Fast Lenses (Page 6): It seems to me that the latest fad is to have EVERYTHING in focus, regardless if it makes sense or not. Some recent cameras even include features to facilitate...

Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum

Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰

Main Photography Discussion

Fast Lenses

Page <<first <prev 6 of 8 next> last>>

Sep 17, 2020 21:45:07 #

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Architect1776 wrote:

I do not condemn fast lenses per se.
There are many valuable purposes for them.
But does not one get tired of one eye in focus and the rest fuzzy?
Clothing fuzzy?
Everything but that eye fuzzy?

It seems to me that the latest fad is to have EVERYTHING in focus, regardless if it makes sense or not. Some recent cameras even include features to facilitate focus stacking for that very purpose.

I'm not sure about fuzziness making the eyes tired. But over-sharpening everything certainly will.

Sep 17, 2020 21:59:57 #

Drip Dry McFleye

Haydon wrote:

Maybe you should look into Elena Shumilova's work where shooting wide open becomes art. Many portrait photographers shoot wide open and know how to use it to their advantage. Her work has brought in 60,000,000 viewers. She's still regularly shoots with a 5DIII with the EF 85 1.2.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/75571860@N06/

Thanks for the link. Mind blowing!

Sep 17, 2020 22:05:56 #

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Architect1776 wrote:

I believe one of the first f0.95 lenses made was by Canon who introduced it in 1961, way ahead of everyone else.

https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/s43.html

https://allmyfriendsarejpegs.com/2018/04/21/canon-50mm-f0-95-lens-review/#:~:text=Introduced%20in%201961%2C%20the%20Canon,ever%20produced%20for%20commercial%20use.

I think the Zeiss Planar 50mm F0.7 was made around the same time - but the Canon was the first. The Zeiss is still the fastest.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Zeiss_Planar_50mm_f/0.7

Sep 17, 2020 22:08:19 #

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Thomas902 wrote:

oh my goodness... br No mention of the NIKKOR Z 58... (show quote)

Hell, that Nikkor F0.95 is almost 2 lbs lighter than my walkaround bird lens - Sigma Sport 150-600 - my triceps and biceps haven't changed much.

Sep 17, 2020 22:35:01 #

canondave1 Loc: Houston, TX

Architect1776 wrote:

I have with interest observed the "Bokeh"... (show quote)

I love this portrait! Your grandmother was a beautiful lady.

Sep 17, 2020 22:43:54 #

Josephakraig

I like fast lenses for low light shooting but I don't have a lot. I have a 50mm 1.4 and an 85mm 1.8 and a bunch of 2.8's but don't consider the 2.8's very wide. I like the 85 because I can stop it down just a little and dramatically increase DOF. I enjoy seeing single strands of hair but don't want to see individual pores on the face when I'm doing portraits. If I really want a very shallow DOF on a portrait and it's a woman or girl I go ahead and focus on the eye and make sure both eyes are in the same plane. I've gotten some nice ones this way but another way to cheat a little to get the great smooth bokeh that everyone seems so enamored about is to use a longer lens, I like my Nikon 70-210 f:4 for this. Back way up and then the whole face is in focus but the background is totally wiped out. My 70-210 (constant f:4) is an older lens but may be the sharpest in my kit, although I think I consider all my lenses pretty sharp. You will probably want to use a tripod to do this or really good VR or VC.

Again I like the wide lenses because their sweet spot while perhaps not wide open is down there pretty low.

I shoot a Nikon D850 and love it.

Sep 17, 2020 23:03:54 #

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

Gene51 wrote:

Hell, that Nikkor F0.95 is almost 2 lbs lighter than my walkaround bird lens - Sigma Sport 150-600 - my triceps and biceps haven't changed much.

My favorite lens weighs 8 pounds and it is quite a workout to handhold it

Sep 18, 2020 01:17:36 #

Islandgal Loc: Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Canada

joer wrote:

.

I like fast lenses not because of the shallow depth of field but because they focus better in low light. They really pay off in early morning or late evening.

Agreed!

Sep 18, 2020 06:31:10 #

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

baron_silverton wrote:

There are several reasons for fast lenses, and creating razor thin DOF at close distance is only one and probably the least important.

One thing to remember is that DOF is not only the result of the aperture but also of the distance to the subject.

So for whole body shots where it is necessary to back away from the subject there is more DOF (less shallow) than just the plane of the eye even at f/1.2 on a 50mm or 85mm lens. So, for example, there are use cases for these fast lenses where one wants to have shallow DOF and more bokeh but from farther away. In this way you can achieve the Bokeh of an f/2.8 or F/4 lens at close distance but from farther away to get a full body shot. With an F/2.8 or F/4 lens from the distance of the full body shot the bokeh will start to become too well defined and not enough out of focus - even though at close distance at those apertures it is sufficient.

