better. |
I can't agree on that... Unless you have a low-light monster, but we speak about an APS-C... To my eye some of the pictures were shot@ ISO800-1600, stopping down the lens from 1.2 to 2.8 is 2 and 1/3 stops, means ISO would have to go very high (and ISO 6400 or even worse 12800 ain't gonna do any good to the pictures...). I could go a stop higher on ISO, leaving the aperture wide open but getting shorter shutter speed to freeze the action. _________________ Cameras: Canon 5DIII, Zorki-4, Canon AE-1
MF:Rokkor 58/1.2, Rokkor MC 58/1.4, Yashica ML 50/1.7, M39 Jupiter-9 (silver 1955), Zuiko 35-70/3.6
AF: Sigma Art 35/1.4, Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC, |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fermy
Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 1974
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
fermy wrote:
RTI wrote: |
I can't agree on that... Unless you have a low-light monster, but we speak about an APS-C... To my eye some of the pictures were shot@ ISO800-1600, stopping down the lens from 1.2 to 2.8 is 2 and 1/3 stops, means ISO would have to go very high (and ISO 6400 or even worse 12800 ain't gonna do any good to the pictures...). I could go a stop higher on ISO, leaving the aperture wide open but getting shorter shutter speed to freeze the action. |
+1. To my eyes there is a clear motion blur here, so the only thing that these pictures need is higher shutter speed (and lower ISO), which means even faster lens. Sometimes f1.2 is just not enough for the light. The idea that fast lenses such as this are meant to be shot stopped down is nonsense. Fast aperture is there not just to blur the background. _________________ Many lenses and some film bodies for sale here: http://forum.mflenses.com/canon-fd-minolta-md-c-mounts-m42-pentax-and-more-t50465.html
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/96060788@N06/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DanielT74
Joined: 01 Apr 2011 Posts: 204
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
DanielT74 wrote:
The expression and poses captured in the photos are very interesting. They are not really sharp and the light is challenging to say the least, but this isn't the lenses fault. Most of the shots are slightly front focused I think rather than motion blur. It is challenging to get the focus right under these conditions, to say the least. I would have tried my luck with burst or stop it down slightly. The depth of field is rather thin with 85/1.2.
Wide open the 85/1.2L is fine for portraits and even action shots under the right conditions. I recently used mine for my sons' karate grading but the light while not pleasant was not as difficult there plus the NEX-5n is better for MF assist, I think.
Here are a few shots wide open:
Last edited by DanielT74 on Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:50 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 3704 Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
Thank you for all replies. I din't use hood. It's true photos taken from bigger distance are sharper. BW also helps. I'll post some samples later. Anyway i am pleased with this situation a lot. Lens is great wide-open. I find it as confident as any F1.4 i tried. Details are present with high magnification; i didn't sharper this results. I can't wait to shoot more with exactly the same set. Maybe trying with more calm hand . _________________ ---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lowersaxonguy
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 Posts: 122 Location: lowersaxony
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:13 pm Post subject: wide open |
|
|
lowersaxonguy wrote:
nice lady, pl. try again, |
|
Back to top |
|
|
laenee
Joined: 31 Jan 2011 Posts: 369 Location: Shanghai
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
laenee wrote:
Nice capture !
Good Job !!
Liveness !!!
+1 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011 Posts: 2187 Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
I kinda like the results. Some are not perfectly sharp, but I don't think it's a priority here.
The lens seems to perform very well in the sharper shots, so probably it's more a matter of movement-shutter times.
I like the use of flare in most of them, it makes interesting a light situation that may look really boring otherwise. _________________ C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
A rare occasion, but I find myself agreeing with Ian. It is common to display wide open test results with such a lens, or even photos where depth of field is used artfully, but in this case the event and type of pictures deserved greater depth of field. A fast lens is still great in such low light situations to aid in focus, but the photographer needs to find the best combination of aperture, ISO, and shutter speed. Sometimes there is no perfect solution, but there will always be a best combination. I will say to enjoy your lens however it pleases you, but I will suggest giving much more thought to where, when, and how fully open is used. _________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pdccameras
Joined: 23 Aug 2009 Posts: 825 Location: Putnam, CT
Expire: 2014-08-11
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pdccameras wrote:
A little perspective here. To say that focussing is challenging with the 85 f/1.2 is an understatement! I have the EF version of this lens. It is incredibly sharp wide open - when I can nail the focus - which isn't all that often. Just take a look at the depth of field of chart for this lens:
Let's say your subject is 3 meters (9.8 ft) away from your camera. Your dof wide open at that distance is only .1 meter (3-15/16")! That's about the distance from the tip of my nose to my ear. If you are moving, or your subject is moving - forget about critical focus.
