Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,566   Posts: 1,545,421   Online: 1051
      
Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 130
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,445
    Quote Originally Posted by jstout View Post
    Lenses could be made a lot cheaper by leaving out the shutter blades, and all that extra hardware. The lens could also be made much lighter. The complicated mechanisms could be left out, and just use faster shutter speeds. This could make those ultra-fast lenses available to the rest of us. Also, good idea about the welding goggles, as I have a pair somewhere that I may be able to adapt to the purpose.
    You know, I've had a couple of those "ultra fast" lenses. Without exception, the only reason I could find to use them wide-open is to get a photograph that cannot be made any other way - that is in very low light. The 50/1.4 Zuiko at 1.4 was soft and mushy around a semi-sharp central zone, and all the highlights had reddish halos. The 50/1.2 Canon in Leica m39 was just lousy wide open. The 50/1.2 Nikkor wasn't much good either. The 50 1.4 Nikkor was by far the best of the lot, but I sold the camera it was on - the original bill of sale said it and the camera were a unit. I now use the 50/2 Nikkor H lenses as my fast 50s, they do everything I need done, and have none of the aberrations (wide open) the faddists go gaga over.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    local
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,342
    Blog Entries
    5
    Images
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by vpwphoto View Post
    I was just musing in a depressed manner that younger folks think all they have to do is "follow someones" web blog and do what they say to do and that is it.
    vpwphoto --
    its the way of the world now. i remember when i was just starting out
    i got my hands on one of those "black books" ... thumbed through it listening to cheezy 80s music
    there were names and images of pro shooters in there, their best work. some were
    2-3 page spreads that must have cost a small fortune for them to have published.

    nowadays everyone thinks they are a pro, and is a self published expert
    with a tumbler and flickr page, and they often go on their blog and blather on about
    how they shot a wedding over the weekend wide open and hdr and documentary style
    with no narrative and they got paid their 150$ upfront, and got the gig from craigs list or guru.com ... gotta love it !

    i don't think the booquet craze is gonna run its course anytime soon.
    silver magnets, trickle tanks sold
    artwork often times sold for charity
    PM me for details

  3. #33
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,367
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by jstout View Post
    Lenses could be made a lot cheaper by leaving out the shutter blades, and all that extra hardware. The lens could also be made much lighter. The complicated mechanisms could be left out, and just use faster shutter speeds. This could make those ultra-fast lenses available to the rest of us. Also, good idea about the welding goggles, as I have a pair somewhere that I may be able to adapt to the purpose.
    I have a lens that is just an achromat meniscus, f 4.5, two elements and a diaphragm, about as simple as it gets, but it weighs something like 6lbs (did I mention it's a 16" Kodak Portrait lens?). So (relatively) small maximum apertures and mechanical simplicity do not a light-weight lens make

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    northwest New Jersey, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    106
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    I have a lens that is just an achromat meniscus, f 4.5, two elements and a diaphragm, about as simple as it gets, but it weighs something like 6lbs (did I mention it's a 16" Kodak Portrait lens?). So (relatively) small maximum apertures and mechanical simplicity do not a light-weight lens make
    Good point. Actually, I was kidding about making the 50/1.2 Nikons and others, and selling them stripped down. Kind of like a nokton barrel lens.

  5. #35
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,367
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    I know But there are some here who would read something like that and take it literally, and carry on for far too long about why someone doesn't do that

  6. #36

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    428
    Quote Originally Posted by vpwphoto View Post
    Afraid not... She is 20 and believes the best photos are made at f1.8 and believes she needs a 1.4 for better photos still.
    She may grow... I have just made an observation that she thinks she thinks she has figured out the secret to all great photos.
    Every photo on her card was made a 1.8. She says she's not going to be a "program shooter" I set my lens manually to 1.8.

    I was so bummed with her arrogance and confidence in her abilities that I don't think I feel like taking her under my wing.
    I told her to hold off on the 1.4 purchase, "that's not what I read". Her other lens is a 50mm f2.8 macro. "for detail shots".

    I was just musing in a depressed manner that younger folks think all they have to do is "follow someones" web blog and do what they say to do and that is it.

    I always thought the larger aperture lenses came along with the SLR's for easier low-light focusing and image rendering on Tr-x. A 105 1.8 was needed to make basketball photos in the day as not even a pro arena was lit well for a 105 2.5
    Maybe time for a photography tech theory lesson? If she's an intern, she's there to learn, no?
    http://street-photos.net/ | http://felinik.com/ | http://www.facebook.com/jf.felinik

    "The one with the most stuff when he dies wins"

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,278
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Helinophoto View Post
    Although, if she is indeed a Canon-shooter, the two 50's cannot be shot wide-open really, as they (at least the f1.4) become both soft and rather strange at those apertures (halo-effects on in-focus objects and also on objects that are out of focus).
    As I recall, the 1.8 isn't too bad wide open. Of course it's not as sharp that way as when stopped down a bit, but I don't remember seeing objectionable halos from it.

    There's a lot of superstition about bokeh, but at least I can see where ultra-shallow DOF can be an aesthetic choice. It might be one of those things like infrared film, where people have a tendency to go crazy for it at first experience, then eventually get bored with the novelty and take a more balanced perspective.

    I'd be lying shamelessly if I claimed never to have gone in for the wide-open macro shot across a map or a sheet of music; they're cliches but they're kinda fun anyway.

    -NT
    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  8. #38
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,827
    Quote Originally Posted by vpwphoto View Post
    My intern showed me photos she made with a 50mm f1.8.... then she says 1.4 bohka "is the best, but I can't afford a 1.4".
    It's Japanese and spelled bokeh, and not to be confused with the japanese word baka that means idiot.
    Last edited by benjiboy; 03-22-2013 at 12:35 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    Ben

  9. #39
    kintatsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Bavaria, Germany
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    350
    Images
    2
    Bokeh has its uses, mostly artistic. The problem is, most people use it as a crutch for shallow DOF, to seem more artistic, or because they are often pretentious.

    Bokeh properly applied can add to an image, after all part of it is the shape, and texture thereby given, of your aperture, and how it relates to your image, not just the lack of focus. People forget the esthetics of it.

    Usually, though, it really is used to hide poor focusing.

  10. #40
    Fixcinater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    887
    Images
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by kintatsu View Post
    Usually, though, it really is used to hide poor focusing.

    Would not shallower-than-average DOF require better-than-average focusing?

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin