Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II - Nifty Fifty

[gonças]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2688/4334954416_a5dc4f51c4_o.jpg

:) Yesterday I got my 3rd "nifty fifty" in 3 years! 1st one was destroyed when it fell of a table, 2nd was sold to fund another lens and this new one I got for 70 € :p

[.mark.]

^ AWESOME!

cheers :D

[lotsofphotog]

Here's a shoot I did today for a family:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4003/4335400049_bfecbd9d96.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4046/4335570905_4f591b397a.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2705/4335569055_2d995bc098.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2792/4335404521_d324369c49.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2697/4335569145_ccbf7bf5f6.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4042/4335567771_45019a6fe1.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2727/4336159554_526f550850.jpg

[bikgc]

Here's a shoot I did today for a family:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4003/4335400049_bfecbd9d96.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4046/4335570905_4f591b397a.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2705/4335569055_2d995bc098.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2792/4335404521_d324369c49.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2697/4335569145_ccbf7bf5f6.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4042/4335567771_45019a6fe1.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2727/4336159554_526f550850.jpg


Do you use your flash off camera or just natural lighting...by the way nice photos :)

[lotsofphotog]

Natural - thanks!

[stsva]

Natural - thanks!

Really sweet pics. :D

[lotsofphotog]

Really sweet pics. :D

Thank you!

[richierich1212]

great shots Joanie! Pretty amazing how you can have the just the Nifty-Fifty+5D for all your pictures.

[lotsofphotog]

Thanks richie! Yeah, unfortunately I'm getting a nasty vignette from the nifty for some reason with the 5d. I'm getting the 24-70L here in the next month or so - just in time for my own newborn to be here. :)

[richierich1212]

That's quite the upgrade. Keep the beautiful pictures coming!

[dsldub]

@ f/1.8

http://www3.sympatico.ca/fernandesj/POTN/IMG_3635.JPG

focus on 2nd ball.

[lotsofphotog]

@ f/1.8

http://www3.sympatico.ca/fernandesj/POTN/IMG_3635.JPG

focus on 2nd ball.

These would look great in my home :)

[dsldub]

These would look great in my home :)

Thanks!!

[stsva]

Thanks richie! Yeah, unfortunately I'm getting a nasty vignette from the nifty for some reason with the 5d. I'm getting the 24-70L here in the next month or so - just in time for my own newborn to be here. :)

Here's the word on the vignetting:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/415-canon_50_18_ff?start=1

[lotsofphotog]

thanks for sharing stsva!

[tfd888]

Shot when I was bored :lol:.

[RobinSchouten]

http://th04.deviantart.net/fs70/300W/i/2010/032/9/d/Throw_the_Dice_by_robinschouten.jpg

[Salma]

Shot when I was bored :lol:.
That is so cool, love it <3

Shot with my niece in my not yet ready studio.

http://i45.tinypic.com/2n6heux.jpg

http://i49.tinypic.com/11l3l2e.jpg

http://i46.tinypic.com/14vqq0h.jpg

http://i46.tinypic.com/dvhbac.jpg

http://i46.tinypic.com/nchz0l.jpg

http://i49.tinypic.com/dr57ya.jpg

[Matt Peters]

Nice shots Salma, what was your set-up?

[dsldub]

@ f/1.8

http://www3.sympatico.ca/fernandesj/POTN/50mm_test_1.jpg

[dsldub]

Another one at f/1.8:

http://www3.sympatico.ca/fernandesj/POTN/IMG_3641_EF50_test2.jpg

Great lens!!

[dsldub]

@ f/6.3

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4046/4280370724_4feec04621.jpg

[Chris215]

That is so cool, love it <3

Shot with my niece in my not yet ready studio.

http://i45.tinypic.com/2n6heux.jpg

http://i49.tinypic.com/11l3l2e.jpg

http://i46.tinypic.com/14vqq0h.jpg

http://i46.tinypic.com/dvhbac.jpg

http://i46.tinypic.com/nchz0l.jpg

http://i49.tinypic.com/dr57ya.jpg


great job, nice series. she's cute :)

I'm guessing you used gels for those?

[k.CHU]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4003/4337067202_846c0a666c_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4029/4337063552_657a3ef9b9_b.jpg

[tonyniev]

a nifty 50:
http://tonyniev.smugmug.com/Photography/Test-shoots/IMG2100/783150528_3UdF3-M.jpg

[polobreaka]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4029/4337063552_657a3ef9b9_b.jpg

mmmm i want some flame broiler right now. maybe ill go get some! thanks for helping me make my decision for lunch!

[Stone 13]

Just messing around in the hotel @f1.8

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4066/4338408965_e24cbcd233_o.jpg

[willy b]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2762/4338390283_0994c79965_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4039/4338391455_ae747eb3ac_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2801/4339139322_dba9b4b89a_b.jpg

[k.CHU]

ur welcome polo :)

[Salma]

Nice shots Salma, what was your set-up?
Hi Matt, thankyou so much, I appreciate that :D

I'm basically just starting out and didn't use anything too special, at the time I took these shots I didn't even have a light stand for my strobe, so I had it sitting on a long box LOL on the left of the subject facing the background so the gels on the strobe can light up the BG in colour and then I had my 430ex on my camera in manual mode, I didn't have triggers or anything to use it off camera :(

The 430 was directed at the subject face on very low settings and just a backdrop really.
great job, nice series. she's cute :)

I'm guessing you used gels for those?
Hiya, thanks Chris, yes I used gels :D

[esemte]

Shot at a recent Drift Battle on the weekend, using a Canon 7D.

Click on image for FULL-VIEW.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2763/4338966435_b436c9504e.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/esemte/4338966435/sizes/o/)

[imput1234]

Some recent shots:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2754/4342874388_6109d37ef3_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2686/4341753317_73f0504d5a.jpg

[willy b]

^^^
Look at the bloody size of that thing! lol

Shot @ F2.8, so sharp!
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2520/4341623814_9353c1c8dd_b.jpg

[richierich1212]

Willy, that's actually nothing compared to some "monster" trucks I've seen driving around LOL

An example:
http://www.wholesalesuspensionoutlet.com/images/big_truck04F150.jpg

[GSeries1]

I probably have a 100 trucks just like that in my neighborhood. (TX) They see nothing but paved roads their entire lives though. Guess it's a compensation issue.

[izthistaken]

I probably have a 100 trucks just like that in my neighborhood. (TX) They see nothing but paved roads their entire lives though. Guess it's a compensation issue.
Just like the guy who owns a ferrari and doesnt drive over 75 mph. ;)

Or buys a DSLR and leaves it in 'auto' mode.

[GSeries1]

Just like the guy who owns a ferrari and doesnt drive over 75 mph. ;)

Or buys a DSLR and leaves it in 'auto' mode.

yup... we have those too... lol

Unfortunately I am too poor to indulge in such eccentricities.

[imput1234]

I probably have a 100 trucks just like that in my neighborhood. (TX) They see nothing but paved roads their entire lives though. Guess it's a compensation issue.

Yeah lots of people like that here too, but my homie isn't one of them. That trunks gone through a lot!

[dpds68]

Took these today while trying to run down the batteries in my camera, so I could them charged for tomorrow nite.

Great shots , and you don't need to run down the batteries before charging .




David

[willy b]

Those trucks are crazy! If they go off road, then fine, but if not then I hate them/the drivers lol

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4343702407_9b605c524b_b.jpg

[niceshoes]

Nice captures willy b. I love the feel. What type of PP did you do?

[willy b]

Thanks a lot :)

B&W
Upped contrast
Altered hue a little
and tbh that is all, i'm not that good at PP lol

[implayaz9]

mine is for sale
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=823126

[_FireBird_]

At the local skating rink..

http://members.cox.net/zkoenig/canon/bokeh.jpg

[TeenPhotog]

looks a little OOF firebird, but I really like that background

[_FireBird_]

looks a little OOF firebird, but I really like that background

Ya I think it's the high ISO at 1250 that makes it look soft, but the "Nifty Fifty" does seem to miss focus in low light so it could be that.

[Salma]

Hey guys, how's it going?

I've been macroing again, nothing special but love the bling here.

Took these shots with a reversed 50mm 1.8.

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz198/SitaraPhotos/Jewels7of12.jpg

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz198/SitaraPhotos/Jewels5of12.jpg

[Njv]

Holy contrast


a little bit overboard on the contrast..but I do like the last one

[tjaudet829]

At the local skating rink..


I think the softness is from the dof some of the hair seems in focus

[peterbj7]

Yes, that's the biggest issue I have with this lens. Unless I stop it way down, in which case I might as well use my 24-105 anyway, it has extraordinary shallow depth of field. Especially on my FF camera. Not a problem as such, but certainly an issue that needs to be allowed for and managed.

[arn]

Definitely the biggest - and possibly the only - problem for me about the 50/1.8 is the AF accuracy. It just isn't as accurate as for example the 35/2. Focusing on a still object, the 35/2 nails it quite reliably on the the same spot, while with the 50/1.8 the AF is more scattered on the FF - spot on - BF axis.

[peterbj7]

With a well lit and contrasty subject my 50 focuses quickly and accurately. If either of those is in doubt however all bets are off. I end up manually focussing maybe 20% of the time.

[willy b]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4008/4346965766_3299de0bb7_b.jpg

[Karizmatik]

http://www.kariz-matik.com/photography/IMG_1562-Edit-2.jpg

[Immaculens]

Well done! what aperture?

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4008/4346965766_3299de0bb7_b.jpg

[jonneymendoza]

whats the sharpest aparure of this lens? Great pic above btw

[DreDaze]

Well done! what aperture?

looks like f8 to me...











i also fully cheated :D:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2010in50mm/4346965766/meta/

[orangekayak]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2732/4280487138_d8c37990fa_b.jpg

[orangekayak]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4049/4290256967_40355b466b_b.jpg

[MaxSteel]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2723/4348193716_c72b7bf9cc.jpg

[ZoranR]

http://i50.tinypic.com/n4fw4x.jpg

[willy b]

Well done! what aperture?

Thanks guys :)

Yeh I find that F8 is really very sharp! I use F8 when shooting landscapes mainly, always seem to come up ok then.

[Salma]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2723/4348193716_c72b7bf9cc.jpg

Niiiice shot :)

[KayakPhotos]

whats the sharpest aparure of this lens? Great pic above btw

From f/5.6-f/8 this lens is VERY sharp from my experience. It might be rough around the edges and not have the best bokeh, but you just can't beat it for the price.

[D.Henderson]

Haven't shot with my fifty in a long time, thinking about heading out to a old aircraft museum to snap some shot but anyway I decided to go with the 'flat/old' look on these.

Retired drift AE86, sale pending so this is probably the last picture I'll ever get to take of her. :)


@ f/5.6
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2803/4348443153_ab96b58238.jpg



@ f/5.6

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4024/4349168568_ffeeec3294.jpg

[arn]

http://www.pbase.com/arn/image/121873248.jpg (http://www.pbase.com/arn/image/121873248/original)
50mm f/1.8 II @ f/2.

[londonandlawson]

I really like that picFresh from the digital darkroom

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2704/4333010941_497c08831f_b.jpg

[KayakPhotos]

http://www.pbase.com/arn/image/121873248.jpg (http://www.pbase.com/arn/image/121873248/original)
50mm f/1.8 II @ f/2.
Perfect lighting!

[Grady69]

Well my nifty-fifty bit the dust today. Got out of my car and the whole front piece fell right off the lens on to the ground. I was so shocked and pissed (probably said a few choice words too!! LOL) Therefore I need to rearrange my wishlist now. I went to my local camera store to see what they had in their used department, but nothing really interested me at all I did look at the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 which is what I used to take these shots it seem pretty nice might have to add it to the wishlist for the future. Therefore Im out of the Nifty-fifty club unwillingly.
Grady

[GSeries1]

Well my nifty-fifty bit the dust today. Got out of my car and the whole front piece fell right off the lens on to the ground. I was so shocked and pissed (probably said a few choice words too!! LOL) Therefore I need to rearrange my wishlist now. I went to my local camera store to see what they had in their used department, but nothing really interested me at all I did look at the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 which is what I used to take these shots it seem pretty nice might have to add it to the wishlist for the future. Therefore Im out of the Nifty-fifty club unwillingly.
Grady

It just fell apart for no reason... or you dropped it and then it broke?

[RebelChick]

Well my nifty-fifty bit the dust today. Got out of my car and the whole front piece fell right off the lens on to the ground. I was so shocked and pissed (probably said a few choice words too!! LOL) Therefore I need to rearrange my wishlist now. I went to my local camera store to see what they had in their used department, but nothing really interested me at all I did look at the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 which is what I used to take these shots it seem pretty nice might have to add it to the wishlist for the future. Therefore Im out of the Nifty-fifty club unwillingly.
Grady

Sounds weird to just "fall off" . I just replaced my nifty because in September, My camera bag fell off a bench (it was on an angle) and my lens split into two pieces. I was able to snap it back to gether and it was fine except one of the clips inside was busted. Eventually the front part THEN fell off when I picked the camera up, and it fell to the ground shattering. Now I have a brand new one and am happy. But for your lens to just come apart sounds fishy.

