Uses for 85mm f1.8 lens (Page 3): Love the Isley Brothers album! I grew up with that playing on the radio. That said, yeah, the lens does not have to be super-fast to yield decent...

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

User ID wrote:

I know Hogsters want some lens speed to obliterate... (show quote)

Love the Isley Brothers album! I grew up with that playing on the radio.

That said, yeah, the lens does not have to be super-fast to yield decent images. And one benefit of mirrorless is being able to mount just about any sort of lens on it.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

burkphoto wrote:

Love the Isley Brothers album! I grew up with that playing on the radio.

That said, yeah, the lens does not have to be super-fast to yield decent images. And one benefit of mirrorless is being able to mount just about any sort of lens on it.

I don’t see how this is a mirrorless advantage?

You can mount anything to anything with the appropriate adapter, no?

JD750 Loc: SoCal

fetzler wrote:

I have this Oly lens too. I use it to photograph my pet parrot. He is a tough subject as he likes the camera and tries to look in the lens or jump on my hands. The lens is also good for landscape use and making panoramas.

Ha ha your parrot 🦜 is a ham. ;)

Unlike cats 🐈 all of which seem to think the camera is trying to steal their soul.

User ID

JD750 wrote:

I don’t see how this is a mirrorless advantage?

You can mount anything to anything with the appropriate adapter, no?

NOPE. No way.

90mm Leica RF lens on Nikon EVF body.

(Download)

User ID

burkphoto wrote:

While the 45mm Olympus lens has an effective field of view similar to 90mm on full frame ......................

(One of my favorite things about m43 is that there is more depth of field at wider apertures for the same field of view. Much of my subject matter benefits from that.)

M4/3 rules the DoF universe ! Not only optically but mechanically. Low mass is its own reward. Acoarst FW deserves plenty of credit as well.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

JD750 wrote:

I don’t see how this is a mirrorless advantage?

You can mount anything to anything with the appropriate adapter, no?

You can't mount mirrorless cameras on dSLRs with any real practical success. Mirrorless cameras have a shorter flange-to-sensor distance than do dSLRs, so you CAN adapt most dSLR lenses to most mirrorless cameras. But going the other way does not allow the full focusing range to work.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

User ID wrote:

M4/3 rules the DoF universe ! Not only optically but mechanically.

Low mass is its own reward.

I do like all major formats for some reasons. But the more I use Micro 4/3, the more I prefer it, for a very long list of reasons.

My iPhone has a lot more depth of field, though! Not that that's a bad or good thing... It's just a thing.

User ID

Seabastes wrote:

That lens was so great for portraits I actually wo... (show quote)

The simplest settings are the best.

Mostly I use manual everything, to avoid unpleasant surprises. Of the "advanced" features I tend to lean on high fps burst speeds, about four frames per burst, for working at questionable shutter speeds. But even then its very simple cuz I very simply just leave it on all the time.

You see some threads titled "best setting for xxxx". My own settings are best for every "xxxx" so I never need to think any such thoughts about settings.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

burkphoto wrote:

You can't mount mirrorless cameras on dSLRs with any real practical success. Mirrorless cameras have a shorter flange-to-sensor distance than do dSLRs, so you CAN adapt most dSLR lenses to most mirrorless cameras. But going the other way does not allow the full focusing range to work.

Ah I understand! Thank you.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

burkphoto wrote:

I do like all major formats for some reasons. But the more I use Micro 4/3, the more I prefer it, for a very long list of reasons.

My iPhone has a lot more depth of field, though! Not that that's a bad or good thing... It's just a thing.

I resemble both of those statements.

Could it be the 4/3 aspect ratio is more optimized than the 3/2 ratio? It seems to me it is.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

JD750 wrote:

I resemble both of those statements.

Could it be the 4/3 aspect ratio is more optimized than the 3/2 ratio? It seems to me it is.

It crops better to 8x10. You lose 6% of pixels instead of 20%, if I recall.

But I like it because it has multiple attributes that work for me. Others may find 3:2 works better for them.

4:3 can be better for video, since it enables both open gate recording (full 4:3 aspect ratio, crop-able to 16:9), AND anamorphic squeeze/de-squeeze.

I don't see format "wars" so much as I see multiple formats apply to different use cases. Sometimes you need a #0 Phillips screwdriver. Sometimes you need a larger one (#1, #2, #3...). They're all used for different purposes.