Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,198   Posts: 1,531,459   Online: 825
      
Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 85
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2,612
    more people are using conversion to digital is altering the wides mainly

    more people going to om1 for serious photos

    lots of lenses stored in lofts and out houses eaten by fungus the bogey man

    there were not many non standard lenses compared to Nikon

    bad news if you are buying

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    971
    You really have to scratch your head about internet forums. Someone posts a thread on lens prices, and someone else replies that it's a result of a photographer's age and flower photos.

    No one has to grow old, you know. That prerogative is in everyone's hands, and what w/ the world being already overcrowded and everything....

    I AM looking forward to more photos of Martian rock bokeh though.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,223
    hmmm I just had a leaf through some old Camera magazines from 1980. In the back there are private "classifieds", amongst which I found a OM Zuiko 85mm f/2 for sale for £120.

    A quick scan of recent eBay "sold" items (worldwide) for that lens shows the most expensive at around £350, the least expensive about £100.

    Using one of the online "inflation calculators", I found that a price of £120 in 1980 equates to the best part of £440 today.

    The magazines also featured some nice pictures of flowers, and some of the pro photographers appeared to be over 40 ...

  4. #24
    Allan Swindles's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Wirral, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    250
    Why does everyone want f1.4 and f2.0, fast lenses? They're bound to be more expensive when compared with the f3.5 and f2.8 versions but not necessarily better.
    I'm into painting with light - NOT painting by numbers!

  5. #25
    erikg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    pawtucket rhode island usa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,397
    Adjusted for inflation those pros would now be in their 70's.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    northern england
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by Allan Swindles View Post
    Why does everyone want f1.4 and f2.0, fast lenses? They're bound to be more expensive when compared with the f3.5 and f2.8 versions but not necessarily better.
    Agreed.

  7. #27
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,229
    Images
    60
    At least with respect to the fast wide angle lenses, they are definitely easier to focus than their slower brethren.

    The Zuiko 35mm f/2 is my standard lens.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Washington, the state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,097
    Images
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Allan Swindles View Post
    Why does everyone want f1.4 and f2.0, fast lenses? They're bound to be more expensive when compared with the f3.5 and f2.8 versions but not necessarily better.
    Because I live in Western Washington State and it has more cloudy and dark days every winter than most other places have in ten years. A fast lens is easier to focus and I don't have to push 400 speed film to 1600 for everyday use.
    Dave

    "She's always out making pictures, She's always out making scenes.
    She's always out the window, When it comes to making Dreams.

    It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up."

    From It's All Mixed Up by The Cars

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    965
    Images
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by jjphoto View Post
    And here's a bokeh comparison for you:

    Which one is the good one?

  10. #30
    jjphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by Moopheus View Post
    Which one is the good one?
    Most people like smooth, creamy bokeh (the first image) which doesn't cause any distraction or bring attention to itself. The most expensive cine lenses all have very smooth bokeh for this reason. On the other hand harsh bokeh does bring attention to itself, and is therefore distracting, but this doesn't have to be a bad thing, it can just be used badly or inappropriately (such as film/video). So to answer your question, neither is the "good one", they are just different. I actually like very harsh bokeh but it's not always easy to use well.



    Both images are also from the same lens, a Meogon 80/2.8 enlarging lens! The bokeh is different depending on whether the OOF area is in front or behind the point of focus.
    Last edited by jjphoto; 09-08-2013 at 07:35 PM. Click to view previous post history.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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