#i am happy with my new 50mm lens and the zoom lens that i got with the camera 12 years ago | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

ericlwoods · 7 years ago

Text

A while back I wrote an apology letter review to a lens. That was admittedly odd. This is another one of those.

Differences? The prior had a G badge while this one earned a Zeiss badge. The prior a telephoto zoom and this is a wide to short tele zoom.

Similarities? Quite a few. Both are early full frame mirrorless Sony Alpha mount lenses. Both have image stabilization. Both zooms. Both had aperture specs a stop less than what was expected for top rung offerings. Both were pricey at the time of their release. Both are plentiful on the used market likely owing to them having higher spec’s variants being released since. Both are lenses I wildly underestimated.

Have to say that looking back Sony was right and I was wrong. Looking at both lenses with fresh eyes I now realize that I was focused on specs while they were focusing on size, weight, and cost. Looking at the prices of the newer lenses I said I wanted initially (24-70mm and 70-200mm f/2.8s) I now realize that they are so large (defeating a major stated advantage of mirrorless) and expensive that I would have never considered this system at all. Plus releasing the lower variants last would mean that it would have delayed their depreciation.

On the used market I paid hundreds less for both of these f/4 lenses combined than the new 24-70mm f/2.8 alone. Nearly $1,000 less combined than one new 70-200mm f/2.8.

AF adapt a Canon DSLR or an earlier Sony DSLR lens? Personal preference, but I never seriously considered either of those paths. No matter the combination there always seemed to be a considerable compromise in size, weight, and AF capabilities.

The more I learn about photography the more I realize what gear will actually do is ultimately far more important than whatever the specification sheet has to say. In use the 70-200m f/4 blew me away.

Sidebar: Wrote reviews here, here, and here pleading the case for the lower rung Sony 28-70mm lens. That is still an amazing lens. Nothing has changed. Would still be using it today, but Southeastern Camera had the 24-70mm f/4 at a price that undercut the current market value so much that I simply could not ignore it so I pulled the trigger on a film gear trade. Otherwise I would still gladly be using the former. But I love a good deal.

…and we are back. Like I said the 70-200mm f/4 blew me away, but I did not expect the same from the 24-70mm f/4. I was wrong. The 28-70mm was very good. The 24-70mm is better.

How?

Sharpness. That Zeiss badge is not just a sticker. The 28-70mm was fine on the 24MP A7ii, but I must admit that the 42.4MP A7Rii stretched it a bit beyond it’s capabilities. Not so with the 24-70mm.

Build. The previous lens had a fine build quality, and was even more compact while zooming, but the Zeiss is a tank. Proper melee weapon in a pinch grade kit. And a fine looking hood you have there Mr. Zeiss.

Focusing speed. May just be the Zeiss pixie dust clouding my judgment, but while the 28-70mm was a zippy focuser the Zeiss seems a touch quicker.

Who am I kidding? It says Zeiss right there on the side. I am not immune to the charm of that name and its history.

Now on to the even more surprising bit. This is all the lens I really need between 24mm and 70mm. If I were not a prime lens zealot (first step is admitting you have a problem) I could (gasp) trade my other primes. I would never have believed this, but it was first made apparent at a work event I shot in low conference room light (a St. Baldrick event where the room light was kept low since a projector was running) where it performed flawlessly… and later proven at a recent photo shoot.

At this recent event I was the solo shooter moving between 2 rooms with very different lighting/flash conditions (ballroom w/ on camera sto-fen flash vs. 3 remote light couple vs. 3 remote light group shots).

Ballroom w/ on camera sto-fen flash:

At first I was determined to use primes (switching between the FE 50mm f/1.8 and the FE 85mm f/1.8 depending on how far I would be from the subject) due to the meager light available. Despite my earlier experience with the Zeiss I was convinced that f/4 would not cut it. But then I realized that in such an informal setting f/1.8 was actually working against me. With the subjects seated at round tables it was not always possible to get both persons in a couple on the same focus plane with such a thin depth of field. Meaning I had to stop them down. (ding, ding, ding) The bells went off in my head and I realized I would be better served (and possibly save my lenses from drops and sensor from dust contamination) by using the 24-70mm instead of swapping lenses back and forth.

3 remote light couple vs. 3 remote light group shots:

This one was more cut and dry. Was switching from full length to waist and up and group shots here so a zoom is a natural choice. Plus since f/4 is more desirable for group shots and confidence was bolstered by having the three light set up I knew the Zeiss would be at home here. But this lens really shined. This lens more than stood up to the demands of a 42.4MP sensor. I own no lens sharper than this. I own no lens that renders colors better than this.

It even performed flawlessly when I was caught flat-footed and brought outside after 10pm to take a group shot that I had not expected. They knew. Just did not tell the photographer. Details. No time to move lights. No time to test. No time to switch lenses even. But with a little cooperation from the subjects in holding still and a firm tucked in shoulder no breathing hold I got my favorite shot of the night using this lens.

Even did well getting a candid shot of the band I took while they were throwing down (They were phenomenal. Still trying to find out their name..

For my next shoot this is the lens I will start with and I expect that it will be the one that stays on the camera the entirety of the shoot. My primes will now be reserved for personal and special use. It is that good.

Would I have paid the going rate for one new or used before using this lens? Likely not. Would I do so now that I have seen first hand what it can do? No doubt.

Again, the 28-70mm below it is no slouch. But this lens goes that bit further where it matters.

Is the newer 24-70mm f/2.8 a better lens. I am sure it is. But by how much? I do believe this 24-70mm f/4 (ongoing gallery here) is worth serious consideration before spending over twice as much for its larger, pricier successor.

Happy shooting.

-ELW

Sony Zeiss FE 24-70mm f/4: Overdue write up on a bread and butter lens. A while back I wrote an apology letter review to a lens. That was admittedly odd.

