Lensbabies

[Rleka]

Hi,

I was reading about a lens called the "Lensbabies" http://www.lensbabies.com/ . I was wondering if anyone has this lens and what they think of it.

What is the difference between using this lens and using something like the 50mm 1.8? Is this lens for when you can't get a good dof?

It looks intriguing but I'm not sure if I quite understand the purpose of this lens versus a regular lens.

Thanks for your help:)

[bolantej]

http://www.lensbabies.com/
it's a specialty lens, shifts the focus.

[Liquid_Squelch]

I was reading up on these earlier in the week. It allows you to change the focus point, while making the rest of the frame slightly out of focus. It’s a pretty need effect, if you handle it right.

Some of the galleries on the Lensbaby site look great... but couldn't you just take the time to do it on PS??

[MagentaJoe]

I have the lensbaby 1.0. It's a tilt lens, not a shift. It allows you to tilt the plane of focus off of the plane of the image sensor. Not only does this have an effect on the dof but it also causes a distortion. The main difference between the lensbaby 1.0 and 2.0 is that the 2.0 has a bigger sweetspot. The area in clear focus. They are great for artistic effects and for product shots.

This first shot shows what can be done with a product type shot.
http://www.ceretti.com/msn/lensbaby/berries.jpg

This second shows a simulation of motion while keeping the subject in focus.
http://www.ceretti.com/msn/lensbaby/motion.jpg

and this third is more artistic and draws your attention to a subject while causing a, subjectively, pleasing distortion in the surrounding area.
http://www.ceretti.com/msn/lensbaby/ab.jpg

I don't use the lensbaby a lot. But there are times when it really allows me to make something out of the ordinary for the project I am working on at a particular moment.

Yes, the same effect can be simulated in photoshop. For the price I think it's great. Lots of fun even though it does take a while to get the hang of what will actually come from the shot in the end as compared to what one sees in the viewfinder.

[Jman13]

I have the Lensbaby 2, and it's a very neat lens, but very specialty. It has a great effect, and the v2.0 version is very sharp in the sweet spot, but the DOF quickly runs away fromt he selected focus area. It takes some time to get used to focusing with it, so it's not a good lens for action photography, or even candid people shots. It can be used for pretty neat effects though.

I haven't had too much time to really go out and shoot with it (crazy busy at work since I got it), so here are a few samples...the obligatory cat photo test shots (excuse the noise...had to shoot very high ISO in the crappy light I had). Both cat shots are at f/2. The last photo is a 100% crop of the sweet spot at f/4, so you can see that the sweet spot, if the focus is correct is very sharp. Even if you miss focus, though, the effect can still be very pleasing and surreal.

http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/arthur_lensbaby.jpg

http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/henry_lensbaby.jpg

http://www.jordansteele.com/forumlinks/lensbaby_crop.jpg

[Jman13]

Some of the galleries on the Lensbaby site look great... but couldn't you just take the time to do it on PS??

Not really. The effect of the lensbaby can be approximated in Photoshop, but you won't get the same look. It's a combination of a zoom blur run away with creamy smooth blurring. (I can't say it's perfect bokeh because light sources halo a bit, but non-light sources are blurred extremely smoothly). The stretching of the image would be the hardest to recreate, and the 'lensbaby effect' shots I've seen really don't come anywhere near the true look of the lens. Plus, you think about the shot differently when looking through the lens.

[René Damkot]

Search gave this:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=99577&highlight=lensbaby
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=112482&highlight=lensbaby
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=127710&highlight=lensbaby
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=134313&highlight=lensbaby

I've got the Lensbaby 2, and I like it. In low light with moving subjects it can be a pain to use:
http://www.moonglade.net/~rene/051029Rockarty/image/rhd20051029roar279.jpg

[Balliolman]

These are nice effects, certainly. I fear If I had one it would be used a few times then gather dust somewhere .... They are also expensive. In the hands of an enthusiastic and competent user it may well offer a new and enjoyable photographic experience IMHO.

[MagentaJoe]

Expensive? I got mine new for 90 dollars.

[SSquared2000]

I've thought of getting a lensbaby on and off again over the last year. I really like the effect and can use it for some of what I like to photograph. I didn't think they were all too expensive. The newer 2.0 version is list price of $150, I thought.

It is definitely a specialty lens and will probably gather dust if you really have no purpose for it. And yes, I have seen Photoshop examples trying to imitate the effect, but like Jman13 mentioned, you get a different perspective of how to see the picture when you see the effect through the lens.

[Andrew Khan]

I do not like the effect.

[MagentaJoe]

I do not like the effect.

Huh? You sound very sure of yourself. What don't you like and why?

[Sageg]

Magenta Joe: 90$CANUK? Lensbaby 1 or 2?

[MagentaJoe]

Lensbaby 1. I got it about 2 weeks before the 2 was announced on the lensbaby website. It was aproximately $90.00-$100.00 Canadian in one of the downtown Toronto camera shops I like to lurk about in.

[Balliolman]

Expensive? I got mine new for 90 dollars.

They seem to get more pricey crossing the Atlantic to Rip-Off Britain!! ;)

[Jon]

Well, B&H has Lensbaby 1 for $96 US, so either the Canadian dollar was really high against the US dollar, he hit a major sale, or the US is getting ripped off too.

[Andrew Khan]

Lensbaby 1. I got it about 2 weeks before the 2 was announced on the lensbaby website. It was aproximately $90.00-$100.00 Canadian in one of the downtown Toronto camera shops I like to lurk about in.

Thank you for asking Joe. Well, maybe it's less of the fact that I 'dislike' the effect, and more so of the fact that I do not think the price is worth the attained effect from the product.