Here is some great info on both the MF and AF versions of this lens:
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/eos/EF-lenses/EF85mmf12LUSM/index.htm
When it is focussed on the mark it is one hell of a sharp lens - even wide open!
Best,
Paul _________________ Canon 5D Mii, Canon 40D, Canon 350D IR, Sony A7 Mii, Sony Alpha-6000, a ton of lenses: AF & MF and too many cameras to count, all formats: 110 - 4x5. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007 Posts: 10472 Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
very nice series!
for those who don't see the performance, take the last one and sharpen it a little, you will see all the skin imperfections _________________ T* |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fuzzywuzzy
Joined: 18 Dec 2010 Posts: 1258 Location: Down East, Canada, eh?
Expire: 2013-11-30
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fuzzywuzzy wrote:
The results aren't perfectly focused but they convey a great mood, you should definitely keep taking that lens to concerts. _________________ I welcome C&C, editing my pics and reposting them on the forum is fine.
NEX-F3
~~~~~~~~~
CZJ Sonnar 135/4, Biotar 58/2, Pancolar 50/2, Tessar 50/2.8, Flek 35/2.8, Flek 25/4
Super Takumar 135/2.5, 135/3.5, 100/4 bellows, 50/1.4, 28/3.5
Helios 58/2, 3M-5A 500/8, Mir 20M
Vivitar Series 1 70-210 - - - - - - - - Nikkor 200/4
Rikenon 28/2.8 - - - - - - - - Zeiss 50/1.7 Planar
PB 50/2.4, 135/2.8
Yashica 50/1.9, 28/2.8, 135/2.8
Hexanon 28/3.5, 50/1.4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fermy
Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 1974
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fermy wrote:
woodrim wrote: |
A rare occasion, but I find myself agreeing with Ian. It is common to display wide open test results with such a lens, or even photos where depth of field is used artfully, but in this case the event and type of pictures deserved greater depth of field. A fast lens is still great in such low light situations to aid in focus, but the photographer needs to find the best combination of aperture, ISO, and shutter speed. Sometimes there is no perfect solution, but there will always be a best combination. I will say to enjoy your lens however it pleases you, but I will suggest giving much more thought to where, when, and how fully open is used. |
With all due respect, but technical problems with these images have nothing to do with too shallow depth of field. Picture is worth a thousand words, so I'll present a picture. It's taken with Canon FD 50/1.2 wide open on E-PL1 (2x crop) close to MFD. Assuming focus distance of 55 cm, the DOF calculator gives depth of field of 0.39 cm. That's not a typo, it's less than a half of a centimeter. However, IMHO it does not look gimmicky or as blurry mess because focus is spot on, the sharpness retreats gradually, and downsizing increases the DOF.
OP's pictures are clearly either OOF by a good meter or suffer from motion blur or both (most likely), which is compounded by contrast robbing flairs and difficult lighting. Granted, it's very difficult to nail focus on a jumping up and down singer, almost impossible to do it at f1.2. But still, that does not change the point that perfectly focused the pictures would look fabulous at f1.2 and probably a lot worse at f2.8 due to ISO being too high. _________________ Many lenses and some film bodies for sale here: http://forum.mflenses.com/canon-fd-minolta-md-c-mounts-m42-pentax-and-more-t50465.html
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/96060788@N06/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DanielT74
Joined: 01 Apr 2011 Posts: 204
|
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
DanielT74 wrote:
Fermy, I agree mostly except that the DoF of 55mm @1.2 is a lot deeper than of 85mm @1.2.
It is strange to say that portraits should be shot at f2.8 or some such. Sometimes it works to have more DoF but sometimes shallow DoF works too. I posted some portraits shot at f0.95 in the Cine forum, here's one of a workmate from yesterday:
I think shallow DoF can be used to good effect (much better than my skills allow at the moment). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DanielT74
Joined: 01 Apr 2011 Posts: 204
|
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DanielT74 wrote:
That's a great picture, Omar, and an excellent model you have there! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fermy
Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 1974
|
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fermy wrote:
DanielT74 wrote: |
Fermy, I agree mostly except that the DoF of 55mm @1.2 is a lot deeper than of 85mm @1.2.
|
Depends on the focusing distance (and crop) really. 50mm near MFD on E-PL1 has shallower DOF than 85mm at 3 meters on NEX. _________________ Many lenses and some film bodies for sale here: http://forum.mflenses.com/canon-fd-minolta-md-c-mounts-m42-pentax-and-more-t50465.html
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/96060788@N06/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tanheis
Joined: 05 Sep 2007 Posts: 507 Location: Finland
|
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 6:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tanheis wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
RTI wrote: |
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
Hmm, really strange results, at first I thought they were out of focus but looking closely I can see the odd little bit of hair or other detail that does look in focus.
This shows why shooting fast lenses wide open is a bad idea, you get really soft results where only a tiny portion of the frame is in focus.
Sorry to be critical but these are not good. |
Good fast lenses are meant to shoot wide open with them. And 85/1.2 is better then good, it's superb and proved to deliver awesome results wide-open.
Images look a bit blurred because the subject was moving, and the flares are quite nasty. |
It's bad technique to shoot this type of subject wide open, stop it down to 2.8 and turn up the ISO and results would be a lot better. |
Well here is some concert shots with Zeiss Planar 85/1.4 on old EOS 20D.
Shooting such lenses is tricky and I try to get shutter speed low enough to have sharp results even without stopping lens down and raise iso too high to get too high noise.
Nikkor 105/1.8
_________________ EOS 5D mk II
Lenses: Zeiss Distagon T* 15/2.8, Nikkor 24mm 2.8, Pentacon 30 3.5, SMC Takumar 50 1.4, Nikon 50mm 1.4 AI-S & non-AI ones,Olympus OM Zuiko 28/2,Pentacon 50 1.8,Industar-50 50mm 3.5(silver & black) Tamron SP 90mm 2.5, Tokina 28-85 4, Tamron SP 35-80 2.8-3.8, Zeiss 15mm 2.8 ZE Distagon, Zeiss Tessar 45/2.8, Zeiss Planar 85/1.4,Nikon 105mm 1.8,Nikon 200/2 ED-IF AI-S,Seimar 135 2.8, Tamron SP 300mm 5.6, Tamron SP 60-300 3.8-5.4, Tamron SP 500mm 8.0 Mirror, Zenit Photosniper + Tair-3, Canon FD 800 5.6L - EOS converted
-----------------------------------------------
Canon EOS M
Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
Olympus PEN-F 42mm f/1.2 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Those are wonderful shots Tanheis, sharp and in focus, quite a contrast to the OP's shots.
I must clarify, when I said turn up the ISO, I was merely thinking 800 instead of 200, 800 isn't that noisy on the NEX-3 and a good denoiser like Dfine can certainly cure it.
I do find with the NEX if I have a fairly large and heavy lens on it, I can cradle the lens in my left hand and get shakefree shots with lower speeds, for instance 1/100 is quite possible with a 135mm lens this way. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 3704 Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2012 11:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
True my first selection was impulsive and badly processed emphasizing colors more then sharpness.
Here few quite sharper:
_________________ ---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
Yes, Pancolart, those are far better. The first B&W is a superb example of proper use of shallow DOF. If these all were at fully open, then you were far enough away to get decent DOF. I stand by what I said about when and when not to use a shallow depth lens wide open. And it is a big difference composing a shot of a baby where you can position the camera to best align DOF with the subject and a situation where there is movement, making it difficult. In such a situation I would try to find the best combination of aperture, shutter speed, and ISO for the situation with select exceptions like your first B&W. _________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|