Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Sun Nov 23, 2014 5:52 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 10:46 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:08 pm
Posts: 7968
Location: Germany
Yes, you're welcome to add!
I think he meant that the focus was off so badly that even stopped down to f/5.6 (with larger dof) you can see it was off.
Normally stopping down makes focus-errors less visible.

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 1:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:42 pm
Posts: 1388
Location: The Netherlands
Oh yes, that's true, depending on distance to subject too of course :-)

_________________
- Wout -
Lowepro Nova 200 AW filled with Nikon D90 + MB-D80
18-70 DX, 70-300 VR, 35 1.8 DX, SB-700


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 1:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:59 pm
Posts: 6009
Location: The Netherlands
Pixel peeping aside, I like this lens. Yeah it fringes....indeed it does. It also didn't cost me an arm, leg, and kidney.

Will I upgrade to the 1.4 if I have the money? Possibly.
Will I only take horrible shots with the 1.8? That's not the lens' fault :lol:

_________________
I take pictures so quickly, my highschool was "Continuous High".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:17 pm 
The 85mm from Canon has also big CA problems. So it's pretty common. Still,it's an excellent price/quality ratio (F/1.8+great dof+as-sharp-as-you-can-get details+very low distorsion). :)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 7:39 pm 
Just wanted to add that you seem to have a rather warped perspective Thomas with regard to 'dof' and it what situations you'd actually use it in. Nobody, will shoot a tree as you have, at that distance, at f1.8. If you find someone who does that, or an image shot at f1.8 similar to the one you've shown, I'd love to see their images.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:18 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:08 pm
Posts: 7968
Location: Germany
Your way of presuming what people shoot with which lens is rather irritating, Gregory. Could you please leave that decision to the photographers using the gear in the way they like?
Btw.: Are you alluding to the focus-test-shot with the tree or the CA-test or the purple fringing test with the tree?

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:52 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:08 pm
Posts: 7968
Location: Germany
Btw. Here's one of my favorite tree-shots at f/1.4 :shock: (well that was a 50mm lens, but you get my drift):

Image

The smallish image doesn't to the picture justice, esp. not with regard to dof. But you may click through to the large original.
As I stated earlier: It is extremely hard to get good dof-separation in low magnification nature/landscape shots so using large aperture lenses wide open is the only way to go.

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 10:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 10:41 pm
Posts: 367
Dear Thomas

Just like those old large format photographs from the nineteenth century (and the autochromes from the twentieth). Marvellous.

_________________
HCC
Nikon DSLRs, film cameras from Leica to Linhof


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:02 pm 
Thomas wrote:
Btw. Here's one of my favorite tree-shots at f/1.4 :shock: (well that was a 50mm lens, but you get my drift):
...


I hope you'll get mine and see that this is an entirely different shot than what you posted earlier. Key differences;

1; NOT shot straight into an overhead sun
2; shot from a distance of not more than a few metres away

I'm referring to this picture ;

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3205/304 ... e7dc_o.jpg

What I'm trying to say, is that NO lens is perfect. The trick is to work around a lenses flaws. Any lens you shoot these sort of images at that sort of aperture, wide open, will produce the same flaws.

(I'm now referring to all your CA/fringing, etc images).

If your review was just a case of, if you want to create images with lots of fringing, do the following, and be sure to look at 100%, and heaven forbid should you try to correct any of it, then I probably would have nothing wrong with it.

Oh, and I can see a nice spot of fringing in the top of the image there. :wink:. Looks like it's not just this lens that does it after all.


Last edited by Gregory.Rotter on Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:08 pm 
grahamnp wrote:
I think we're missing the point here. For a good review, it's a necessary to push the lens to reveal it's flaws. It would be quite bad to buy the lens ignoring the landscape shooting issues only to find out it has a similar problem with other styles of high contrast shooting.


Why is it necessary to push a lens where it's not meant to go? You wouldn't take a 1000cc hyabusa motorbike on a 5 hour dakar rally tour would you? It's not the lenses job to correct for your mistakes. It's your job to correct for it's characteristics, and use it accordingly.

The issue is not that Thomas is telling us that this lens is crap shooting into sunlight, wide open. The issue is that I am unable to conceive that someone would actually be ignorant enough to do so, totally unaware that a fast prime would behave that way, and not realise that without stopping the lens down, or using another lens entirely, that they are using the wrong tool, at the wrong setting, for the job.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:21 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:08 pm
Posts: 7968
Location: Germany
Remember Greg, that shot is NOT with the 85/1.8 which surely would have produced quite some more CA against the sky.
I was only proving here that a fast prime is not per se relegated to shooting indoor portraits. Imagine shooting with the 85/1.8 at the beach with the sun reflecting from the waves behind your model. The result? Ugly purple fringing!

But in the end you're right: Don't use a lens when it does not perform.
That, Gregory, was the exact goal to show in my review :idea:

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:50 pm 
Off-Topic: Are both sides at peace now? :) I think the situation is fairly well explained at this time.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 3:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:59 pm
Posts: 6009
Location: The Netherlands
If the sea highlights at the beach are that bright to cause fringing, I doubt you are able to shoot wide open anyhow. :wink:

Yeah, this lens fringes, but it's not as bad as you might think from my experience.

_________________
I take pictures so quickly, my highschool was "Continuous High".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 7:51 pm 
Thomas wrote:
But in the end you're right: Don't use a lens when it does not perform.


Now you're just putting words in my mouth :P

I was saying, use the right lens for the right job, and if you do only have that lens at hand, then take appropriate measures to eliminate/reduce it's flaws. I.e stopping down ;)

As far as your argument about using dof goes, you're using it on DX, so you're getting larger dof anyway. That and are you really getting that much different a look shooting at f1.8 as opposed to 2.5 or 2.8? I mean, it's a choice you have to make. Either shoot wide open, and bear the fringing and ca, or stop down. It's not as black and white as you seem to think it is.

Oh and here's a shot, wide open. Yeah it's web res, but seeing as that's what you were posting earlier;

Image

I suppose it's just a case of your shooting 'style', being very different from everyone that is able to live with this lens.

Here's another one, this time at f2.2;

Image

Sure you can see some green and purple CA in the frame of the window if you look hard enough. Does that automatically make the shot garbage? Not to me. Opinions may differ obviously.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 8:52 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:08 pm
Posts: 7968
Location: Germany
Well, if you produce 800x500 shots you could do with a p&s.
No need to discuss CAs, sharpness, focus-quality then :D

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group