0 notes

photomaniacs · 7 years ago

Photo

Film vs. Digital: Let’s Put It to the Test http://ift.tt/2iJbLO7

Have you ever heard the argument that digital just doesn’t have the same look as film? Well, let’s put that argument to rest. I have painstakingly made my own Lightroom preset that I believe is 96% the same as my favorite film, Kodak Tri-X 400.

Now, this preset is custom made for my camera specifically. So let’s dive a little deeper into how I accomplished this preset and put all those subjective arguments to rest.

First, The Setup

First off, I had to get my Kodak Tri-X film as close as I possibly could to the digital equivalent. In order to do that, I shot my film on a Leica M6 using a 50mm Summilux f/1.4 ASPH. And for my digital setup, I used the same lens on a Leica M (Typ-240).

I had two camera bodies and just swapped the lens between the two cameras, using the exact same settings. This way I could get the photos as accurately as possible when making direct comparisons in Lightroom.

To make sure all the colors and tones are as accurate as possible when making the preset, I used a ColorChecker and also made a custom DNG Camera Calibration. The Kodak Tri-X 400 was developed in a lab and scanned on a Fuji Frontier 3000 scanner at 300 dpi. The film was scanned at the closest possible size to a Leica M (type 240) RAW.

To Compare

For guidance, I used multiple shots in natural sunlight, overcast lighting, inside lighting etc. All using the same lens and settings and putting the ColorChecker in each photo. I did this so that I could get a consistent look regardless of the lighting situation when it came to applying my preset to any photograph I took.

Test Time

Now here is your first test. Four images of the same subject matter. Which photo is the Kodak Tri-X 400 and which one is my personal Preset and which one is VSCO’s preset for comparison? I’m sure you can figure out which image is the RAW photo, but if you can’t… please get your eyes checked.

Have you chosen which one you know without a doubt is Kodak Tri-X 400, or are you just guessing? I only ask because if you’re guessing then the digital vs. film argument is pointless.

OK, here is the reveal… Let’s see if you got it right?

Did you get it right? Or were you wrong? Let me know because I believe that film just doesn’t have the dynamic range that digital RAW files have now. I also believe there is something special that film gives, and that is negative prints made in the darkroom. If you’re shooting film and then digitally scanning it, I really don’t see the point personally. Because making a digital file out of an analog negative is kinda ironic. But do whatever makes you happy.

Three More Tests

OK here are three more images. One is Kodak Tri-X 400 and the other is my own personal preset. Let’s see if you can tell the difference.

Example #1:

Answer below:

Example #2:

Answer below:

The last comparison is a crop at 100% for you pixel-pushes out there. I was quite impressed with both results, and am happy to say I will be using my preset from now on. Sorry VSCO but I like my results better. So here you go, 100% zoom of a Kodak Tri-X 400 and 100% zoom of a Leica RAW file with my custom preset. (And FYI, I don’t think anyone looks at a print or photo this close… ever.)

Example #3:

And your answer below:

Conclusion

Is film still relevant when a RAW file can be so close to emulating the film look? Personally, I think film still has its place and I also love making prints in the darkroom. The only thing I think is kinda contradictory is scanning and digitizing your film into pixels. But whatever floats your boat.

So what do you think, does film vs. digital still have an argument? Or is it currently just a subjective debate with no real winner or right answer? I’ll leave that up to you. And don’t worry I won’t tell anyone what your answers were.

About the author: A.B Watson is a New Zealand photographer based in Auckland. The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. To see more of his work, head over to his website or follow him on Facebook and Instagram. This post was also published here.

Go to Source Author: A.B Watson If you’d like us to remove any content please send us a message here CHECK OUT THE TOP SELLING CAMERAS!

The post Film vs. Digital: Let’s Put It to the Test appeared first on CameraFreaks.

August 30, 2017 at 09:03PM

#photo photography art camera cameras

0 notes

grgedoors02142 · 8 years ago

Text

Ask the staff: Pick one focal length or lens to rule them all

Can you guess the focal length? Photo by Wenmei Hill

We handle a lot of glass in the DPReview office, but there always seems to be a handful of lenses or fixed lens cameras that everyone is extra eager to lay some paws on. Which got us thinking of a fun hypothetical: If we could only choose one lens to use for the rest of time, what would it be?

To keep things interesting, and to vary the answers, we opened the question up to include one lens in particular or one focal length. The photograph that accompanies each answer was shot with that staff member's chosen lens or focal length. We purposely didn't list the gear used. See if you can guess!

Carey Rose

Any guesses what focal length Carey gravitates toward?

Before I worked at DPReview, I would have immediately chosen the 35mm focal length. Now that I’ve worked at DPReview for some time, I have to say… I haven’t really changed my mind.

Splurging on a battered old D700 after college left me without enough money to pick up anything approaching a fast zoom, so I started building up a collection of affordable Nikon AF-D primes: a 50mm F1.8, a 35mm F2, an 85mm F1.8. I quickly realized that I just wasn’t a zoom guy, and the 35mm F2 was glued to my camera most of the time. A used X100 was a natural next step for a more portable setup when I scored a good deal on one. Even today, after using lens after lens and camera after camera for review after review, the 35mm focal length remains my go-to. It doesn’t matter whether I’m headed to shoot an event, a wedding, an environmental portrait, or just strolling around when some nice light hits, it’s more likely I’ll have a 35mm lens with me than any other.

Wenmei Hill

Wenmei likes versatility. Did she choose a zoom or a prime?

I’m going to take the easy way out and pick a zoom lens rather than a single focal length. My choice is the Nikon AF-S 24-120mm F4G ED VR, and my excuse is that the majority of shooting I do (documentary lifestyle and candid portraiture) requires a flexibility that is difficult to get with a single focal length.

