Lens with big lobang :)

[FrogLAH]

As mentioned in different thread, i think you are having DoF issue because you are too close to the subject. I am newbie too..haha..but i have read of this issue where area of focus is sharp but starts getting blur very fast ..and played around with my 1.8 and noticed it too.

As suggested, at 1.8, it's best to have sufficient distance. Have you tried around 2.8? With the 1.4 or 1.8, there's quite a huge room for play between 4 and 1.4/1.8 with regards to bokeh and speed. Play around the zone of 1.8 to 4. Many times i have to remind myself that i dun have to just use the extremes. My humble thoughts and suggestions based on the little experience i have.

 

[Artosoft]

then buy f2.8 for what?buy f2 or f1.4 for what?

that's what my question is!

if i get the 70-200 vr and shoot at 5.6,

will it be the same as getting the 70-300 and shoot at 5.6?:dunno:

Maybe the question should be: why the camera/lens manufacturer create f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8 lens?

When you use fast lens to shoot at f/5.6, before you fully pressed shutter release, the lens aperture is open at max aperture, thus let your camera handle focus in low light better than f/5.6 lens.

Regards,
Arto.

 

[catchlights]

then buy f2.8 for what?buy f2 or f1.4 for what?

that's what my question is!

if i get the 70-200 vr and shoot at 5.6,

will it be the same as getting the 70-300 and shoot at 5.6?:dunno:

see post #4

 

[jeanie]

Maybe the question should be: why the camera/lens manufacturer create f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8 lens?

When you use fast lens to shoot at f/5.6, before you fully pressed shutter release, the lens aperture is open at max aperture, thus let your camera handle focus in low light better than f/5.6 lens.

Regards,
Arto.

HUH!?!?!??!
REALLY?
geezz!i learn new things everyday!thanks!

 

[jeanie]

see post #4

saw it.

u said:most lens design to perform best at close down two stop..
and the quality of a f1.4 lens and a f1.8 lens won't be the same.

so, in that case, we buy big hole lens just to use it at 2 stops slower?
doesnt make sense rite?

so shouldnt they make a F1.0 so we can use it at f2?or 2.8?

so arto
am i right to say,
bigger lobang lenses means they FOCUS faster only rite?apart from having better optics and being more expensive.
AND
also
there's the advantage of having the paperthin DOF when we want it.
is there all to it?:dunno:

 

[Artosoft]

saw it.

u said:most lens design to perform best at close down two stop..
and the quality of a f1.4 lens and a f1.8 lens won't be the same.

so, in that case, we buy big hole lens just to use it at 2 stops slower?
doesnt make sense rite?

so shouldnt they make a F1.0 so we can use it at f2?or 2.8?

so arto
am i right to say,
bigger lobang lenses means they FOCUS faster only rite?apart from having better optics and being more expensive.
AND
also
there's the advantage of having the paperthin DOF when we want it.
is there all to it?:dunno:

No. Fast lens doesn't make focus faster. Fast lens make it BETTER in handling low light focusing.

Yes. We can have thin DoF when we want it (but only when you know how to do it).

Regards,
Arto.

 

[hwchoy]

saw it.

u said:most lens design to perform best at close down two stop..
and the quality of a f1.4 lens and a f1.8 lens won't be the same.

so, in that case, we buy big hole lens just to use it at 2 stops slower?
doesnt make sense rite?

so shouldnt they make a F1.0 so we can use it at f2?or 2.8?

when you have an ƒ/1.4 lens, you CAN choose to use it wide open if you have to, during poor light condition. and of course it will also allow you to simply be able to AF because the AF sensor will be focusing when the lens is wide open (regardless of your shooting aperture).

if you have an ƒ/3.5 lens, you will have no choice other than to up your ISO if the light is poor.

its about choices, limits and budgets.

 

[Reno]

It all depends on the effect you want to acheive.
Maybe for some shots some people want to have eyes sharp and the ears be blur.

to discourage you... please give me your camera gears and find another hobby ;p

You so bad..... :bsmilie:

 

[ortega]

saw it.

u said:most lens design to perform best at close down two stop..
and the quality of a f1.4 lens and a f1.8 lens won't be the same.

so, in that case, we buy big hole lens just to use it at 2 stops slower?
doesnt make sense rite?

so shouldnt they make a F1.0 so we can use it at f2?or 2.8?

so arto
am i right to say,
bigger lobang lenses means they FOCUS faster only rite?apart from having better optics and being more expensive.
AND
also
there's the advantage of having the paperthin DOF when we want it.
is there all to it?:dunno:

why would you $pend that little bit of $
to get that lil bit of quality
when you can stop down and have a really good image?

the bigger the aperture the brighter your viewfinder image
thus easier to focus via your eyes.

 

[jeanie]

why would you $pend that little bit of $
to get that lil bit of quality
when you can stop down and have a really good image?

the bigger the aperture the brighter your viewfinder image
thus easier to focus via your eyes.

dont understand your first para.rephrase k?
i too heartbroken to think straight.

 

[Splutter]

saw it.

u said:most lens design to perform best at close down two stop..
and the quality of a f1.4 lens and a f1.8 lens won't be the same.

so, in that case, we buy big hole lens just to use it at 2 stops slower?
doesnt make sense rite?

so shouldnt they make a F1.0 so we can use it at f2?or 2.8?

so arto
am i right to say,
bigger lobang lenses means they FOCUS faster only rite?apart from having better optics and being more expensive.
AND
also
there's the advantage of having the paperthin DOF when we want it.
is there all to it?:dunno:

You are somewhat right. There are F1.0 lens, F0.75 also have. A F1.0 50mm lens cost as much as 8k though. Bigger lobangs means you can see easier when shooting (since it's brighter) and also helps your camera focus faster. A lot of big aperture lenses perform very well wide open too, so you can actually shoot wide open and get equal sharpness as compared to a lousier lens at F5.6. Of course when you step down further, the quality also improves along. You also have to take into account things like contrast, saturation, build, handling etc.

 

[jeanie]

You are somewhat right. There are F1.0 lens, F0.75 also have. A F1.0 50mm lens cost as much as 8k though. Bigger lobangs means you can see easier when shooting (since it's brighter) and also helps your camera focus faster. A lot of big aperture lenses perform very well wide open too, so you can actually shoot wide open and get equal sharpness as compared to a lousier lens at F5.6. Of course when you step down further, the quality also improves along. You also have to take into account things like contrast, saturation, build, handling etc.

ok.thanks splut.(sounds like slut.):bsmilie:

kiddin ya?:kiss: :sweatsm: :lovegrin:

 

[kcuf2]

then buy f2.8 for what?buy f2 or f1.4 for what?

that's what my question is!

if i get the 70-200 vr and shoot at 5.6,

will it be the same as getting the 70-300 and shoot at 5.6?:dunno:

Now, the problem here is that the 70-200vr is a dam good glass. Even at f2.8, its performance is already :thumbsup: of course if u stop down to f4 it will be even better.
Thus there is not really a need to stop down if u need the speed..

BUT, if its other glasses, (dun wish to list down the glass), u need to stop down to get nice crisp images. because these glasses when wide open, are really soft.. Thus although its stated as can shoot at f5.6, most of the time, u need to stop down to f8 to get good images.

And lastly, the colour and contrast of the 70-200vr is really good :thumbsup:

 

[jeanie]

Now, the problem here is that the 70-200vr is a dam good glass. Even at f2.8, its performance is already :thumbsup: of course if u stop down to f4 it will be even better.
Thus there is not really a need to stop down if u need the speed..

BUT, if its other glasses, (dun wish to list down the glass), u need to stop down to get nice crisp images. because these glasses when wide open, are really soft.. Thus although its stated as can shoot at f5.6, most of the time, u need to stop down to f8 to get good images.

And lastly, the colour and contrast of the 70-200vr is really good :thumbsup:

needless to say, u own a 70-200?

lidat a bit biased comments hor.:bsmilie:
but thanks for the input.i have to agree.the 70-200 is as sharp as my old 80-200 AFD.

 

[Splutter]

ok.thanks splut.(sounds like slut.):bsmilie:

kiddin ya?:kiss: :sweatsm: :lovegrin:

I may be a slut but I'm no bimbo :bsmilie:

 

[kcuf2]

needless to say, u own a 70-200?

lidat a bit biased comments hor.:bsmilie:
but thanks for the input.i have to agree.the 70-200 is as sharp as my old 80-200 AFD.

haha..ya i got it for arnd half a yr already.. and 2 months back got the 1.7x tele.. but i am not really impressed with the 1.7x tele though..

i guess i need to get a prime 300 f4 to use with the 1.7x tele instead. should have better results..

and in a sense, i m not really biased, because i have used a couple of lens such as the AF70-300G lens, and for that lens, i need to stop down to F8 for acceptable results, and F11 for the marvellous results... but of course F11 is too slow already... [and erm nope, i m not a perfectionist..]

 

[jeanie]

haha..ya i got it for arnd half a yr already.. and 2 months back got the 1.7x tele.. but i am not really impressed with the 1.7x tele though..

i guess i need to get a prime 300 f4 to use with the 1.7x tele instead. should have better results..

and in a sense, i m not really biased, because i have used a couple of lens such as the AF70-300G lens, and for that lens, i need to stop down to F8 for acceptable results, and F11 for the marvellous results... but of course F11 is too slow already... [and erm nope, i m not a perfectionist..]

u have the telecon?
can u post some pics in the nikon folder?i started a thread there about TC.
am speculating to get one too.but just cant decide 1.7x or 2x.
share share lei!:kiss: :kiss: :kiss: :kiss:

 

[babykailan]

i thought got lens with big discount.. chey...

 

[hwchoy]

also not to forget, at the end of the day there is also bokeh, and there is no spec or measurement other than to see pix samples and decide if it is what you are looking for, especially for portraits. it is hard to put a dollar value on bokeh.

 

[jeanie]

also not to forget, at the end of the day there is also bokeh, and there is no spec or measurement other than to see pix samples and decide if it is what you are looking for, especially for portraits. it is hard to put a dollar value on bokeh.

i guess for bokeh, none comes close to the DC lenses.
though some would argue the 85 1.4 is as good.

i remember my idol will03 shoots with 135mm f2.
i simply love his shots.:heart: