Canon's 85 1.8 is fine, great even for the price.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NeoGAF Camera Equipment Thread | MK II
- Thread starter MRORANGE
- Start date
Canon's 85 1.8 is fine, great even for the price.
JadedWriter
Member
He could probably look for a bargain on the Sigma EX 1.4 85.
panama chief
Member
For the OP, here are examples of a Nikon 50mm mounted on a Nikon 55-200:
Ball point pen by Kevin, on Flickr
Honda Accord key by Kevin, on Flickr
I am not thrilled with the quality but it only cost a few bucks to "make" a macro lens, although this level is macro is a bit too much IMO.
Thanks. These are exactly the type of pictures I want to take. Every day things the human eye doesn't take notice of.
higher shutter speed
Jzero
Member
Nice bokeh, I'll look into getting this one thanks.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Just to supplement, but a good rule of thumb is to keep your shutter speed at the same value as your focal length or higher. Obviously it depends on how steady you are and the lens/body combination, but if you're working with a 50mm lens without stabilization, you're probably going to be safe if you keep your shutter speed above 1/50.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
That's the idea! You might be able to keep it a bit slower if you hold the camera very steady, or you may have to make it a bit faster, but that should be your ballpark for minimum shutter speed at that focal length without any stabilization.
DarkJediKnight
Member
During daylight, set it to AV, at night, set ISO to auto and shutter to 1/125 until you get the hang of what shutter speed to use manually. You'll get the hang of it. It's not rocket science.
TFGB
Member
Seems fine here?
I'm used to handling Nikkors so all Lumix lenses feel a little odd to me lol. It's not as smooth as the 100-300, but then the 100-400 feels better engineered.
I wonder if stifness issues have been mentioned by users that tend to push/pull rather than rotate the zoom ring? I'd imagine it would only be a problem for video work.
Astral/H3X
Member
Don't care about AF?
Id say either the Samyang 85 1.4, or even their 100mm 2.8 macro. The 85mm is a smidge soft wide open, (as most 1.4's are) but is perfect for portrait work. The 100mm is sharper, like razor sharp, but doesn't get quite the same soft bokeh. On the plus side, at 100mm, as long as you get some distance between the subject and the background, you still get really, really great separation. Also it's a fantastic macro lens to boot.
85mm sample:
https://flic.kr/p/Tm26uS
https://flic.kr/p/Jofriv
100mm sample:
https://flic.kr/p/LnheJD
https://flic.kr/p/Lnh7Pr
https://flic.kr/p/NvGgnS
I have others if you search through my flickr, but I'm on mobile ATM.
Alright thanks
I'm looking at the Sigma 24mm f1.4. I guess also the Canon version but it's like $1,000 more expensive.
I've never used Lens Rentals but I may give it a go. I'm cautious about buying this as I already have the focal length covered with my 14-40mm L lens but it only goes to f4.0. Curious to see how much the 1.4 would effect my shooting and look of the photos.
I've never used Lens Rentals but I may give it a go. I'm cautious about buying this as I already have the focal length covered with my 14-40mm L lens but it only goes to f4.0. Curious to see how much the 1.4 would effect my shooting and look of the photos.
What are you shooting?
nhlducks35
Member
1/60 since it's a crop sensor
Portraits. I looove my Sigma 50mm but I've been getting a bunch of books out at the library of photographers that include lots of the environment in their portraits. These photographers are all using 8x10 view cameras but I'm thinking around 24mm on my full frame would give a roughly similar look.
JadedWriter
Member
I was going to mention that he should get the 35. If he doesn't want the Sigma he could also get the Tamron 35 1.8.
JadedWriter
Member
I thought we saw in 50mm? 24mm is really weird for portraits. You can make it work but yeesh, I wouldn't buy a prime specifically for that.
well I've taken portraits at 17mm that I really like. That's more of a niche lens yea but 24 isn't too weird at least for my style/preference (close to subject and getting lots of the environment).
Playing around in my house a bit I do like the 35mm focal length...
I rarely ever get new lenses but I might pull the trigger here sometime soon.
Playing around in my house a bit I do like the 35mm focal length...
I rarely ever get new lenses but I might pull the trigger here sometime soon.
Miniature Kaiju
Member
I was going to suggest you to use your zoom locked to these focal lengths for a while indeed. At 24mm, f/1.4 will mostly give more light to work with, since you need to be fairly close to your subject to get separation. Focal length of the human eye is debatable (especially since eyes are not very camera-like), but currently is held to be around 43mm (55º horizontal field of view).
I wouldn't call Sternfeld's photography portraiture, really. It's more something between street photography and urban landscapes that happen to contain people.
JadedWriter
Member
I had to google him to get some examples...they start to get a bit...samey in my opinion.
Got any particular examples of the composition/look you're going for? Just curious cause I'd agree that wider isn't necessarily what I'd expect for portraits, and mirroring the point about needing to get closer (again, depends what you're going for though). I experienced the other end of the camera last week when my brother in law was taking a wide shot of me at the Grand Canyon, that lens felt uncomfortably close, heh.
As for myself I'm still on 40mm (or equivalent at least, 20mm on m4/3), might be a weird tweener between the "standard" 35 and 50 but it works in its own way I guess.
As for myself I'm still on 40mm (or equivalent at least, 20mm on m4/3), might be a weird tweener between the "standard" 35 and 50 but it works in its own way I guess.
BlackBanditSho
Member
Canon's 85 1.8 is a beautiful lens and is widely regarded as one of the best portrait lenses. If you want to spend more money, the Canon 85. 1.2 is godlike. Canon is about to release the 85 1.4 this week. Price unknown.
But you can't go wrong with the 85 1.8 by Canon.
Jzero
Member
Cool thanks I'll do more research on the 1.8. There's no way I'm going to be able to afford their new L lens though lol.
JadedWriter
Member
Also do some research on Tamron's 85. It's stabilized.
Miniature Kaiju
Member
I've used it before and it is excellent. It's fairly sharp throughout the frame wide open and becomes razor sharp with loads of contrast once you hit f/2. It's also built like a tank.
JadedWriter
Member
excellent. I guess if he can find one cheap enough that'd be an excellent option. The most recent batch of Tamron lenses have been really damn good.
Yes "depends on what you're going for." I want to get into more environmental portraits that show the person but also take in a good look of their physical environment. I do like taking close up "head shot" type portraits as well but I want to be as versatile as possible.
here are two photos from a portrait series I just completed. These are at 17mm on full frame:
Skel1ingt0n
I can't *believe* these lazy developers keep making file sizes so damn large. Btw, how does technology work?
Saw that the guy on Fuji Rumors is claiming the X-T2s could be announced in the next few months - sooner than I expected.
I love my X-T2, probably my favorite camera I've ever owned. It's damn near perfect in my eyes, and has the perfect balance between size, weight, ruggedness, picture quality, sensor size, lens selection, and price. I was pretty sure I was going to hold onto it for at least 4 or 5 years. That was knowing that IBIS was never coming to Fuji's crop sensors.
But man, I don't think I'll be able to resist image stabilization, assuming it's good. That's literally my only complaint about the system other than lack of touch screen and them needing to upgrade all their lenses to be weather resistant.
I love my X-T2, probably my favorite camera I've ever owned. It's damn near perfect in my eyes, and has the perfect balance between size, weight, ruggedness, picture quality, sensor size, lens selection, and price. I was pretty sure I was going to hold onto it for at least 4 or 5 years. That was knowing that IBIS was never coming to Fuji's crop sensors.
But man, I don't think I'll be able to resist image stabilization, assuming it's good. That's literally my only complaint about the system other than lack of touch screen and them needing to upgrade all their lenses to be weather resistant.
JadedWriter
Member
The only way I'd get the XT2s is if there's some sort of trade in program and I don't have to pay more than $400 for it. I'm perfectly fine without IBIS.
LegendOfGood
Member
Thanks for the info and write-up (and thanks to everyone else who chimed in with their thoughts on my camera choice a few weeks ago...).
I think I've narrowed my choice down to: Fuji X-T20, Lumix G85, or Olympus E-M5 II.
Here's my thought process:
I decided to move away from DSLR's due to their bulky nature and lack of video tools (focus peaking, zebra warnings, etc.). This is despite being attracted to the 77D / 80D's ease-of-use, lens ecosystem, and solid HD video.
I considered the Sony A7 II, but moved away due to its cost, heaviness, lack of articulating touch screen, and supposed 'loudness'. I am also wary of Sony's lens prices. This is despite being attracted to the IBIS, solid HD video, and full-frame sensor.
I considered the Sony a6300, but moved away due to average HD video quality (I know 4K is solid on it), lack of weather sealing, lack of IBIS, lack of articulating touch screen, and again - Sony's expensive lenses.
I considered the Fuji X-T2, but moved away due to cost and lack of IBIS. Everything else about this camera is attractive to me and I am still considering biting the bullet on cost...
So once again it's down to... Fuji X-T20, Lumix G85, or Olympus E-M5 II.
I think the biggest question for me is: should I compromise sensor size (16 MP) and accept M4/3 in exchange for IBIS. Is IBIS worth it? And am I hurting myself by getting stuck in the M4/3 ecosystem?
Or should I take the larger sensor and better HD video quality in exchange for lack of IBIS on the Fuji? Is the extra cash worth it for the X-T2?
Any thoughts would be very welcome.
I am mainly interested in taking portraits (family, friends), casual/enthusiast landscape shots, and occasionally semi-professional (ie, just need solid HD) video. I am not sure how much I will need IBIS. I don't plan on lugging a tri-pod around with me, but would be open to it.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
The apparent field of view is the same, but 250mm on large format looks different from 35mm on full frame, in terms of perspective and angles. It's hard to explain.
yea I get that. I don't want to just copy Sternfeld's style... obviously I should be going for my own thing. I just really dig his type of portraiture and was interested in getting a close approximation with my gear.
JadedWriter
Member
How much do you really care about video? For portraits and landscapes sensor size and dynamic range are king. For Panasonic and Olympus they both can share lenses if that helps, though the Panasonic ones are more affordable. The G85 is a pretty good camera and I think it most likely has the best IBIS barring the GH5. The grip on the XT20 is horrible, I honestly think the camera is just too damn small. It's a baby XT2 yes, but it's really just too small and missing the iso knob and impossible to get a vertical grip on it. Pretty much to be succinct you can either get the G85 or just get the XT2. Also look at which lenses you'd think you would want for the cameras and make your decision like that. Olympus has some really good glass, but it's also really expensive for M43rds.
LegendOfGood
Member
Thanks for the response.
While the primary use of my camera will be for stills, my background is in video, so it's tough for me to compromise video quality in the off-chance I may need it.
Tough choices but if you are going to be taking picture of still objects more than moving objects, I think IBIS is great. I personally won't invest seriously in a system without IBIS after having it for over a decade. It's one of those things where it's hard to let go once you have it. Not having to whip out that tripod as much as possible, plus more and more places don't allow it unless you have permits, is pretty big deal while traveling. There's 1-1.5 stop difference in high ISO performance between m43 and APS-C and IBIS will let you keep the ISO lower on m43 no problem, more than enough to make up the differences. If you need more high ISO performance to keep shutter speed high for most of the cases, then go for APS-C.
edit: this all kind of assume you are going to be using the primes more than the zooms that have OIS since you care about bulk.
Fuji is supposed to make some announcements on Sept 7 and there is a rumor of a X-T2s with IS.
Jzero
Member
Canon's 85mm 1.4L is $1,599.00. Kinda want to go into debt for a while after seeing the demos 😥
Maybe I can even make money with it 🤔
Maybe I can even make money with it 🤔
JadedWriter
Member
I mean you can try, but it's not easy. Your area better not be overrun with photographers like mine is.
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
Anyone want too see some burned equipment from this last solar eclipse?
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/09/rental-camera-gear-destroyed-by-the-solar-eclipse-of-2017/
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/09/rental-camera-gear-destroyed-by-the-solar-eclipse-of-2017/
sixteen-bit
Member
StopMakingSense
Member
That 600 lol.
opticalmace
Member
Now imagine what staring at the sun with just your eyes could do... scary.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Lmfao that sucks.