I’m choosing the 24-120mm even though it’s not one of my ‘favorite’ lenses because it is relatively small, lightweight and versatile enough to get the variety of shots I look for when photographing. I am able to immerse myself in a scene at 24mm but also step back for a portrait at 120mm, using the longer focal length to get pleasing bokeh and separation from the background.

Shooting it on a DX-format body gives me even more reach at the long end (180mm equivalent) for portraits. I already use this lens as my everyday lens when I don’t have a particular creative plan and want to be prepared for anything, so it’s the one I’d choose if I had to pick just one.

Dale Baskin

Dale chose a specific focal length that he didn't always love. Can you guess what it is?

This will probably seem like I’m going for the low hanging fruit, but I would choose 35mm. I used to be a solid 50mm guy, and if I wanted to go a bit wider I switched to 28mm, skipping 35mm entirely. My shift to 35mm began in earnest when I started shooting Fujifilm’s X100 series of cameras, which have a 35mm equivalent lens.

Now, one could argue that I’m choosing 35mm because I really enjoy the camera to which it’s attached, but that’s not the case. In fact, when I first started shooting the X100 I enjoyed it despite the focal length. It was actually the one thing I didn’t care for about the camera. However, as I continued to use it, I learned to adjust my style to take advantage of the 35mm field of view. After a few months, I found myself really enjoying it, so I decided to do a little experiment: I was about to embark on a trip to Brazil and decided to shoot my entire adventure at 35mm. The idea was both exciting and scary; I knew from experience that I would be giving up some shots by not having the right lens. However, I like to travel light, and I hate carrying camera gear, so I threw down the gauntlet and accepted my own challenge.

The upshot? I had a great trip and captured a lot of memorable images. Did I miss a few shots along the way? Sure, I did. But on the flip side, I got some great photos I would have otherwise missed because I forced myself to visualize every scene at 35mm instead of mentally switching to a different focal length. Now, no matter what camera I happen to be testing, one of the first lenses I always put on the front is a 35mm (or equivalent).

Sam Spencer

Sam chose a specialty lens. This image was shot using a similar lens, albeit with a different focal length. Do you know what it is?

Forever? Forever ever? I’m sure I could do the practical thing and say ’24-70’, or be a motorsports spectator the rest of my life and say ’70-200’, but I’m weirder than that. If it was a lens for me to shoot what makes me happy for the rest of my days, it’d be the Nikon PC-E 85mm F2.8 for product, portrait, and automotive photography. The maximum magnification of 1:2 means I can get close for product, and use the tilt to either get more of the product in focus, or isolate the focal point. I like medium telephoto lenses for the narrower field of view that makes selecting a background out of a busy environment much easier, and even F2.8 can be bright enough to blur the background at 85mm. I’m a control freak, not a speed demon, so I’ll be watching eBay for a copy…

Dan Bracaglia

Dan's image was shot with the equivalent of his favorite focal length. The image was cropped in slightly, still any ideas what he chose?

The first and only lens I'd owned for many years was a 50mm. But as my interest in photography (and other activities) grew I found myself yearning for other lenses. If you'd asked me this question when I was 16 years old and shooting a lot of skateboarding, I probably would have said a fisheye is my favorite lens. If you'd asked me again when I was 18 or 19 years old and starting to get into photojournalism, I'd probably have said 24mm. If you'd ask me when I was 24-28 years-old, and reviewing cameras for a living, all why exploring the streets of NYC/Seattle, I most likely would have said 35mm. But these days, I've come full circle and 50mm is my focal length of choice if I could only shoot one lens for the rest of my life.

Sometimes overlooked or seen as pedestrian, there are plenty of reasons why a normal 50mm lens is number one in my heart and bag: For starters the nifty fifty is as practical as they come. Most manufacturers make a reasonably fast, yet inexpensive 50mm equiv. Moreover, I'd argue its the most versatile focal length of them all: in a pinch it can be used for portraiture or detail shots, in the same way a tele can. And it can also be used in some capacity as a wide-angle, if you have the room to move (I've shot many concerts with just a 50mm, without feeling a need for something wider). And if you get a reversal ring, you can mount a nifty fifty backward and use it for macro shooting!

For years I've carried a Nikon 50mm F1.8 in my bag as the ultimate backup for just about anything I'm shooting: weddings, concerts, portrait sessions, travel. It's light cheap and versatile. But these days, the lens spends as much time mounted on my camera as glass I own costing 6x as much.

Jeff Keller

Jeff chose a workhorse zoom. Can you guess which one?

Since I’m always shooting with something work-related, I don’t get to use my EOS 5D III very often. But when I do, my daily driver is the Canon EF 24-105mm F4L IS USM. Not the most exciting choice of lens, I admit, but for land- and cityscapes that I enjoy taking, it definitely fits the bill. The image stabilization works well, it focuses silently and the weatherproofing is helpful when you’re out at Snoqualmie Falls and it’s throwing mist. Naturally, not long after I bought the 24-105, the Mark II arrived, with new optics, better autofocus and new coatings to reduce lens flare and ghosting. The lens is larger and heavier than my Mark I model, which I consider a good size for its focal length and aperture.

It’s nice to see that Canon isn’t the only one offering a lens with this focal range. Sigma’s 24-105mm F4 DG OS HSM Art lens is even bigger and heavier than Canon’s Mark II version, but the build quality is excellent. And, according to DxO, it’s also a sharper lens. And did I mention that it’s a bit cheaper? Thus, if I was stranded in a world with wonderful landscapes and cool architecture, the Sigma 24-105mm F4 Art would be permanently mounted on my 5D III.

Vladimir Bobov

Vladimir is our newest DPR team member. He makes sure the site works properly. Any guesses what focal length he chose?

I wasn't sure whether to bother praising the 50mm focal length. I figured that it's so common, that talking about it would be either redundant at best or boring at worst. However, sorting my photo collection by focal length showed that I took more photos with a 50mm (on a 35mm full frame camera) than with any other lens, including the more versatile zooms.

So why pick the "normal" prime for the rest of my life? Versatility and portability. It's the perfect lens for candid portraits in a casual setting - fast enough to use in low light, and small enough to not intimidate the subject. Wide enough for full-body and group portraits, and good enough for head-and-shoulders (especially when paired with an APS-C camera). I've also been able to use it effectively for landscapes, close-ups, product, and food photography. So although I'd certainly miss the other focal lengths, with enough creativity and trickery, the 50 and I could live happily ever after.

Richard Butler

Richard chose a favorite lens that doesn't yet exist. This image falls toward the tele-end of his made-up range. Can you guess what it is?

If I have to live within the constraints of reality, then I’d be tempted to say a 35mm just for its Goldilocks-like flexibility. But, it seems only fair that if I agree to be bound by an arbitrary restriction, I’m should get to relax the need to limit myself to lenses that actually exist. The problem is that I really like 35-40mm equivalent lenses but also love something around 90mm equiv. for portraiture and a lifetime seems like a long time to have to go without.

Equally, if I have a 24 or 28mm equivalent lens, I get back into the habit of ‘seeing’ wide-angle scenes and I’m sure there’s some aphorism about making one’s life spicy. This is why I’m pushing back against reality: the need for a 90mm equiv, rules out the use of a 24-70mm equiv and, over time, the limiting equivalent aperture of an 18-55mm F2.8 on APS-C would leave me frustrated. Sigma’s 18-35mm F1.8 is a work of genius that I wish were available on mirrorless systems, so I’m going to put my faith in the men and women of Aizu and trust that they’ll make me a 16-60mm F2 for APS-C mirrorless. I mean, how hard could it be?

Allison Johnson

Allison chose a specific zoom lens, can you guess which one?

Maybe a truly bold person picks a prime to shoot with for the rest of their life, but I’m going to play it safe and pick a zoom, whatever that says about me. The Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 is not the very best lens I’ve ever shot with, but it’s fairly versatile, sturdy and relatively small. It’s the right size (along with the OM-D cameras I’ve used it with) so that it’s doable to carry around all day in my purse, and I like having a fairly wide 24mm equiv. out to 80mm for a little more reach when I want it.

Really, it’s not special in any way except that it’s a solid standard zoom for a system I like. I’ve had many happy days shooting with it, including one wonderful afternoon at a defunct nuclear power plant (seriously, it was awesome). If picking a zoom makes me basic, then so be it.

Barney Britton

Any guesses what lens Barney chose?

If I was trying to impress you, and if I wasn’t such a died-in-the-wool contrarian, my choice for ‘go-to’ camera and lens would be a Nikon D810 and a 35mm lens �� something good, like the Nikon 35mm F1.4 or Sigma Art 35mm F1.4, or perhaps an old ’sleeper' favorite, like the Nikon AF-D 35mm F2, for the hipsters. If you were to ask me what focal length I use most, I’d say that probably around 90% of my photography could be achieved with a 35mm lens. If you were to ask some of my comment-thread critics on the other hand, they’d tell you that 90% of my photography could be achieved with an iPhone, or their 5-year old daughter, or their blind grandmother, or their blind grandmother’s 5 year-old iPhone, but that’s beside the point.

But I’m not trying to impress you. Which is why I’m going to cheat a little, and make a case for a zoom lens, and one that doesn’t get a lot of love in these parts – the Nikon AF-S 24-120mm F4. The current version of Nikon’s ‘street-sweeper’ do-everything zoom, it’s true that the 24-120mm isn’t the sharpest lens in Nikon’s stable, or the best-controlled when it comes to distortion, or the toughest, and all the rest. It’s a kit zoom. A pretty good kit zoom, in my opinion, but still. So why – if I had to choose only one lens – would I pick the 24-120mm? Because it just works. I know that if I go out shooting with the D810 and 24-120mm, come rain or shine (or snow, or hail, or desert dust, or any of the other nasties I’ve thrown at it) I can capture pretty much anything I might want or need to. It’s almost boring. I wish I had more of an excuse to attach other lenses, but to be honest, most of the time I just don’t. I actually sold a bunch of my Nikon glass recently, because it wasn’t getting used.

The image above was taken just after a torrential downpour last December which turned into a hail storm. The camera and lens were - like me - soaked. Could I have taken it on something better? Maybe, but I wouldn’t have wanted to risk damaging a more expensive lens in those conditions. And would it be a better picture had I done so? Or a happier memory? No.

What would you choose?

If you could only shoot with one lens, or one focal length for the rest of your life, what would you choose? Feel free to share your answer in the comments!

from DIYS http://ift.tt/2mHg4L7

#DIYS

0 notes

rtscrndr53704 · 8 years ago

Text

Ask the staff: Pick one focal length or lens to rule them all

Can you guess the focal length? Photo by Wenmei Hill

Carey Rose

Any guesses what focal length Carey gravitates toward?

Before I worked at DPReview, I would have immediately chosen the 35mm focal length. Now that I’ve worked at DPReview for some time, I have to say… I haven’t really changed my mind.

Wenmei Hill

Wenmei likes versatility. Did she choose a zoom or a prime?

Dale Baskin

Dale chose a specific focal length that he didn't always love. Can you guess what it is?

Sam Spencer

Sam chose a specialty lens. This image was shot using a similar lens, albeit with a different focal length. Do you know what it is?

Dan Bracaglia

Dan's image was shot with the equivalent of his favorite focal length. The image was cropped in slightly, still any ideas what he chose?

Jeff Keller

Jeff chose a workhorse zoom. Can you guess which one?

Vladimir Bobov

Vladimir is our newest DPR team member. He makes sure the site works properly. Any guesses what focal length he chose?

Richard Butler

Richard chose a favorite lens that doesn't yet exist. This image falls toward the tele-end of his made-up range. Can you guess what it is?

Allison Johnson

Allison chose a specific zoom lens, can you guess which one?

Barney Britton

Any guesses what lens Barney chose?

If I was trying to impress you, and if I wasn’t such a died-in-the-wool contrarian, my choice for ‘go-to’ camera and lens would be a Nikon D810 and a 35mm lens – something good, like the Nikon 35mm F1.4 or Sigma Art 35mm F1.4, or perhaps an old ’sleeper' favorite, like the Nikon AF-D 35mm F2, for the hipsters. If you were to ask me what focal length I use most, I’d say that probably around 90% of my photography could be achieved with a 35mm lens. If you were to ask some of my comment-thread critics on the other hand, they’d tell you that 90% of my photography could be achieved with an iPhone, or their 5-year old daughter, or their blind grandmother, or their blind grandmother’s 5 year-old iPhone, but that’s beside the point.

What would you choose?

If you could only shoot with one lens, or one focal length for the rest of your life, what would you choose? Feel free to share your answer in the comments!

from DIYS http://ift.tt/2mHg4L7

#DIYS

0 notes

exfrenchdorsl4p0a1 · 8 years ago

Text

Ask the staff: Pick one focal length or lens to rule them all

Can you guess the focal length? Photo by Wenmei Hill

Carey Rose

Any guesses what focal length Carey gravitates toward?

Before I worked at DPReview, I would have immediately chosen the 35mm focal length. Now that I’ve worked at DPReview for some time, I have to say… I haven’t really changed my mind.

Wenmei Hill

Wenmei likes versatility. Did she choose a zoom or a prime?

Dale Baskin

Dale chose a specific focal length that he didn't always love. Can you guess what it is?

Sam Spencer

Sam chose a specialty lens. This image was shot using a similar lens, albeit with a different focal length. Do you know what it is?

Dan Bracaglia

Dan's image was shot with the equivalent of his favorite focal length. The image was cropped in slightly, still any ideas what he chose?

Jeff Keller

Jeff chose a workhorse zoom. Can you guess which one?

Vladimir Bobov

Vladimir is our newest DPR team member. He makes sure the site works properly. Any guesses what focal length he chose?

Richard Butler

Richard chose a favorite lens that doesn't yet exist. This image falls toward the tele-end of his made-up range. Can you guess what it is?

Allison Johnson

Allison chose a specific zoom lens, can you guess which one?

Barney Britton

Any guesses what lens Barney chose?

What would you choose?

If you could only shoot with one lens, or one focal length for the rest of your life, what would you choose? Feel free to share your answer in the comments!

from DIYS http://ift.tt/2mHg4L7

#DIYS

0 notes

pat78701 · 8 years ago

Text

Ask the staff: Pick one focal length or lens to rule them all

Can you guess the focal length? Photo by Wenmei Hill

Carey Rose

Any guesses what focal length Carey gravitates toward?

Before I worked at DPReview, I would have immediately chosen the 35mm focal length. Now that I’ve worked at DPReview for some time, I have to say… I haven’t really changed my mind.

Wenmei Hill

Wenmei likes versatility. Did she choose a zoom or a prime?

Dale Baskin

Dale chose a specific focal length that he didn't always love. Can you guess what it is?

Sam Spencer

Sam chose a specialty lens. This image was shot using a similar lens, albeit with a different focal length. Do you know what it is?

Dan Bracaglia

Dan's image was shot with the equivalent of his favorite focal length. The image was cropped in slightly, still any ideas what he chose?

Jeff Keller

Jeff chose a workhorse zoom. Can you guess which one?

Vladimir Bobov

Vladimir is our newest DPR team member. He makes sure the site works properly. Any guesses what focal length he chose?

Richard Butler

Richard chose a favorite lens that doesn't yet exist. This image falls toward the tele-end of his made-up range. Can you guess what it is?

Allison Johnson

Allison chose a specific zoom lens, can you guess which one?

Barney Britton

Any guesses what lens Barney chose?

What would you choose?

If you could only shoot with one lens, or one focal length for the rest of your life, what would you choose? Feel free to share your answer in the comments!

from DIYS http://ift.tt/2mHg4L7

#DIYS

0 notes

repwincoml4a0a5 · 8 years ago

Text

Ask the staff: Pick one focal length or lens to rule them all

Can you guess the focal length? Photo by Wenmei Hill

Carey Rose

Any guesses what focal length Carey gravitates toward?

Before I worked at DPReview, I would have immediately chosen the 35mm focal length. Now that I’ve worked at DPReview for some time, I have to say… I haven’t really changed my mind.

Wenmei Hill

Wenmei likes versatility. Did she choose a zoom or a prime?

Dale Baskin

Dale chose a specific focal length that he didn't always love. Can you guess what it is?

Sam Spencer

Sam chose a specialty lens. This image was shot using a similar lens, albeit with a different focal length. Do you know what it is?

Dan Bracaglia

Dan's image was shot with the equivalent of his favorite focal length. The image was cropped in slightly, still any ideas what he chose?

Jeff Keller

Jeff chose a workhorse zoom. Can you guess which one?

Vladimir Bobov

Vladimir is our newest DPR team member. He makes sure the site works properly. Any guesses what focal length he chose?

Richard Butler

Richard chose a favorite lens that doesn't yet exist. This image falls toward the tele-end of his made-up range. Can you guess what it is?

Allison Johnson

Allison chose a specific zoom lens, can you guess which one?

Barney Britton

Any guesses what lens Barney chose?

What would you choose?

If you could only shoot with one lens, or one focal length for the rest of your life, what would you choose? Feel free to share your answer in the comments!

from DIYS http://ift.tt/2mHg4L7

#DIYS

0 notes

porchenclose10019 · 8 years ago

Text

Ask the staff: Pick one focal length or lens to rule them all

Can you guess the focal length? Photo by Wenmei Hill

Carey Rose

Any guesses what focal length Carey gravitates toward?

