/p/ - Photography » Thread #298389

[52 / 0 / ?]

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 11:00:00 No.298389 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By:

I want a new lens for Christmas, preferably a good portrait lens.

I was thinking about the 35mm 1.4

But then they have the 24mm 1.4
and the 50mm and 85mm 1.2

I really don't know which one I should treat myself to.
What's your opinion?
Do you have any other suggestions?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 11:01:00 No.298390 Report

Quoted By:

I wanna STF lens for my christmas.

wooooooo hoooooooooo!!

Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m

Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m Sat 22 Nov 2008 11:02:00 No.298392 Report

Quoted By:

The only protrait lens on that list is the 85. Also, 135mm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 11:03:00 No.298394 Report

Quoted By:

Well, not exactly for portraits.
Just ones that would be good for them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 11:04:00 No.298396 Report

Quoted By: >>298401

50mm f/1.2 on crop, 85mm f/1.2 if full-frame.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 11:05:00 No.298398 Report

Quoted By:

Yeah, I have a Mark III 1D
So it's a crop

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 11:07:00 No.298401 Report

Quoted By:

>>298396

not enough for portrait though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 11:12:00 No.298403 Report

Quoted By: >>298410

Crop wise
My Mark is a 1.3
and my 40D is a 1.6
(Correct me if I'm wrong)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 11:16:00 No.298404 Report

Quoted By:

Of course you could do portraits with any of them. We don't know what perspective you want, what qualities you like in a lens, visually and ergonomically, or what lenses you already own. So how are we supposed to answer this question?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 11:21:00 No.298410 Report

Quoted By: >>298413

>>298403
You have a 1d, and you don't know shit about what you're doing. Stop showing off to the internet, and make decisions for yourself.

You should know what the fuck you want if you have a "pro" body.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 11:22:00 No.298412 Report

Quoted By:

Well just about all my portraits are done in a studio.
I'm looking for a lens with a very shallow DOF.
I already own a 17-40 4.0, 70-200 IS 2.8, 100-400 IS 4.5-5.6, and a 15 Fisheye
(All L but the fisheye)

Does that help at all?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 11:23:00 No.298413 Report

Quoted By: >>298432

>>298410
Oh, I'm sorry, I can't ask for opinions from other photographers? Guess not.
All I wanted was a simple opinion on what I should get, since my town doesn't have any good camera shops, I can't try the lens out for myself.

Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM

Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM Sat 22 Nov 2008 11:57:00 No.298432 Report

Quoted By: >>298433 >>298450

>>298413
>>298413
The 85mm 1.2 is amazing, but it's a) pricy and b) relatively slow focusing due to the massive weight of its glass.

The 50mm 1.2 is worth it if you're shooting wide open. If not, the 1.4 is just as good.

The 35 1.4 is quite nice, same with the 24mm 1.4.

Basically, barring the 50/1.2 they're all excellent choices, assuming it's the focal length you want. Bottom line: Choose by focal length.

Shallowest depth of field of the bunch will be the 85mm 1.2.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 12:00:00 No.298433 Report

Quoted By: >>298436

>>298432
Thanks a ton
I'll take all of it into consideration ^_^

Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM

Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM Sat 22 Nov 2008 12:20:00 No.298436 Report

Quoted By: >>298438 >>298449

>>298433
Oh yeah - simple depth of field thing:

Given a specific magnification (Say, filling the frame with someone's head) and a specific aperture (say, f/1.2) the longer a lens is, the shallower the depth of field will be.

Hm...anyone have a calculator that lets you enter the focal length, subject size etc and get dof out of it? I'm just wondering how to figure out what dof would be like at 200/2.8 relative to 85 1.2, etc.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 12:28:00 No.298438 Report

Quoted By:

>>298436
Well, I mentioned that it won't be for JUST portraits. But I still will use the shallow DOF for creative shots.

fence !!POey2hdozCZ

fence !!POey2hdozCZ Sat 22 Nov 2008 13:14:00 No.298449 Report

Quoted By:

>>298436

http://dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

but yeah, at the same subject size, the 85 1.2 is going have a much thinner depth of field than the 200 2.8.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 13:15:00 No.298450 Report

Quoted By: >>298847

>>298432
>>The 50mm 1.2 is worth it if you're shooting wide open. If not, the 1.4 is just as good.

Wrong. The f/1.2 is sharp wide open and up while the f/1.4 is soft at, sharp at f/1.8. At that point you may as well recommend the f/1.8. Not to mention you can use the f/1.2 in 50% of the light as the f/1.4.

tri/p/fag !!0YcZMyxo3fF

tri/p/fag !!0YcZMyxo3fF Sat 22 Nov 2008 13:18:00 No.298452 Report

Quoted By:

85 1.2. I'm a Nikon fag, but seeing the output from that lens on a 5D makes my ball hair tingle.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 13:19:00 No.298453 Report

Quoted By: >>298454 >>298474

Threads like these are why I love my basement. I will spend the rest of my life dicking around with my five computers (all running Unix-based OS's), beating off all over myself to futa porn at 2:00 AM and thumbing trough Perl, Assembly and C compsci books, only to leave my house during the week for 7.5 painless daily hours of writing hideous vbscripts and staring off into space. You don't know peace and inner perfection until you've collapsed on the unwashed, mildewed rug in front of your computer with the bowl of cereal you were eating after fapping impulsively for the fifth time today to the same JAV rape/vomit porn avi and knowing that whatever misfortune may visit you in the distant future, you can die happilly knowing nothing need surpass this moment, even though tomorrow will be better but otherwise no different, just like yesterday. I am complete.

I am /g/.

Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m

Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m Sat 22 Nov 2008 13:27:00 No.298454 Report

Quoted By:

>>298453
/g/ is ^that^ way

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 14:32:00 No.298474 Report

Quoted By:

>>298453
/r/ if you have one for every board.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 20:58:00 No.298539 Report

Quoted By: >>298541

/p/: reading second hand reviews online about lenses you've never used makes you an expert on them

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 21:02:00 No.298541 Report

Quoted By:

>>298539

Some of us just ignore these threads and leave them to it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 21:05:00 No.298542 Report

Quoted By:

sometimes you just can't ignore the stupid shit that's being spread around here

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2008 22:00:00 No.298581 Report

Quoted By: >>298648

Get a mildly telephoto lens with a red ring, shut up, and be happy.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO unknown.jpg, 0B, 0x0

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 01:08:00 No.298648 Report

Quoted By:

>>298581

lol wut

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 01:16:00 No.298652 Report

Quoted By:

dude....just get the most expensive..THATS a good portrait lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 01:22:00 No.298654 Report

Quoted By: >>298658

200mm 1.8L

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO unknown.jpg, 0B, 0x0

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 01:34:00 No.298658 Report

Quoted By:

>>298654

oh wow, at first i thought you were trolling, then i googled and was like OMFGWTF O_O

man, that's some huge piece of glass

$19.99 !OSYhGye6hY

$19.99 !OSYhGye6hY Sun 23 Nov 2008 01:37:00 No.298660 Report

Quoted By:

That lens gives EXTREM BORKEH!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrbokeh/2385609850/

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO unknown.jpg, 0B, 0x0

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 01:38:00 No.298662 Report

Quoted By:

fucking hell Canon..

the black one on the left is the 200mm f/2.8, the middle is the 200mm f/1.8, right is 300mm f/2.8 IS

1 1/3 stop faster, 5956874 times moar hueg

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 01:42:00 No.298664 Report

Quoted By: >>298667 >>298678

Too bad you can take a 85mm f/1.8 lens, crop it to 200mm and get the exact same effect for 15% of the cost, 7% of the weight and 100% the image quality and focus speed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 01:45:00 No.298667 Report

Quoted By:

>>298664
Yeah, less framing ease but when there's nothing else in the frame besides one subject and blobs, it doesn't really matter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 02:11:00 No.298678 Report

Quoted By:

>>298664
YOU LOSE VALUABLE BORKEH THOUGH!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 02:17:00 No.298680 Report

Quoted By:

wait, would cropping the 85mm actually give the same amount of bokeh as 200mm though?

or is it a bad joke

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 02:30:00 No.298687 Report

Quoted By:

the same AMOUNT of bokeh? lol

SURE IS GEARFAG IN HERE

sage rage !3I4SJbCh8M

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO unknown.jpg, 0B, 0x0

sage rage !3I4SJbCh8M Sun 23 Nov 2008 04:19:00 No.298723 Report

Quoted By: >>298833

it is well known that Sony cameras give 1.2x the borkeh of any other camera, due to their maple leaf shutter and superior ISO performance

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 08:24:00 No.298833 Report

Quoted By:

>>298723
that is bullshit, sony has fucked iso

Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM

Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM Sun 23 Nov 2008 09:09:00 No.298847 Report

Quoted By: >>298849

>>298450
The first half of what you said just agreed with me...?

The 1.8 isn't sharp at 1.8 though. What was meant was that if you were shooting at f/1.2 to f/2, the 50/1.2 is better. If you're shooting at f/2 on, the 50/1.4 is better. 50/1.4s have better focus/build/IQ than the 1.8s.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 09:14:00 No.298849 Report

Quoted By: >>298914

>>298847
so if i wanted a 1.8 and the 1.8 isnt sharp at its max apature, should i get the 1.2 so that I can shoot 1.8, since the 1.2 prolly isnt good at 1.2?

Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM

Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM Sun 23 Nov 2008 12:50:00 No.298914 Report

Quoted By:

>>298849
If you're critical, you'll pretty much always want to be at least a stop down from wide open. The 50/1.2 is good if you're using it in the 1.2-2.0 range. If you typically want more dof than this (or just don't need the light), then I'd have a really hard time recommending it due to the size, weight, cost and aberrations (weird as all hell getting such severe purple fringing even just in a camera shop...).

And just for clarification - the 50/1.2 isn't _bad_ at 1.2. It's actually really quite good, particularly in the center of the frame. It's just that it's not so different from the others, whereas the 85/1.2 is quite different than the 85/1.8.

Honestly, this shouldn't have exploded into such a big thing. Really, here's what you should do: Buy a lens in the focal length you want. Any of these are good lenses and will serve you admirably. Just figure out what you're lacking, and choose that way.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 22:37:00 No.299079 Report

Quoted By: >>299090 >>299093

Keen in mind Einta is a XSi Rebel faggot who posted his first thread on /p/ about getting a sweeeeet deal on his Rebel kit.

Love those Internet bench photographers. MTF TEST CHARTS MOTHERFUCKER, ULTIMATE RULE

Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM

Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM Sun 23 Nov 2008 22:54:00 No.299090 Report

Quoted By: >>299099 >>299104

>>299079
Oh yeah. That should be kept in mind. I really _am_ a numbers-obsessed obsessive min-maxer. Sure, I know the ideal apertures (separately for sharpness/cromabs/etc) of each lens I own and spend way too much time reading about equipment. I get paid to do so though, so it's not so bad for me.

And hey! It was sweet, dammit. Prices have dropped and it's still only about $17 cheaper than I paid back in May.

Hm...I just reread your post, and I apologize. The missing comma threw me off. Thanks :)
> Keen in mind, Einta is a XSi Rebel faggot

SAGE

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO unknown.jpg, 0B, 0x0

SAGE Sun 23 Nov 2008 23:02:00 No.299093 Report

Quoted By:

>>299079
MTF are so exciting to read, oh just load up on Adderall

11Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS-1D Mark II NCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsPhotographerMichael HolveMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.4111Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:11:21 04:44:28Exposure Time1/250 secF-Numberf/16.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/16.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashFlash, CompulsoryFocal Length35.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width800Image Height511RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard1

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 23:16:00 No.299094 Report

Quoted By:

>Sure, I know the ideal apertures (separately for sharpness/cromabs/etc) of each lens I own and spend

This is just good technique. Though I did my own tests without MTF charts, purely visual. Different apertures look different, so of course that's something to take into consideration alongside depth of field, although the latter is more important.

One plus side of small sensors like those in point and shoots is that there's 99% of the time enough depth of field for you to pick any aperture between maximum and minimum just for their other visual effects.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 23:30:00 No.299099 Report

Quoted By:

>>299090I get paid to do so though, so it's not so bad for me.

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH, man. Camera salesman, and proud of it. Awesome.

Good on you to not say you get paid to take photos though. Nothing wrong with selling cameras.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Nov 2008 23:51:00 No.299104 Report

Quoted By:

>>299090Sure, I know the ideal apertures (separately for sharpness/cromabs/etc) of each lens I own

...? 1 to 2 stops down from wide open. man, that's so hard to remember! -______________-

inb4yeah but then i know when i just need 2/3 stop or 1 instead of going 2 full stops!!!!

you know what? fuck your pixel peeping faggotry, any lens is good enough stopped down a bit. only idiots obsess over shit like this and prevents them from getting good photos

Project !dashI8UpO.

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO unknown.jpg, 0B, 0x0

Project !dashI8UpO. Mon 24 Nov 2008 00:35:00 No.299128 Report

Quoted By: >>299144

28-80 f/3.5-5.6, kitlens of the F60. Quite a crappy lens with baaad cromabs. Not sure about distortion. But at least it's sharp ENOUGH.

Just made this a while ago. Light source is a flash to the ceiling. This is at f/3.5 ISO 100 on the left and f/7.1 ISO 400 on the right. Full res crops on top. 50% crop and resize to 500px wide on the bottom (to emulate a 100% resized to 1000px wide, ie web).

I'd rather have 2 stops less noise or 2 stops faster shutter than 2 stops more "sharpness". The only time I ever stop up is when I'm in shutter priority outdoors or specifically want more DOF or want to do a long exposure.

So yeah, fuck pixel peeping and blah blah.

111111

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Nov 2008 00:59:00 No.299144 Report

Quoted By: >>299147

>>299128
You're in broad daylight, Sunny 16 light, and you'd rather go for a faster shutter speed than a better aperture, assuming it's just going to be focused at infinity and etc. so depth of field doesn't go into it?

Project !dashI8UpO.

Project !dashI8UpO. Mon 24 Nov 2008 01:02:00 No.299147 Report

Quoted By: >>299150

>>299144
Kinda falls into the "shutter priority outdoors" category I guess.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Nov 2008 01:11:00 No.299150 Report

Quoted By:

>>299147
What I'm getting at is that, yes, of course, everyone who isn't anal is going to agree that pretty much every lens is sharp enough. But why not try to get the knowledge and put it into practice to get results closer to what you want, whether that's picking this lens over that one, this aperture over that aperture? Not necessarily the technically best, but the one that gives you the results you want? For instance, a lens might be sharpest at f/5.6 but its bokeh is nicer at f/4, and the difference in depth of field is okay with you either way. You could pick either based on the shot.

Of course sensitivity versus noise, shutter speed, etc. have to be balanced, but it's not a good idea to just leave one part of the equation at some default, whether that's the sharpest aperture or wide open or whatever.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches