or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › ***SW&D Photography Thread***
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

***SW&D Photography Thread*** - Page 23

post #331 of 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crane's View Post


In that regard you would be wrong. No photographer would ever argue against getting better glass. My advice about going to a camera store and trying both lenses is sound. His main complaint is the lens is soft at 50mm. By personally comparing both 50s side by side means he makes an informed decision based on his own personal experience. Lab results and other users experiences are useful in helping make that decision but should always be taken with a grain of salt. I'm not sure I follow your reasoning about professional work and practicing either when it comes to lens selection. Care to explain that a little more?

Pro photog here and I would argue against it. In this scenario anyways. 

 

KJ - don't get bogged down with a bunch of gear talk. It's for pros and pixel peepers and gear collectors, IMO. It's too confusing and no one really cares. 50mm 1.8 is great for where it sounds like you're at right now. Upgrade to a 1.4 if you eventually feel like you need to (I will bet money that you never will). 1.4 is unquestionably a better lens, but the 1.8 will get you 98% of the way there. Especially over the garbage Canon kit lenses. 

 

Resale value no good on a 1.8? Perfect, buy one used. Or buy it new and you'll be out a whole 50 bucks if you a sell of a loss of 50% (doubtful). My $125 Nikkor 50mm 1.8 is probably the sharpest lens I own (never made huge prints to compare though......) 

 

I'd also recommend a 35mm on a cropped sensor. I found 50mm frustratingly long most of the time on my crop cameras, but maybe that's just me. Buy whatever and just go shoot.

post #332 of 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by basil rathbone View Post

Buy whatever and just go shoot.

Best advice.

If you can handle it in store that's even better

I agree about the 35 on a cropped sensor (giving you equivalent to a 50 on 35mm which shouldn't be a standard anymore but it is so that's that) great for walking around
post #333 of 589

Honestly, most of the time i see it as 95% individual / 5% camera.  I used to spend ages deliberating over spec on one of my first digital cameras and spent quite a bit of cash, probably in the hope that it would let me take better photographs (it didn't).  Now i'm happiest with a XA2 i got on ebay for £10 or my Contax T2 point and shoot.  The most important thing happened in my brain and eyes.  I don't mind people talking detail and spec, and if you're doing a specific type of work that requires specific lenses then fair enough, but it's just not my thing. 

post #334 of 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by basil rathbone View Post
 

Pro photog here and I would argue against it. In this scenario anyways. 

 

KJ - don't get bogged down with a bunch of gear talk. It's for pros and pixel peepers and gear collectors, IMO. It's too confusing and no one really cares. 50mm 1.8 is great for where it sounds like you're at right now. Upgrade to a 1.4 if you eventually feel like you need to (I will bet money that you never will). 1.4 is unquestionably a better lens, but the 1.8 will get you 98% of the way there. Especially over the garbage Canon kit lenses. 

 

Resale value no good on a 1.8? Perfect, buy one used. Or buy it new and you'll be out a whole 50 bucks if you a sell of a loss of 50% (doubtful). My $125 Nikkor 50mm 1.8 is probably the sharpest lens I own (never made huge prints to compare though......) 

 

I'd also recommend a 35mm on a cropped sensor. I found 50mm frustratingly long most of the time on my crop cameras, but maybe that's just me. Buy whatever and just go shoot.

 

Yeah I'm not a gear head at all and have no desire to be, I just a) want to try out a prime with a low barrier of entry and b) want a cheap lens that could make up for some of the deficiencies of the one i currently have (namely poor low-light capabilities, bulk, and lack of sharpness in many environments).  The 35 might get more use and is probably an eventual buy, but I'd prefer to use what I have for awhile before dropping that much.  This is what I'm using now (bought used for about 250): 

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28-135mm-3-5-5-6-Standard-Cameras/dp/B00006I53S/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1379984646&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+28-135

post #335 of 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crane's View Post


Sharpness is controlled by more than just the lens. ISO can play a part in sharpness, so can shutter speed and camera settings. Lenses also have a tendency to be the sharpest stopped down a few stops from wide open. Also keep in mind looking at a full size image on a computer screen isn't a good indicator of sharpness as well. To do it properly you need to look at a print done up by a lab. That doesn't mean Walmart, it means someplace like Mpix. In general sharpness is judged by a print done at 5 times the size of the film plane. For practical purposes an 8 by 10 print is what you want. Also the file type and output dpi is very important. A compressed 72 dpi image looks like crap and won't print worth a hoot either. A 350 dpi uncompressed file on the other hand is good enough for large prints and magazines. Then there's something else called the circle of confusion. That's another matter altogether. Only one distance in your image will be in critical focus. Everything else will not be in focus. You control this with depth of field. The smaller the f stop the greater the depth of what appears to be in focus.

So don't be in a hurry to buy more glass. That f1.8 50 you're talking about is a cheap lens. Cheap and glass are two things that don't play well together. The f1.4 50 is a much better piece of glass. If you want to do better than that then you look at the full frame lenses. When used on an APS-C camera full frame lenses work great and if you ever end up with say a 5D MKIII you'll be set with lenses.

My portrait lens is a full frame Zeiss Planar T 85mm f1.4. This lens is considered to be the portrait lens no matter what camera body you use. It's an absolutely phenomenal lens but it also costs 1700 bucks. Do most people need something like this? The answer is no. I get paid to shoot portraits and weddings so good equipment tends to make my job easier not to mention it's less likely to break in the middle of a job.

Anyway buy once and buy smart.

That's actually what I don't agree with it. Yes the 50 1.8 is plastic but its a great value for what it is. And if you were going to sell out the cash for the 50 1.4 you  might as well pick up a used sigma 30 1.4. the old one and not the new art version. 

 

Dont worry about gear, but something that fits your shooting style. If you want a walk around lens with low light capability id probably go for the 30 1.4 from sigma since the 50 is a bit long as a walk around. Or buy a the sigma 17-50 2.8 which is also a nice walk around lens that gives you some flexibility.

post #336 of 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJulien View Post
 

 

Yeah I'm not a gear head at all and have no desire to be, I just a) want to try out a prime with a low barrier of entry and b) want a cheap lens that could make up for some of the deficiencies of the one i currently have (namely poor low-light capabilities, bulk, and lack of sharpness in many environments).  The 35 might get more use and is probably an eventual buy, but I'd prefer to use what I have for awhile before dropping that much.  This is what I'm using now (bought used for about 250): 

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28-135mm-3-5-5-6-Standard-Cameras/dp/B00006I53S/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1379984646&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+28-135

 

Use your lens right now and set it to 50 mm and 30mm. if the 50 feels long get the 30. if the 50 is good enough get that. It would be no point in buying something you wont be using enough because its too long. Which is what happened to me. I bought the 50 1.8 because everyone recommended it. It is an amazing lens for the price but it just was too long. I never got the shots I wanted. So from the beginning you might as well spend that extra couple hundred and just buy the 30 or 35 if thats what you need. After shooting a while I realized 18mm is perfect for me I like wider shots especially since I do a 1 to 1 crop for instagram. 

post #337 of 589

 

£849 for the new Fuji 23mm lens, ridiculous.

post #338 of 589

Anyone here shoot DSLR video as well?

post #339 of 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by troika View Post

Anyone here shoot DSLR video as well?

Yes, but very simple stuff.
post #340 of 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamacyborg View Post

£849 for the new Fuji 23mm lens, ridiculous.
Seriously super expensive.... But I still want it.... XD
post #341 of 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowboardpunk View Post

Seriously super expensive.... But I still want it.... XD

LOL! You know I have to do this given the latest convo. Why would you buy it? I mean there's got to be a cheaper lens that performs as well or at least almost as well. ROFL!
post #342 of 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by confuseddasher View Post

I have always been interested in photography, but started off pretty late. I just got my gear late last year and have been practicing since. Here are a few pics I took during my trip to Europe. I'd love you guys' feedback.




That looks like a builing pictured here: http://www.tamron.eu/en/lenses/focal-length-comparison.html
Edited by CDFS - 9/24/13 at 2:13pm
post #343 of 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crane's View Post


Yes, but very simple stuff.

 

Selfish plug: I run a small videography company and we shoot dslr video, was just curious about others on this forum.

 

Work sample - shot on a t2i and 7d (Click to show)
VIdeo (vimeo embed isn't working atm)
https://vimeo.com/67935107

Company--

THE MEGAPIXEL

post #344 of 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFS View Post


That looks like a builing pictured here: http://www.tamron.eu/en/lenses/focal-length-comparison.html
 

 

It's Ponte Vecchio in Florence

post #345 of 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crane's View Post

LOL! You know I have to do this given the latest convo. Why would you buy it? I mean there's got to be a cheaper lens that performs as well or at least almost as well. ROFL!

Because I'd prefer to shoot a 35mm equivalent than a 50mm equiv. As far as I know there's no real other equivalent lens for the Fuji mount.

Hopefully it'll drop down in price in a few months once the initial hype is over, £849 is still just the preorder price.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › ***SW&D Photography Thread***