Max aperture all the way, all the time folks are interesting breed... Its really odd to see their group photos of people, where only one or two are in focus and the rest out of focus because they are on a different focus plane just a foot behind or in front of the others that are in focus, or the use of crazy shutter speeds like 1/4000 of a second outdoors in every shot so they can use that aperture. I wish they would realize that they dont need to spend all that dough and just use a lens of a longer focal length to get some of that bokeh they want.
The only reason to have a fast lens is to let more light in. At least that's the way I see it. I must be a different breed as I'm 22
You should explain that she is confusing the terms.
"Bokeh" (not 'Bohka' btw), refers to the quality of out of focus objects and highlights.
What I think she means, is "DOF", and that she prefer very narrow depth of field.
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).
Nothing wrong with playing with narrow depth of field (or even tilt-shift lenses with narrow depth of field as well), this is a creative decision.
- Who decided that you have to shoot at f22 to be a "proper photographer"?
I use whatever aperture that suit the situation, but for people in an environment, narrow depth of field can be really nice, you can even use the shapes in the "Bokeh" to add to your composition, as well as eliminate distracting elements in the background more effectively.
I think you are all a bit patronizing here, why does she deserve to be laughed of, just because she got a creative preference and confuse the terms a bit?
Shooting wide open, blurred backgrounds with main subjects often out of focus, etc., has long encroached beyond the realm of still photography, at least here in Germany.
As a DOP myself, I sometimes have discussions with directors about that "look" that has become so trendy amongst the younger generation of camera persons with gadgets like the 5d with fast lenses, who say things to me like "it does not matter if even the main subject is sometimes out of focus, it adds to the aesthetics of THAT look"!!
Of course it looks different, I can even understand the allure of Bokeh, but there has to be a balance between "look" and content. It has to make sense.
I think it's cute, good that you have observed her odd presumptions and can help her to better knowing..
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.
Originally Posted by Helinophoto
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
I agree with many of you, I use a 105 1.8 A LOT. It makes focusing easier (mine is an AIS I use on AF bodies... and youngsters are always amused I use an antique lens on a D800 or f100).
But also why cary the bulk everywhere??
I use it most often between f2.8 and 1.8.
Ok, makes sense :P
She'll hopefully grow out of the shallow-dof phase and expand and try other stuff as well. ^^
Actually, even though I like shallow-dof on many occasions, with medium-format, I am really struggling with too thin DOF's.
Even F4 on 80mm is too thin on many occasions, I then stop down, only to find out that I should have jammed a 400 ISO film into the camera instead of 100 :D
(I'm pretty new to medium-format shooting)
Hopefully this "shoot it wide open" fad will run it's course. It will be replaced by something equally stupid and annoying, though.
Unfortunately, the 1.8 bokeh faddist has all the conceit and arrogance of the very ignorant; hopefully she'll grow out of it but it doesn't sound encouraging. It's hard to learn when you already know it all.
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.