Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

^^^^^^Great shots! Nice job on getting light into the eyes while wearing a ball cap.

Just picked up this lens...and holy build quality, AF speed and sharpness when stopped down passed f/3.2 or so.

Must have lens crop or FF.

1st:
f/4.5
1/3200
ISO 400

2nd:
f/3.2
1/3200
ISO 400

please excuse the darkness on the first shot, didn't think it'd turn out that way

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

ericm678 wrote in post #15762759
Just picked up this lens...and holy build quality, AF speed and sharpness when stopped down passed f/3.2 or so.

Must have lens crop or FF.

1st:
f/4.5
1/3200
ISO 400

2nd:
f/3.2
1/3200
ISO 400

please excuse the darkness on the first shot, didn't think it'd turn out that way

Very nice, I wouldn't change that first pic at all, the darker exposure seems to fit very well and set the somber mood for the pic. Lovely...

JVthePT wrote in post #15763439
Very nice, I wouldn't change that first pic at all, the darker exposure seems to fit very well and set the somber mood for the pic. Lovely...

^^^My exact thoughts when I looked at it too - dark tone sets the sombre mood of the pic very nicely.

sushikam wrote in post #15748427
I'm excited to see the rest of your shoot! My daughter's 1st birthday is coming up and it is going to be somewhat of a giraffe theme. Can't wait to do her cake smash pictures! Though I'm still tempted to pay a true professional to do them so I don't mess them up doing them myself

Thanks!

Here's another still using the 85 (used it pretty much the whole time):

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …sephotography/8​596945522/

the DOF is just find unless you really want to show the background.

ericm678 wrote in post #15762759
Just picked up this lens...and holy build quality, AF speed and sharpness when stopped down passed f/3.2 or so.

Must have lens crop or FF.

1st:
f/4.5
1/3200
ISO 400

2nd:
f/3.2
1/3200
ISO 400

please excuse the darkness on the first shot, didn't think it'd turn out that way

Is this Hollywood Cemetery?

JVthePT wrote in post #15763439
Very nice, I wouldn't change that first pic at all, the darker exposure seems to fit very well and set the somber mood for the pic. Lovely...

Thanks!
It was more of the PP that i think darkened it, some vignetting and contrast.

when converted to jpeg and uploaded it always looks darker or blotchy is my monitor out of calibration at all?

BigLobowski wrote in post #15763467
^^^My exact thoughts when I looked at it too - dark tone sets the sombre mood of the pic very nicely.

Thanks alot!

it was a must to make it black and white

2cruise wrote in post #15763778
Is this Hollywood Cemetery?

Unfortunately no, i wished i lived in Hollywood

It's a small cemetery in Easton,Pa

No doubt great lens, my fist shot using this lens

andrisetyoo wrote in post #15763941
No doubt great lens, my fist shot using this lens

i still can't get over how nice the bokeh is on this lens

what was this shot at? wide open?

Just wondering how sharp this lens is at doing full length body shots at wide open f1.8 ?
Camera in portrait orientation, focus on the eye, framed so that the subjects (adult) head and feet are both within the frame.

I ask because I used to have a 100/2 lens which was really good at doing head shots, half body shots and maybe 3/4 length shots, but the focus accuracy at full length body shots went down to less than 50% hit rate - probably nearer 25%. Having also shot with a Sigma 85mm f1.4 lens the same thing happened, full length body shots wide open at f1.4 were really soft on the focus point (eyes) whereas half body shots were pin sharp

Thanks for any help!

these two are almost full body shot at f1.8

ericm678 wrote in post #15763899
Unfortunately no, i wished i lived in Hollywood

It's a small cemetery in Easton,Pa

Well I don't I was referring to Hollywood Cemetery in Richmond, Va which is very old and was named as such with the amount of holly trees there.

futureal33 wrote in post #15764391
Just wondering how sharp this lens is at doing full length body shots at wide open f1.8 ?
Camera in portrait orientation, focus on the eye, framed so that the subjects (adult) head and feet are both within the frame.

I ask because I used to have a 100/2 lens which was really good at doing head shots, half body shots and maybe 3/4 length shots, but the focus accuracy at full length body shots went down to less than 50% hit rate - probably nearer 25%. Having also shot with a Sigma 85mm f1.4 lens the same thing happened, full length body shots wide open at f1.4 were really soft on the focus point (eyes) whereas half body shots were pin sharp

Thanks for any help!

Its not the lenses that are at fault here. Its technique. With that composition your focus point may be larger than the thing you are trying to focus on.

gonzogolf wrote in post #15764971
Its not the lenses that are at fault here. Its technique. With that composition your focus point may be larger than the thing you are trying to focus on.

Id agree with you that the technique could potentially cause back focus (ie, focus point at that FL is around the size of her entire head, so it could lock onto something contrasty behind her head) but what I am getting is front focus (consistently at this focal length, but NOT at closer focal length - which doesn't make sense)