Should I really care about large aperture lens?

rbelyell · Expire: 2014-01-31

well, my leica experience is limited to my summitar 50/1.4, and i can say most assuredly that lens stinks wide open. i have never gotten even a decent result at 1.4. i'm sure thats due in part to my talent limitations, but just by dumb luck i shouldve managed one good shot! Embarassed

by 2.8 its better, but it really gets going at 5.6...

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

The reason split image wont work for me particularly is that its too slow and can't help with moving subjects, most of the time even people, if you are trying to catch them in a natural state, or have a very limited time to take the picture (usually the case). To make it work you have to -

- select a point of focus where its easy to identify that the image is split - this is not easy if your point of focus is eyes. Often its impossible.
- keep track of your desired point of focus
- keep adjusting focus as that point - and your camera - move around
- keep track of framing, changing aspects of your subject, the way the light falls, etc. as you decide when to press the shutter.

I really don't have time for this, the process does not work fast enough in the situations where it really counts. Perhaps its me, I am not good at multitasking. Very difficult really. Microprism is no better.

Both are fine for semi-static subjects, but if thats what you have then your DSLR will already give you the best focus confirm, a test shot. If you are not taking pictures where DOF is an issue, then DSLR focus confirm works perfectly well. You can use your 50/1.4 at f/5.6 and it will be just fine.

Similar problems with long lenses and sports/action. For my airshow shots for instance I prefocus and mark the lens for different ranges. Split image, etc. wont work, also not fast enough.

These same problems also exist with film bodies ! The only advantage of full-frame film cameras in this respect is a bigger finder image and a real groundglass - on some, not all SLR's by the way.

On Pentax cameras focus confirm works with all lenses with no extra electronics. There is no groundglass, but experience will teach you just the point when :

a. Focus confirm will go off, and just how far off it is likely to be and just how much closer/farther you have to move (the camera, not the focus helical, its faster to move your body when you are dealing with close subjects at narrow DOF) to hit the right point.

b. And you can also tell on the screen (you have to get used to doing a lot of focusing) when the image is genuinely "on". This can be seen even on a DSLR screen - mine anyway. Its subtle and nowhere near as good as a groundglass. Some lenses I find are better at this than others, you can see focus just snap in, when you are used to it. Thats where all my attention is when I am looking through the finder.

FluffPuppy · Joined: 11 Dec 2011 Posts: 365

rbelyell · Expire: 2014-01-31

its mf lens forum man! we all shoot old lenses! 75% of the lenses i have are 30-40 years old!

FluffPuppy · Joined: 11 Dec 2011 Posts: 365

mfkita · Joined: 29 Jul 2007 Posts: 222

At any aperture, the closer you get, the less depth of field there is...the dove above was @ 2.8....this bird was shot at 5.6 with 200mm/F4

Full frame and 100% crop...

peterqd · Expire: 2014-01-04

I like using 1.4-1.8 lenses for the bright viewfinder image, but even a 1.4 is difficult to focus really accurately wide open, and I only very rarely use any lens wide open. For this reason I can't justify paying the exponential increase in price for 1.2 or faster lenses.

rbelyell · Expire: 2014-01-31

amen to that peter. ive grown even more estranged from 'fast' lenses since getting my x100. its so good in low light i now dont even think about shooting open ap with other lenses.

btw, while there are many technical reasons i dont understand for the x100s great low light performance, one overlooked and underestimated factor is its great DOF. since its a 1.5 crop factor, the '35'mm lens is really a 23mm lens, with like double the wide open DOF of a 'normal' 35/2.0. when everything's in focus the picture has a way of looking better! Very Happy

mfkita · Joined: 29 Jul 2007 Posts: 222

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

Small DOF and hence large aperture is an artistic necessity in some cases.

Granted, I find it hard to justify f/1.2 or even f/1.4 on a 50mm
I can't say I use f/1.4 much. I have on occasion, but not often.

A wide angle with a larger aperture is a very nice thing though. A 28/2 can do a lot of interesting tricks.
You can not only shoot party pictures in available light, you can pretty effectively scale focus it from 2 meters +
Theres your autofocus. And you can light a whole theater with the little on-camera flash.

And I like my 200/2.8 Tamron. I'd like a good 300/4 also.

jjphoto · Joined: 17 Mar 2009 Posts: 410

Large aperture lenses are no good, don't buy them (so that I don't have as many people bidding against me).

FluffPuppy · Joined: 11 Dec 2011 Posts: 365

rbelyell · Expire: 2014-01-31

great shot. looks like an advertisement from 1970. do you think it wouldve been a worse or better picture at F4 or 5.6? maybe worse because the car wouldnt stand out as much from the fore and background? to me that is a perfect artistic use of wide open aperture.

jjphoto · Joined: 17 Mar 2009 Posts: 410

The very shallow DOF is not suitable for many applications.

nixland · Expire: 2012-07-29

I am a newbie in this fast lens world. Previously I shot mostly at f8-f16 (landscape shots with AF lens)
But I wanna share what I learn from short experience (1 full year) with fast lens in line with OP posts.

About why the fast lens is more expensive, I only guess because I am not a lens expert, that is the lens is more difficult to design and produce (to eliminate CA, maintain sharpness, etc.) and need a bigger glass for wide aperture.
Maybe our friends here who know more about lens design could share the knowledge.

About why people are crazy about fast lens or is there a trend for fast lens, I can only guess too, because I don't have a statistic evidence Smile

... it might be that at wide open a lens gives a certain look, a special look, a dreamy look that can not be achieved by slower lens.
I was amazed too when I use the f/1.2 lens for the first time.
I don't know when exactly this fast lens started to become a trend in the past. Maybe experience members could share the history about fast lens.
And I assume that this trend could contribute on the lens high price ? I dunno Smile

And yes, the euphoria to use fast lens at wide open, specially for newbie, at some point make them unwise to select the aperture. They always use it wide open where in some condition it would be better to stop down the aperture.
I have experienced it myself Smile

I am still learning to use aperture wisely based on the scene and the concept. But still, the special look of wide open shots always tempting Smile

FluffPuppy · Joined: 11 Dec 2011 Posts: 365

Laurentiu Cristofor · Joined: 23 Oct 2010 Posts: 524 Location: WA, USA

Didn't see this mentioned before, but a fast lens is also useful because you'll get a brighter image in the viewfinder when you'll shoot in low light conditions (assuming you have auto aperture, of course). And with AF lenses this will also help the AF system. So it helps to have a fast lens even if you don't care about shooting wide open or about thin DOF.

I like fast lenses because I like to shoot with available light and I prefer to open up the lens than to bump the ISO.

(edit: I just noticed peterqd's post above about the brighter viewfinder image)

F16SUNSHINE · Expire: 2011-11-18

There are many characteristics in many different lenses when shot wide open.
Making use of some of the "flaws" of a large aperture lens is one area where a photographer takes artistic control of his work.
Yes there is a craze in the last 5 years about shooting wide open at MFD. This Bokey mania has created a bit of a fast lens monster in the marketplace.
Once you get past that though, you can get back to using your lenses to their full potential "Flaws" and all.
Focussing is more difficult with a narrower depth of field. Practice is required so Go practice !!!

Wide open and then @ f5.6 ilford HP5 shot at 1600 and developed in Rodinal. The wide open shot gives a much more time appropriate dating to this image.
It comes only from the lens being shot wide open with it's particular characteristics shot that way. In this case flare, softness, a lovely glow, and aberrations.
Can you guess the lens?

hoanpham · Expire: 2015-01-18

I have a Petri 28/2.8 that has the soft look like that wide open. Step down only half or 1/3 of the click, the photos are sharp. One click is sharp as any regular 28/2.8 lenses i have.

Regarding 50/1.2 and 50/1.4, they came as 'kit' lens in the 80s. I got my first Pentax with 50mm f1.2, and second with 50/1.4, and they delivered cheaper as kit (50/1.7) before the zooms take over. I had a hard time to use f1.2 with film and stay with this one lens for many many years. In film, you have limited iso/asa, so fast glass is the only way out. Otherwise, for artistic purpose, fast glass is a must for some cases.

angara · Joined: 05 Dec 2011 Posts: 14 Location: CHINA

You get what you paid for.

The larger,the better.

FluffPuppy · Joined: 11 Dec 2011 Posts: 365

tomasg · Expire: 2014-04-28

Some of the fast aperture ones seem to be "calibrated" for wide open use, two modern lenses come to mind: Samyang 85/1.4 and Sigma 50/1.4. This doesn t mean that they perform better wide open, just that the overall performance is shifted towardes wide open and the expense of stopped down, a bit.

I don t know how with other camera makers works but with Nikon DSRLs (i owned a D200, D300 and now a D700) the in focus dot indication works very well. One has to learn how to use it and practice.
With Nikon for example, the dot stays on for a certain "travel" (the dot stays on for a certain time as you move the focusing ring from one side to the other) of the focusing ring, i found out that i get the spot on focus when i position the focusing ring on the "closer to the subject" side of that travel.
With Nikon bodies you can use any AF focus sensor (in the case of the D700, 51 of them, some are better) to focus, just like when using AF. This is good, becouse it means less "focus then recompose" where you can move the camera enough to lose the spot on focus, this is the reason why i didn t tried a split screen, yet. I found just using the screen itself is usless for me, but i am 40 years old and i have -6 dioptries on both my eyes. Smile

This works regardles of any brand of lens, if it wouldn t be for the flange distance, Nikon cameras would be the friendlies for use with MF lenses i think, after all Nikon always kept back compability.

It s a joy to use fast lenses, of course at the beggining you tend to use them wide open a lot, but with time one learns to use them in a creative way.

Tomas

peterqd · Expire: 2014-01-04

mfkita · Joined: 29 Jul 2007 Posts: 222

I have found that with F1.4-F2 lenses, stopping down just one f-stop is enough to remove a lot of the "gauzy" haze around contrasting tones....2 F-stops from wide open and it's completely gone with the better lenses..."my" stop-down 1 F-stop rule is (perhaps even more) true for zooms too, AF and MF varieties...it makes me more confident shooing with them...

....however, with my (early edition) 35/2 and 24/2.8 MF Nikkors even stopped down to F5.6-8 flare and "haze" were never fully eliminated, and that the more modern 35/2 by Canon and the basic Canon 18-55IS kit lens were significantly better...I've not tried other 24mm lenses but I've seen excellent results from the Olympus Zuiko 24/2.8.

....and...1 F-stop smaller than wide open doesn't add very much DoF, usually just enough to get the shot in focus. Very Happy

....and has been been said...Some of the fastest lenses were designed with center sharpness and for use when wide-open....with the compromised design to be best at the center at the expense of edge sharpness, and sharpness doesn't improve either at the center or at the edge when stopped down...hence the "value" of getting a 1.4 lens designed for better OVERALL sharpness from edge-to-edge