[willy b]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4048/4348802337_b5354efa60_b.jpg

[Grady69]

Sounds weird to just "fall off" . I just replaced my nifty because in September, My camera bag fell off a bench (it was on an angle) and my lens split into two pieces. I was able to snap it back to gether and it was fine except one of the clips inside was busted. Eventually the front part THEN fell off when I picked the camera up, and it fell to the ground shattering. Now I have a brand new one and am happy. But for your lens to just come apart sounds fishy.

Well I dont remember bumping into anything, might of bumped against me and that was enough to pop it off, cuz it went down my leg and then hit the ground I guess.

[arn]

Another still life, click for larger
http://www.pbase.com/arn/image/121875413.jpg (http://www.pbase.com/arn/image/121875413/original)
@ f/2

[DreDaze]

Well my nifty-fifty bit the dust today. Got out of my car and the whole front piece fell right off the lens on to the ground. I was so shocked and pissed (probably said a few choice words too!! LOL) Therefore I need to rearrange my wishlist now. I went to my local camera store to see what they had in their used department, but nothing really interested me at all I did look at the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 which is what I used to take these shots it seem pretty nice might have to add it to the wishlist for the future. Therefore Im out of the Nifty-fifty club unwillingly.
Grady


it's pretty easy to put back together...do a search...and if you don't find it i'll be home later and will post a link to a guide

http://www.ejarm.com/photo/ef5018iidis/

[willy b]

Arn - Love the light ones :)

[Chris215]

rolling shot
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3565/3602402650_b44f3c364b.jpg

[octospit]

http://rdomaintv.net/pics/09_11_fun01-1.jpg

Nifty @ 2.8mm 1/160th

580exII w/20"softbox , triggered by cybersyncs

[CW Jones]

A shot for the girlfriend...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4043/4349993359_f765b3679c_b.jpg

[Matt Peters]

rolling shot
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3565/3602402650_b44f3c364b.jpg

Nice!

[willy b]

Chris - Love that BMW shot, could easy be a magazine shot. What PP did you do on that, I really like it!!

[Chris215]

Nice!

Chris - Love that BMW shot, could easy be a magazine shot. What PP did you do on that, I really like it!!

thank you, I used a preset called CWP Boost, which is basically a slight green tint and desaturation. I adjusted to my likings until I got that results in lightroom.

[Ro_Ja]

some eye candy hehe :P

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2787/4054377857_3990f8d868.jpg

I've since upgraded to the f/1.4 :D

[ElijahEOS]

Ro_ja, nobody wants to hear bout ur 1.4! ha ha 1.8 is where it's at!


Unless u have a 1.4 and then that's where it's at. ha ha

[Ro_Ja]

Hi Elijah! Took me long enough to join, huh? lol

[richierich1212]

Damn Ro_Ja nice eye candy shot. I'll get in trouble with the misses cuz I can't stop staring so hard at my screen lololol.

[ElijahEOS]

Oh Ro_Ja has some VERY NICE eye candy shots.

[matthewlyle]

Love my 50.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3401/3563948546_5746045ba1.jpg] (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmatthewlyle/3563948546/)

[Salma]

Some rain drops. Not Macro.

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz198/SitaraPhotos/IMG_3441.jpg

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz198/SitaraPhotos/IMG_3439.jpg

[Mike55]

Nice work. This lens is really impressive. I can't see any reason to "upgrade". I've tried, and I just can't see it. Maybe when it breaks? ;)

[SVTmaniac]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4020/4352174201_cfbf7ba7dc_b.jpg

[peterbj7]

I see what you've done but I don't like it.

[FMX]

Nice work. This lens is really impressive. I can't see any reason to "upgrade". I've tried, and I just can't see it. Maybe when it breaks? ;)

I certainly don't see it. The images in here look amazing (in terms of sharpness and clarity).

[SVTmaniac]

I see what you've done but I don't like it.

What exactly don't you like about it? Constructive criticism is the key here not just "I don't like it."

[Karizmatik]

What exactly don't you like about it? Constructive criticism is the key here not just "I don't like it."

The main subject is out of focus. It was clearly intentional, but it doesn't work. You may ask "how" it doesn't -- But certain things don't lend themselves to a reason, this being one such subject, IMO.

If you want to get semi-technical about it though......

There isn't enough for the eye to focus on -- The two "in focus" subjects (The fence posts on either side) are too far away from each other for either eye to "settle" on, so of course, you become cross-eyed while your eyes continue to search for a main subject -- Which finally lands in the middle. But the woman is out of focus, so it disorientates the iris and eventually leads to a vertigo feeling. Not nice.

If you had something dead-smack in the middle of the aisle where your focus is, on the ground, for instance. Then the lady in the background being how she is now, blurred -- Yeah, it would work. But in this instance, you don't have anything for the eye to "happily" look at.

[Karizmatik]

I certainly don't see it. The images in here look amazing (in terms of sharpness and clarity).

Faster focusing and all in all, better focusing. Better colour rendition (IMHO). Better flare rendition. Better build -- It's called the Fantastic Plastic, for a reason. Not to mention the Nifty has some horrid Chromatic Abberation casts -- Purples, Greens, you name it.

Plenty of reason.

[SVTmaniac]

The main subject is out of focus. It was clearly intentional, but it doesn't work. You may ask "how" it doesn't -- But certain things don't lend themselves to a reason, this being one such subject, IMO.

If you want to get semi-technical about it though......

There isn't enough for the eye to focus on -- The two "in focus" subjects (The fence posts on either side) are too far away from each other for either eye to "settle" on, so of course, you become cross-eyed while your eyes continue to search for a main subject -- Which finally lands in the middle. But the woman is out of focus, so it disorientates the iris and eventually leads to a vertigo feeling. Not nice.

If you had something dead-smack in the middle of the aisle where your focus is, on the ground, for instance. Then the lady in the background being how she is now, blurred -- Yeah, it would work. But in this instance, you don't have anything for the eye to "happily" look at.

Thank you. That's the kind of response people need to help make them better.

[Salma]

What exactly don't you like about it? Constructive criticism is the key here not just "I don't like it."
I think it's a bloody fantastic photo, not something people choose to do with a photo often :)

[arn]

I think it's a bloody fantastic photo, not something people choose to do with a photo often :)

I like the photo very much too. If the focus had been on the person, the photo would have been ruined. The DOF would extend too much behind the subject and it would result in a messy backround (that should be obvious even for a total beginner in photography). The way this photo has been taken, there is a feeling of isolation and loneliness.

As to someone claiming that the f/1.4 has faster AF than f/1.8 - it doesn't. It's just a bit more accurate. Also, based on my experience, the f/1.4 has more LoCa than the f/1.8, resulting at times in more disturbing bokéh. The f/1.4 is faster (though softer at f/1.4), but IMO if you can manage the inaccurate AF of the f/1.8, there is no reason to change for f/1.4 unless you need larger aperture.

[peterbj7]

Sorry I was a bit abrupt - no offence intended. Karizmatik pretty well stated my position, though some later posts show that there are other perfectly valid views. I would have taken the photo closer to the person, had the person central and in focus, with the railings on either side probably out of focus (almost) all the way to the person, the railing beyond the person in focus, and the trees beyond out of focus. If the "subject" of the photo is the person, and that appears to be the case, then if the objective is to isolate the person in a fuzzy world that would have been achieved. As it is, I don't know what to look at. I have a picture that would illustrate it, but as it was neither taken with the nifty fifty nor indeed with a Canon I won't!

[SVTmaniac]

Thanks for the ideas. I didn't want the woman (my wife) in focus but I do see where you both are coming from. Perhaps if I had something to focus on other than the railings it would have worked better for some. Thanks for the compliments on it too.

[FMX]

Faster focusing and all in all, better focusing. Better colour rendition (IMHO). Better flare rendition. Better build -- It's called the Fantastic Plastic, for a reason. Not to mention the Nifty has some horrid Chromatic Abberation casts -- Purples, Greens, you name it.

Plenty of reason.

Yeah but I mean in the real world...the iq is very similar.

[FMX]

Thanks for the ideas. I didn't want the woman (my wife) in focus but I do see where you both are coming from. Perhaps if I had something to focus on other than the railings it would have worked better for some. Thanks for the compliments on it too.

In my opinion there are 3 types of photos.

1. Everyone loves the picture, and the sheer beauty is undeniable.
2. Some hate it, some love it.
3. The picture is technically bad, and there is no focal point.

I think we all strive for #1, but #2 is probably something new and creative that just hasn't been done enough to be as acceptable as say a #1 quality photo is.

I like it personally.

[ElijahEOS]

I like the photo but do think there could be just one little small something to help convey the story better. To me it looks like she is there waiting on somebody (because of the way she is more towards one side of the seat, leaving space for another) and they just never showed up. It would be cool to see something in the foreground to help with the story. Not sure what you could add to help hint that story but I'm sure there is something. Maybe some broken roses, foot prints walking toward the camera (away from the subject), etc...

But overall I like it.

[tonyniev]

at F 1.8
http://tonyniev.smugmug.com/Photography/Test-shoots/IMG2270/786703200_g3ZTn-L.jpg

[RenoJohn]

http://www.goraiders.org/bike/forumpics/misc/camera/Lion%20fish.jpg

[RenoJohn]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2436/3553025404_f8b285cd2f.jpgVery Nice

[Salma]

Very Nice
+1 I love it.

[Karizmatik]

(that should be obvious even for a total beginner in photography).

Total speculation, that is. And it should be obvious, even for a total beginner that a clear focal point is needed. Regardless of anything else.

As to someone claiming that the f/1.4 has faster AF than f/1.8 - it doesn't. It's just a bit more accurate. Also, based on my experience, the f/1.4 has more LoCa than the f/1.8, resulting at times in more disturbing bokéh. The f/1.4 is faster (though softer at f/1.4), but IMO if you can manage the inaccurate AF of the f/1.8, there is no reason to change for f/1.4 unless you need larger aperture.

The 1.4 is, actually. Especially in low-light situations, the F1.8 can hunt for days on end. Not to mention the F1.8 misses more times than it actually focuses properly. The F1.4 is a lot more precise.

As far as it being softer -- Sounds like you got a bad copy. And being able to "manage" something that is inaccurate has nothing to do with it. You are debating whether one lens is better than another -- By saying you have to be aware of it's inaccuracies alone is admitting that it has flaws, typically bettered by the other lens.

So, in hindsight of everything you have said -- I stand by it. The F1.4 (Preferably F1.2) is a lot better and there is still plenty of reason to upgrade.

[usdave1t]

I found this rather old toy in a closet today so thought I would try a couple of shots with my nifty.......CC welcome
http://usdave1t.smugmug.com/Still-Life/Toys/IMG1704edit/787679346_mkSjP-L.jpg
http://usdave1t.smugmug.com/Still-Life/Toys/IMG1720edit/787679513_WBS5L-L.jpg

[jerryx1101]

Happy Valentine's Day! :D

[jasongraaf]

And it should be obvious, even for a total beginner that a clear focal point is needed. Regardless of anything else.

Do you mean a point for the mind to focus on, or do you mean focus in a photographic sense? I think I disagree with both...

[matthewlyle]

The 1.4 is, actually. Especially in low-light situations, the F1.8 can hunt for days on end. Not to mention the F1.8 misses more times than it actually focuses properly. The F1.4 is a lot more precise.


The 1.8 is an incredible bang for your buck and I use it very often, but this is true. I find mine hunting to the point of frustration a lot. So beware of that.

[peterbj7]

The other problem is that as it has such a minimal depth of field a slight error in focus if you catch it "mid-hunt" can be catastrophic.

[Karizmatik]

Do you mean a point for the mind to focus on, or do you mean focus in a photographic sense? I think I disagree with both...

Then you need help.

[peterbj7]

Do you mean a point for the mind to focus on, or do you mean focus in a photographic sense? I think I disagree with both...

I've just read this, and I don't know what you're trying to say. Leaving aside any technical issues and just how you achieve the effects you're after, I don't see how you can not need a point (or area) for the mind to focus on. Otherwise what are you doing when you "look" at a photograph - aren't you trying to understand it?

If you disagree with that assertion then I really need some clues as to what you're thinking.

[SVTmaniac]

Since my last photo sparked a big debate allow me to post another one that has a focus point :)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4013/4352920556_ae01bbec5c_b.jpg

[peterbj7]

Now that one reminds me of one I shot underwater at night of an expanded basket star. I hesitate to post that picture here, as it was shot with a Casio compact!

[jasongraaf]

Then you need help.

I applaud your maturity.

What I'm getting at is that there doesn't need to be a single "point" of focus. Take this image for example (not mine: http://www.outbackphoto.com/portfoliowork/pw_10/jf_img_05.jpg). There is no single point of focus, in the mental sense. Rather, there is a scene represented as a whole, just as it exists in real life.
Edit-- the picture 2 posts above does this as well.

In the other sense, I don't think many people would argue that a successful photo needs to have a point of sharp focus. There are many examples of this (although most of them are feature nudity which I believe is not allowed in this part of the forum). Here is a "safe" example (again, not mine:http://www.blzbubaphotography.com/fine_art_images/contemporary-art-photography-blurred-roses-2.jpg).

Edit #2... We should at least include nifty fifty pictures if we're going to debate.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3493/3703162076_61f207d354.jpg

[GSeries1]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4020/4352174201_cfbf7ba7dc_b.jpg

Cool Shot; I like the non-traditional approach... makes you think a little.

[richierich1212]

That little broken twig on the ground is the focal point. There, happy?

[GSeries1]

That little broken twig on the ground is the focal point. There, happy?

I wonder how the little twig got there, and I wonder where he is now... maybe kicked off to the side, or in a bird's nest, so many possibilities.
:p

[Karizmatik]

I applaud your maturity.

What I'm getting at is that there doesn't need to be a single "point" of focus. Take this image for example (not mine: http://www.outbackphoto.com/portfoliowork/pw_10/jf_img_05.jpg). There is no single point of focus, in the mental sense. Rather, there is a scene represented as a whole, just as it exists in real life.
Edit-- the picture 2 posts above does this as well.

In the other sense, I don't think many people would argue that a successful photo needs to have a point of sharp focus. There are many examples of this (although most of them are feature nudity which I believe is not allowed in this part of the forum). Here is a "safe" example (again, not mine:http://www.blzbubaphotography.com/fine_art_images/contemporary-art-photography-blurred-roses-2.jpg).

Edit #2... We should at least include nifty fifty pictures if we're going to debate.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3493/3703162076_61f207d354.jpg

You clearly misunderstood my point -- And as you think I'm too immature, I wont bother replying.

Maybe re-read what I said.

[Salma]

Raaaiiiiiiiiiiiin...

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz198/SitaraPhotos/IMG_3441.jpg

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz198/SitaraPhotos/IMG_3439.jpg

[Daniel2000]

Salma, didn't you posted those in post #6389?
or is it because it still raining in your area? ;)

[izthistaken]

Manually focused.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4354907782_d23d03185e_b.jpg

[peterbj7]

I applaud your maturity.

What I'm getting at is that there doesn't need to be a single "point" of focus. Take this image for example (not mine: http://www.outbackphoto.com/portfoliowork/pw_10/jf_img_05.jpg). There is no single point of focus, in the mental sense. Rather, there is a scene represented as a whole, just as it exists in real life.
Edit-- the picture 2 posts above does this as well.

In the other sense, I don't think many people would argue that a successful photo needs to have a point of sharp focus. There are many examples of this (although most of them are feature nudity which I believe is not allowed in this part of the forum). Here is a "safe" example (again, not mine:http://www.blzbubaphotography.com/fine_art_images/contemporary-art-photography-blurred-roses-2.jpg).

Edit #2... We should at least include nifty fifty pictures if we're going to debate.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3493/3703162076_61f207d354.jpg

You are making too much of the word "single". What I mean is that there should be something to draw the eye, whether that be a single item or several. In the Half Dome picture (I presume that's where it is?) the eye is drawn first to the top of the mountain, which dominates the scene both physically and artistically. Then via the forest to the ground mist and the river. But there definitely is an initial point of interest, the mountain top.

In the motorbike shot, they eye is drawn initially to the bike, specifically to the front wheel high in the air, then to the back wheel, then to the spectator. I don't understand your caveat that there needn't be a point of "sharp" focus - so far as I am concerned the bike/rider/spectator are in sharp focus, and they are what I look at. Whether they are technically fully focussed is by the way, and in any case impossible to tell from such a small image.

In fact, in both photographs everything is in focus, yet nonetheless there is a point the eye is initially drawn to. My problem with the picture that started this was that my eye was immediately drawn to the person sitting on the bench as clearly being the most important part of the image, but that person was severely out of focus which left me feeling rather disorientated. Soft focus might have been different, but this was as soft as flowing water. I consciously looked around the photograph to find something that was in focus (something one should not have to do with a good picture) and found the nearer sections of railings, which from an artistic point of view contribute nothing to the picture. They could just as readily have been edited out for all the significance they have, but then I would be left with a photograph that is totally out of focus across its entire span. I hesitate to say it isn't a good picture because that is terribly personal and subjective, but I will reiterate that it does absolutely nothing for me.

I was going to post an image of my own to illustrate my point but then I realised there is no point - this forum is already crammed with images that do draw the eye and mine wouldn't actually explain anything. In any case, although it's taken with my 5D it's not with my nifty fifty.

I love the works of Jackson Pollock. To a casual observer they just look like an accident with paint, with splodges randomly scattered over a canvas. But a close examination of every one of his works reveals an intricate structure that only genius could have conceived and executed. In those paintings there is never a "single" point of mental focus, which I suspect is one reason many people don't understand them, but nonetheless there are many features in each painting I have studied that all draw the eye, perhaps in a random sequence.

We're on to "art" now, not just pictures. It's just like the difference between a good pop tune, one that's immediately recognisable and that you can sing along with, and a piece written by Bach - they're both music, but with the one it's directly approachable with very clear tags you can grasp with your mind, whilst the other is unbelievably complex and every time you hear it it seems different as your mind sees different paths through it. You don't just listen to such music, you experience and try to understand it. So it is with a painting by Pollock, and so it is with the best photographic images.

[Chris215]

Very Nice

+1 I love it.

appreciate it!

another fav from that day.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3370/3552215675_5dfebc941c.jpg

[Bobster]

http://www.pbase.com/bob_hall/image/121899013.jpg
autofocused ;)

[chris1]

The Lens is a very well priced lens and worth every penny. A must have for any gadget bag

[GSeries1]

appreciate it!

another fav from that day.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3370/3552215675_5dfebc941c.jpg

nice pop.

[jasongraaf]

Peterbj7- I appreciate the response, and I agree with you on most of your points. The only thing that I was trying to get at is that the eye doesn't need to be funneled directly to a point of focus. It can, but I don't think that it is a requirement. For instance, in the landscape that I linked to, my eye started at a completely different place than yours. And yet we both still find it a successful photograph (assuming you do). My photo (the one of the guy riding the bike) wasn't meant to be an example of what I was saying, I was just posting a random nifty fifty picture to keep the thread on topic. I absolutely agree with you that there is a single focus point of this picture.

And fir the record I'm not wild about the origional picture either. I see what the photographer was trying to communicate (mystery, lack of clarity, etc.), but I think that the sharp points of focus right at the edge of the frame are uncomfortable for the eye and overpower the softer subject in the middle.

[jasongraaf]

I missed your paragraph about Jackson Pollock the first time round (I'm on my iPod). That is all that I was trying to say.

[imput1234]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4054/4354948063_8ecc88c23c.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4065/4355693904_999a36ac73.jpg

[lifejacket]

@ DC

50mm
f/6.3
8 sec exposure

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2700/4344495247_b564197ccb_b.jpg

[willy b]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4054/4357749950_3db1a078b6_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4028/4357009031_12e111c3d0_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4016/4357015051_22a2aa6185_b.jpg

[FMX]

beautiful shots

[Bobster]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4054/4354948063_8ecc88c23c.jpg


an iron sight on a painball marker? really???? bizzar...

[usdave1t]

One from my wandering in the woods today.....CC welcome
http://usdave1t.smugmug.com/Nature/Reflections/IMG1871/788512645_kuhu8-L.jpg

[GSeries1]

Today...

[imput1234]

an iron sight on a painball marker? really???? bizzar...

Comes with the A5.

[Bobster]

Comes with the A5.
good old Tipmann :)

[willy b]

beautiful shots

If that was about my shots, thanks :D if not, well :rolleyes:

[FMX]

yep! love the pp. can't wait to get this lens.

[willy b]

yep! love the pp. can't wait to get this lens.

Thanks :D

You will love this lens, using it for my 365 shots has made me love it even more! You really can get some great shots!

Also, on that rose shot, that is quite a heavy crop, so just shows how sharp, that was at f1.8 and iso 400 as well

[Njv]

this lens, a plastic piece of hunk...yet it still is my main lens for weddings and whatnot. I LOVE IT. Ive had three in the last year...can't get enough of it. I can't wait to get the 1.4...or maybe an 85 1.8 :D

[Njv]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2686/4320246594_8c2aa67561.jpg

my girlfriend of 5 years..or should I say my...ALMOST wife...... just bought the ring yesturday =D

[izthistaken]

^She looks to be enjoying your photography.....:lol:

[Njv]

^She looks to be enjoying your photography.....:lol:



Hahahah this is what she said "If you do anything with that photo im going to kill you..." Im still alive...sooooo... :lol::lol:

[mattjns93]

Hey guys, how does this lens perform on FF? I just ordered it and I'm not sure how great it's going to work on FF now.