Before I worked at DPReview, I would have immediately chosen the 35mm focal length. Now that I’ve worked at DPReview for some time, I have to say… I haven’t really changed my mind.

Wenmei Hill

Wenmei likes versatility. Did she choose a zoom or a prime?

Dale Baskin

Dale chose a specific focal length that he didn't always love. Can you guess what it is?

Sam Spencer

Sam chose a specialty lens. This image was shot using a similar lens, albeit with a different focal length. Do you know what it is?

Dan Bracaglia

Dan's image was shot with the equivalent of his favorite focal length. The image was cropped in slightly, still any ideas what he chose?

Jeff Keller

Jeff chose a workhorse zoom. Can you guess which one?

Vladimir Bobov

Vladimir is our newest DPR team member. He makes sure the site works properly. Any guesses what focal length he chose?

Richard Butler

Richard chose a favorite lens that doesn't yet exist. This image falls toward the tele-end of his made-up range. Can you guess what it is?

Allison Johnson

Allison chose a specific zoom lens, can you guess which one?

Barney Britton

Any guesses what lens Barney chose?

What would you choose?

If you could only shoot with one lens, or one focal length for the rest of your life, what would you choose? Feel free to share your answer in the comments!

from DIYS http://ift.tt/2mHg4L7

#DIYS

0 notes

chpatdoorsl3z0a1 · 8 years ago

Text

Ask the staff: Pick one focal length or lens to rule them all

Can you guess the focal length? Photo by Wenmei Hill

Carey Rose

Any guesses what focal length Carey gravitates toward?

Before I worked at DPReview, I would have immediately chosen the 35mm focal length. Now that I’ve worked at DPReview for some time, I have to say… I haven’t really changed my mind.

Wenmei Hill

Wenmei likes versatility. Did she choose a zoom or a prime?

Dale Baskin

Dale chose a specific focal length that he didn't always love. Can you guess what it is?

Sam Spencer

Sam chose a specialty lens. This image was shot using a similar lens, albeit with a different focal length. Do you know what it is?

Dan Bracaglia

Dan's image was shot with the equivalent of his favorite focal length. The image was cropped in slightly, still any ideas what he chose?

Jeff Keller

Jeff chose a workhorse zoom. Can you guess which one?

Vladimir Bobov

Vladimir is our newest DPR team member. He makes sure the site works properly. Any guesses what focal length he chose?

Richard Butler

Richard chose a favorite lens that doesn't yet exist. This image falls toward the tele-end of his made-up range. Can you guess what it is?

Allison Johnson

Allison chose a specific zoom lens, can you guess which one?

Barney Britton

Any guesses what lens Barney chose?

What would you choose?

If you could only shoot with one lens, or one focal length for the rest of your life, what would you choose? Feel free to share your answer in the comments!

from DIYS http://ift.tt/2mHg4L7

#DIYS

0 notes

karingottschalk · 8 years ago

Text

Olympus Australia and digiDIRECT held a launch event in Sydney for the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II Micro Four Thirds/Super 16 hybrid digital camera recently. I am often asked when I am going to try out and write about various cameras, lenses and accessories of interest to independent digital filmmakers and stills photographers, so the launch was a rare chance to see the OM-D E-M1 Mark II in the flesh, as it were, along with some of Olympus’ reputedly excellent M.Zuiko Pro professional lenses.

I am also often asked for the best advice I can give stills photographers and moviemakers just starting out as well as long-established professionals in both fields. Opportunities to see and try production hardware are few and far between here so my ability to provide that advice is limited by that, but one colleague in particular wanted to know my opinion of the Olympus OM-D cameras and Olympus M.Zuiko Pro professional lens series.

He is considering revamping his production kit now that small camera 4K movie production has become an affordable reality and wanted to know which lenses he should buy and what camera system in particular. He prefers primes over zooms but is happy to use zooms when he needs to.

The Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II Micro Four Thirds/Super 16 Hybrid Camera

I did not have an opportunity to try out the OM-D E-M1 Mark II at the event so the best advice I can give is to check out the plethora of product reviews and information available online.

If a review loaner is available sometime soon I will be very keen to put the OM-D E-M1 Mark II’s 4K video and other capabilities to the test.

One thing I was told about the OM-D E-M1 Mark II was a standout – it is equipped with a button on the front of the camera that is allocated to custom white balance, crucial when shooting video and yet one that makers of other video-capable hybrid cameras often seem to forget.

The Olympus Micro Four Thirds M.Zuiko Pro Lens Lineup

Left to right, the Olympus M.Zuiko Pro professional lens lineup as of January 2017, including the 7-14mm f/2.8 wide-angle zoom, 8mm f/1.8 full-frame fisheye, 12-40mm f/2.8 standard zoom, 12-100mm f/4.0 travel zoom, 25mm f/1.2 prime, 40-150mm f/2.8 telephoto zoom and 300mm f/4.0 prime telephoto lens.

For the work my colleague does, a fast 25mm prime lens – equivalent to 50mm in 35mm format – is a mainstay so he wanted to know what I thought of the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 25mm f/1.2 Pro especially in combination with the OM-D E-M1 Mark II for shooing video.

My moviemaking colleague has other cameras to which M43 lenses can be attached without adapters, including those made by Blackmagic Design or via adapters such as Digital Bolex‘s D16 CCD sensor global shutter Super 16 cameras. So any new lens purchases need to work with a range of cameras, current and future, mostly in manual mode but with autofocus when advantageous.

He is a documentary cinematographer so matched manual cinema lens sets such as as those made by Veydra are not in consideration, though they certainly would be were he a feature filmmaker or specialized in the sort of pre-planned, focus-pulling style of cinematography that Veydra primes suit perfectly.

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 25mm f/1.2 Pro

One of the two most recent M.Zuiko Pro lenses to appear, the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 25mm f/1.2 Pro is the second prime lens to join the Olympus professional lens collection.

Although the 25mm focal length, equivalent to 50mm in 35mm format, is not one of my favourite local lengths of all time, 25mm most certainly has its uses when shooting stills and video. It is useful for full-length and half-length portrait photography, covering events conducted in available darkness as this product launch was, and is a much-used focal length in documentary and feature filmmaking.

I like 25mm lenses for face-to-camera interviews, interviewer-and-interviewee two-shots and product shots when I don’t need the immersive deep space feel better suited to extreme wide-angle lenses.

Although slower 25mm lenses have their place especially when breaking into video and stills photography, fast 25mm primes are invaluable when faced with a range of lighting conditions such as the one under which I shot the photograph below.

With aperture set at f/1.2 and my Panasonic Lumix GX8 at A for aperture priority and auto ISO, I manually focussed the lens on the eyes of the Olympus Australia staffer in the centre, allowing everything else in the image to fall into defocus aka bokeh.

One of the unknown pleasures of the GX8 is its clean HDMI-out 4:2:0 8-bit 4K video, non-DCI for sure but great for documentary moviemaking as a lightweight but powerful rangefinder-style camera, a well-kept secret that only filmmakers like Rick Young of Movie Machine seem to appreciate.

Invest in the coming Leeming LUT One for the GX8, set your camera up as recommended, shoot ETTR (expose to the right), apply the LUT in your NLE, rinse and repeat. Do the same for your other cameras. Doubtless a Leeming LUT One for the OM-D E-M1 Mark II will appear soon enough.

One of the several joys of Olympus’ M.Zuiko Pro professional lens collection is their clutch manual focus. Draw the focus encoder ring back towards the camera, spin it left and right, watch critical detail snap into focus with focus magnification or focus peaking, then shoot.

Under this focussing system the encoder ring goes from close to infinity in a quarter turn, perfect when focus-pulling or needing to snap from one focussing distance to another and back. Count me as a major fan of this form of manual focussing in contrast to manually focussing via encoder rings that spin and spin and spin.

My colleague tells me he is in the market for a fast wide-angle prime lens in the region of 12mm, and is considering the Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 12mm f/1.4 Aspheric lens as he is very happy with his Panasonic Leica DG Nocticron 42.5mm f/1.2 Aspheric Power OIS lens. I wonder if Olympus is planning on expanding the prime lenses in its M.Zuiko Pro collection soon?

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-100mm f/4.0 Pro

Although I had all bar one M.Zuiko Pro lens on my mental list to try out at the event, that exception being the M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro that I have had for a while now, the new M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-100mm f/4.o Pro travel zoom was second on my list.

My interest in the travel zoom lens category had been piqued when trying out Fujifilm’s Fujinon XF 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 R LM OIS WR zoom lens last year. Given the long focal length range travel zooms encompass, there will be compromises in optical correction and the same applies to the lenses’ maximum apertures.

I managed to snap off a couple of frames before the lens was needed the other side of the room, but in the image below one can see a certain amount of barrel optical distortion in the white columns and ceiling.

This barrel distortion can be corrected automatically with in-camera JPEGs – I rarely shoot them as I much prefer shooting raw files only – and in correction-savvy raw processors and image editors.

Optical distortion when shooting video is another matter again though. Optical correction in non-linear editors (NLEs) would be far too processor-intensive and so one must grit one’s teeth and bear it. Hence the curved parallel horizontals and vertical one often sees in television shows.

This lens is in interesting proposition, with its long focal length range, slower maximum aperture than the M.Zuiko Pro collection’s other zoom lenses, relatively small size and low weight for its reach, and Olympus’ very first attempt at in-lens optical image stabilization (OIS).

The OIS in this lens reportedly works in conjunction with the OM-D E-M1 Mark II’s 5-axis IBIS (in-body image stabilization) though I would prefer to test that out in practice. The big question for Panasonic users is, will this lens’ OIS also work in conjunction with the IBIS in the GH5?

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 8mm f/1.8 Pro

Older than the other two lenses I tried out, the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 8mm f/1.8 Pro was also on my wishlist of lens tryouts. Fisheye lenses are a low priority – I have resisted the temptations of the GoPro camera range – but this lens has potential for special situations like time-lapse stills and video in tight, poorly-lit spaces, or extreme close-ups.

The outstanding feature of this lens is a much higher maximum aperture than other full-frame fisheye lenses of which I am aware, and its good light distribution with lack of noticeable fall-off though I was using it in poor lighting.

The Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 8mm f/1.8 Pro is definitely one to try again in future.

Snapshots from the Event

Conclusions

I managed to achieve two out of three goals that night, briefly trying out the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 25mm f/1.2 Pro prime lens and the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-100mm f/4.0 Pro zoom lens. My short play with the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 8mm f/1.8 Pro was an unplanned bonus.

Other than the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro which I already own, I want to give the 7-14mm f/2.8 wide-angle, the 40-150mm f/2.8 telephoto zoom and perhaps the 300mm f/4.0 prime telephoto lenses a go.

The same applies to the OM-D E-M1 Mark II, the ostensible star attraction at the event but one which I did not manage to spend time with. From its specifications list, the OM-D E-M1 Mark II looks like it is a Super 16 hybrid video camera to be taken very seriously indeed, especially given Olympus has got it right with the small but essential things like custom white balance.

I look forward to learning more about the OM-D E-M1 Mark II’s video production features soon. This year is already a very interesting one for 4K video and the question now is which new camera and which range of lenses to consider investing in.

Image Credits:

Header image by Carmel D. Morris.

Tech Notes:

Colour photographs made with Panasonic Lumix GX8 camera using three Olympus lenses, the M.Zuiko ED 8mm f1/8, 25mm f/1.2 and 12-100mm then processed with ON1 Photo Raw 2017.