If you are just shooting a head shot or head an shoulders shot like that of your grandmother and you do not want too shallow a DOF you can always stop your fast lens down - this will also give you more sharpness.

To further this point, most manufacturers put there best glass and tech into the faster lenses which is partially why they are more expensive. So the fact that you have the best glass and you are stopping it down 3 stops - a 1.4 lens to f/4 for example - means your head shot should be very sharp and still have a pleasing fall off (not too extreme).

Finally, there is another obvious reason for fast glass beyond shallower DOF which is the ability to use faster shutter speeds and lower ISO's in low light. This alone makes fast glass worth it to many - for example
astro photography or event photography where the ambient light is basically none or very low respectively.

I hope this answer serves to give you something to think about - if nothing else please realize that fast lenses are not only around for some fad - in this case razor thin DOF portraiture - which I think can be argued is not only a fad, but that is another matter.

Hope this helps.
-B

There are several reasons for fast lenses, and cre... (show quote)

So it is low light and I open to f0.95 to get the light in with a fast shutter to freeze the action.
I get the eye in sharp focus frozen no motion while I cannot tell what the activity is because the rest is fuzzy.

Sep 18, 2020 07:45:57 #

kscanman Loc: Wisconsin

Wow! She is an excellent artist.

Sep 18, 2020 09:26:39 #

User ID

ronpier wrote:

I agree that my Tamron 28-75 does a good job at 2.8 but my preferred aperture is also 5.6 for most of my lenses. Just like the results more. Don’t really do much landscapes especially at 2.8.

For midrange FLs on FF and APSC, the DoF at f/5.6 (+/- a stop) seems to represent our human “visual impression” of what enters our view and grabs our attention. IOW it matches our mind’s view of a scene. That tends to make the resulting image look natural.

Sep 18, 2020 09:41:11 #

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"...Hell, that Nikkor F0.95 is almost 2 lbs lighter than my walkaround bird lens - Sigma Sport 150-600..."
Gene51 this isn't about how much you can bench press... leave the testosterone out of the equation here... You are comparing a 150-600mm focal length to a 58mm FL? That new NIKKOR Z 58mm f/0.95 S Noct is not intended for BIF, it is likely for photographing the heavens at night a.k.a. stars... However at 58mm it falls into the camp of "Event" shooters... as such it is virtually useless... No venue is going to take kindly to someone dragging a monopod across their ballroom...

Besides your Sigma Sport 150-600 has OS i.e. VR while the 2,000g Noct doesn't so hand holding likely isn't a wise choice anyway... The Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 dc hsm art optic has the same problem... No OS i.e. VR and weighs in at 1500g. Great idea, albeit zooms in this FL range are typically useful for events... Not as a tripod mounted studio lens... It simply isn't a very useful tool for commercial event shooters in my humble estimation... Same with that obese Noct

Though I'm certain you would command a lot of attention when you walked into a church with your Sigma Sport 150-600 to shoot a wedding event, which reminds me to take you of my list of potential "Second Shooters" lol

Sep 18, 2020 09:43:23 #

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Thomas902 wrote:

"...Hell, that Nikkor F0.95 is almost 2 lbs l... (show quote)

Sep 18, 2020 10:17:28 #

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

joer wrote:

. I like fast lenses not because of the shallow depth of field but because they focus better in low light. They really pay off in early morning or late evening.

No doubt about that. My fastest lenses were 50, 58 and 90mm f/2.0. Then I bought 55 and 85mm f/1.4 Zeiss Otus lenses. That extra stop provides a brighter viewfinder image - low light focus is easier.

Sep 18, 2020 10:37:33 #

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

This discussion has been fun to watch. And of course trends and "fads" have always been an inseparable part of art. Sometimes they are driven by new capabilities, sometimes by some 'breakout' artist coming out with something new...perhaps laughed at and rejected during the artist's lifetime, but adopted as the coolest thing ever later (think Picasso or Andy Warhol). Sometimes it reflects the economy or the feelings of the times, like Art Deco. Sometimes it just happens (think Lady Gaga).

As for focus trends, I am, quite frankly, quite shocked that no one has even mentioned "The f/64 Group" from the first half of the 20th century...if it was in the frame, it was expected to be sharp. Or those special soft focus portrait lenses that we paid really good money for, especially if we were shooting medium format.

Art, music, architecture, decor, clothing, automobile styling, even food preferences and preferred camera technology all cycle through trends and preferences. Some of us are quick to follow those trends, some take some inspiration from them, some don't care at all, some don't even see what is happening. It's the way society has worked for at least a couple of thousand years.

Page <<first <prev 6 of 8 next> last>>

If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.

Main Photography Discussion

Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections

UglyHedgehog.com - Forum