Monochrome event photographs made with Fujifilm X-Pro2 and XF 56mm f/1.2 R lens, then processed with ON1 Photo Raw 2017 using the Bogart Cool preset.

Is the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II Is Poised to Make Waves in the 4K Video World? Olympus Australia and digiDIRECT held a launch event in Sydney for the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II Micro Four Thirds/Super 16 hybrid digital camera…

0 notes

ericlwoods · 8 years ago

Text

There is a new mount in the house, the Fujifilm X mount. Got a prime and a zoom to replace lenses traded with my previous crop body. Everything is fine right? Don’t need anything else. But then I rented a Fujifilm’s portrait darling, the 56mm f/1.2. Why?

What happened was this. I have a portrait lens. It’s a perfectly good portrait lens for another system I have been obsessed withe since my youth… really like . The K Mount Mitakon “The Dream” 85mm f/1.2. Not the sharpest wide open, manual focus, weighs like a Buick, costs about $200 for every .1 of aperture over manual alternatives, but that bokeh though!

So I am covered… But I wanted to give the Fujifilm 56mm f/1.2 a try after reading such glowing reviews and seeing such wonderful portraits taken with it. Southeastern was more than happy to oblige at a reasonable weekend rate. Thoughts one day in? Worth every bit of the praise heaped upon it.

But at the end of the weekend I believe I will be able to resist it’s allure. Will I still want it? Heck yes. But a rare thing has happened. Logic has prevailed. How?

I have a full frame brute with the portrait blunt instrument mentioned above already. Otherwise I would be all over this lens.

I am quite smitten with the much more affordable new to me 35mm f/1.4 which at a normal equivalent focal length is not quite as ideal for portraits, but does not distort that badly and is bright enough to provide very nice separation.

If I was to pick up another piece of Fujifilm gear at or near the cost of this (admittedly very reasonably priced) portrait lens it would be something more pra… {cough} practi.. {hack} practical. There I said it. I am so enamored with the X-Pro1 even knowing it lacks many advances added to the models since (So much so I have made an honest camera of it with a Peak Design strap.) so I would likely add another body. Right now the son of XT2 aka XT20 is looking very good. I am pretty well covered lens wise on my other system so it would be nice to add a Fujifilm camera with an EVF and the latest tech (4K, more MP, advanced focusing, etc.). Plus it is priced below the 56mm at release body only. A no brainer that offers phenomenal value in my book. If I were starting a standalone system from scratch I would not hesitate to get an XT2 however. Also a 55-200mm Fuji lens is great bang for buck and may find it’s way in to my bag before then.

I have quite a few very good portrait lens options not mentioned, so this was ultimately a definite want, not a need.

Not only lenses for another system. With a $20 M42 lens adapter I also gained access to some of my legacy glass. While not f/1.2 and lacking AF my M42 full frame normal-ish lenses make for passable portrait lenses in a pinch when the crop multiplier comes in to play. They work out to roughly 75mm (Takumar 50mm f/1.4), 82.5mm (Takumar 55mm f/1.8), and 87mm (my favorite of the three, the Helios 44-2 58mm f/2.0). While not nearly as crisp as the Fujifilm they are not bad.

What am I on about on that last bullet? Well below are some quick sample shots I took today to compare sharpness, bokeh, and the nature of fall off. I converted them all in to black and white in Lightroom so colors were not a distraction and all could be tweaked to my taste. As much as I could I stood in the same place and took the pictures within a couple of minutes from start to finish. I also used live view and focused all manually so AF would not be a help nor hindrance.

The contenders:

Fujifilm 56mm f/1.2

The reason we are gathered here today.

The crispest out of camera of the pics taken with X-Pro1 for certain. But hitting the rest with the Lightroom stick brought them in line as well.

Helios 44-2 58mm f/2.0 M42 screwmount

Great back story for a lens and dirt cheap. The famous swirly bokeh may be diminished on a crop sensor, but sharpness has not.

Takumar 50mm f/1.4 M42 screwmount

A beautiful lens capable of beautiful photos.

I also added 2 lenses. One other very humble Fuji and the big one.

Fujifilm 18-55mm Kit Lens

Purchased this lens at the same time as the X-Pro1. With f/4.0 available at 55mm (not bad for a kit lens) I figured why not tale a look at what it could do. Not bad.

Mitakon 85mm f/1.2 on Pentax K-1

Bokeh! Ahem. Could have stopped it down a pinch to f/1.8 to sharpen it up a bit which would have been near the full frame equivalent of f/1.2 on the crop sensor spec’d 56mm, but what fun is that?

Sum up? No surprise. The top winners to me were Fujifilm 56mm and the Mitakon. But, taking in to consideration cost and availability I would be happy with any of these lenses. I must admit however that with a level playing field the Fujifilm was best overall. No, it could not match the ridiculous bokeh of the Mitakon (not many lenses can, especially for $699), but it was not far off, had AF, was much lighter, and required almost no post production work in Lightroom unlike the rest.

But even I must be grown up every once in a while. Please note that if I was starting from scratch and going all in on Fujifilm (who knows what the future hoods) this lens would be on my short list. Until then I have a K Mount adapter on the way so I can see what the X-Pro1 can do with the Mitakon and other K mount lenses I have.

Below are some samples I took out and about including a quick trip to my gear test bed aka Duke Gardens and here is an album I am putting together before this lens has to go back. Happy shooting.

-ELW

Fujifilm 56mm f/1.2: Wildly Unscientific, One Shot, Limited Scope Portrait Lens Comparison There is a new mount in the house, the Fujifilm X mount. Got a prime and a zoom to replace lenses traded with my previous crop body.

#56mm #f/1.2 #Fujifilm #Portrait Lens

0 notes