Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 23 Sep 2008 (Tuesday) 11:33
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

NEW Lens Baby Composer

 
JWright
Planes, trains and ham radio...
Avatar
18,399 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Dec 2004
     
Jul 01, 2009 00:27 as a reply to  @ post 8204172 |  #16

Too expensive for my taste... That's most of the price of a new monitor.


John

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
nureality
Goldmember
3,611 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2008
     
Jul 01, 2009 00:33 |  #17

funny, I was looking at pulling the trigger on the Composer today too.

Adorama has a "everything but the kitchen sink" box set, complete with all 4 lenses, the creative aperature kit, the wide angle/telephoto addons... for $460. I think I'll be getting that.

That and the new Vivitar 7mm f/3.5 Fisheye


Alan "NuReality" Fronshtein
Gear List | PBase |  (external link)flickr (external link)
Lots of Fun, Lots of Laughs, Happy Trigger Finger!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
siuleung
Member
Avatar
113 posts
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Wheaton, IL
     
Jul 01, 2009 00:55 |  #18

I bought the 2.0 because it was so cheap when the three new models came out. The 2.0 is equivalent to the muse with the double glass optic, which is $150. All the models give the same effect using the same optic. As far as miniaturization, it doesn't have a lot of potential for shifting the plane of focus like a real T/S lens. The final effect is pretty much just blur on the edges no matter what, although you can move the sweet spot around. Even with limitations, It's a fun thing to play around with and for the price you paid, I think it's well worth it.


"I photograph to see what something will look like photographed." - Garry Winogrand
www.jthurmanphoto.blog​spot.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Agnu
Senior Member
Avatar
779 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Blue Mountains, Australia
     
Jul 01, 2009 07:19 |  #19

I've never understood these 'Lensbaby' things. They just kinda produce gross looking out of focus photos...why would you pay for degredated image quality? Excuse my ignorance if i'm missing something here, but these things seem kind of ludicrous and i'm amazed that they actually sell...


Angus Scott Photography
Gripped 5DmkII | 17-40L | 35L | Sigma 50/1.4 | 135L
Bronica SQAi | 80/2.8 150/4
Website (external link) | Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
siuleung
Member
Avatar
113 posts
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Wheaton, IL
     
Jul 01, 2009 23:42 |  #20

In a world of digital precision and debates over the sharpness of this lens over that, I think sometimes the art takes a backseat to technical perfection. Sharp images have their place, but I also like the low quality look of blur and softness. It's like lo-fi indie musicians recording on an old 4 track tape recorder. Why do that? There's a magic there. It has a quality that no audiophile can understand. All I'm talking about is alternative photography methods in general, not the lensbaby, specifically. I do think they are a little too ubiquitous and some of the wonder of truly raw, lo-fi photography gets lost in the trend.


"I photograph to see what something will look like photographed." - Garry Winogrand
www.jthurmanphoto.blog​spot.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bullfrog142
Member
Avatar
134 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2008
     
Jul 02, 2009 00:51 |  #21

siuleung wrote in post #8210314 (external link)
In a world of digital precision and debates over the sharpness of this lens over that, I think sometimes the art takes a backseat to technical perfection. Sharp images have their place, but I also like the low quality look of blur and softness. It's like lo-fi indie musicians recording on an old 4 track tape recorder. Why do that? There's a magic there. It has a quality that no audiophile can understand. All I'm talking about is alternative photography methods in general, not the lensbaby, specifically. I do think they are a little too ubiquitous and some of the wonder of truly raw, lo-fi photography gets lost in the trend.

Well said.



GF1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jraggio
Member
Avatar
208 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Franklin Square, NY
     
Jul 02, 2009 08:27 |  #22

Really good discussion here. I figured for $75 on Amazon it was cool to try out. It just came yesterday, but haven't had a chance yet to play with it. I got the 2.0 version which I understand can produce the same images as the more expensive models out today including the Muse, Composer, and Control Freak. My hope is that mine is just a little harder to use, but can yield the same types of shots. I couldn't see spending much more than the $75 for something I may not like or use.

John


"Loving the learning and all the memories captured along the way"
Canon 6D
Full Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LostShootingStar
Goldmember
1,005 posts
Joined Jun 2007
     
Jul 02, 2009 14:43 |  #23

jraggio wrote in post #8211511 (external link)
Really good discussion here. I figured for $75 on Amazon it was cool to try out. It just came yesterday, but haven't had a chance yet to play with it. I got the 2.0 version which I understand can produce the same images as the more expensive models out today including the Muse, Composer, and Control Freak. My hope is that mine is just a little harder to use, but can yield the same types of shots. I couldn't see spending much more than the $75 for something I may not like or use.

John

Yeah, for $75, it's at least worth a shot.

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Citizensmith
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,386 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 7
Joined Dec 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA USA
     
Jul 02, 2009 16:42 |  #24

I've had one for a few years now and got some really nice shots from it. The miss rate is pretty high, but as you learn better how to use it you'll gradually improve. Even if it bugs you a bit to start with just stick with it. Once you are used to the lens it can provide some great shots.

And really, once you have got used to the 2.0 you'll see why people are willing to spend more for the better versions.


My POTN Gallery, Complete gear list,
Tradition - Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Barb42
Senior Member
Avatar
775 posts
Joined May 2003
Location: Minnesota
     
Jul 02, 2009 21:00 |  #25

Agnu wrote in post #8205369 (external link)
I've never understood these 'Lensbaby' things. They just kinda produce gross looking out of focus photos...why would you pay for degredated image quality? Excuse my ignorance if i'm missing something here, but these things seem kind of ludicrous and i'm amazed that they actually sell...

Its about beauty and mood and sensuality. And choices.


http://www.barbsmithph​otography.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jraggio
Member
Avatar
208 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Franklin Square, NY
     
Jul 02, 2009 23:01 |  #26

Citizensmith wrote in post #8213990 (external link)
I've had one for a few years now and got some really nice shots from it. The miss rate is pretty high, but as you learn better how to use it you'll gradually improve. Even if it bugs you a bit to start with just stick with it. Once you are used to the lens it can provide some great shots.

And really, once you have got used to the 2.0 you'll see why people are willing to spend more for the better versions.

Thanks, but what makes them "better"? Is it because they are easier to control and use? I sit true that all three models provide the same image styles and results? In other words is there a certain effect or shot that one could get with a composer that they could not get with a Muse or 2.0?

John


"Loving the learning and all the memories captured along the way"
Canon 6D
Full Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Citizensmith
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,386 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 7
Joined Dec 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA USA
     
Jul 03, 2009 00:36 |  #27

jraggio wrote in post #8215935 (external link)
Thanks, but what makes them "better"? Is it because they are easier to control and use? I sit true that all three models provide the same image styles and results? In other words is there a certain effect or shot that one could get with a composer that they could not get with a Muse or 2.0?

John

When I got my 2.0 there was a cheaper version with a single piece, uncoated lens, and a more expensive version with, I believe, the same glass but pins for holding it in place. Can't remember what it was called. So two levels of optics and two levels of control. I'm unsure if the more advanced one could be controlled anyway aside from the pins which would make it slow to use and more suited for tripod work, versus the quicker reaction of the 2.0

The 2.0 has become the Muse, the older advanced version the Control Freak, and the Composer is new in the middle. The 2.0 has the double glass optic which is good as they offer. The only reason it seems to get a Muse over a 2.0 is that the muse would let you swap out optics for some of their other choices.

So basically, the 2.0 has optics as good as any of the others and it all comes down to control and the possibility of swapping optics.


My POTN Gallery, Complete gear list,
Tradition - Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jraggio
Member
Avatar
208 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Franklin Square, NY
     
Jul 03, 2009 08:25 |  #28

Thanks much Smith. This was how I thought it was, but it's good to hear for sure. Looks like I got a good deal then. Now all I have to do is get away from my desk and actually take it out of the box ;-)a

Any ideas on what my first subjects should be? Mid kids may oblige, but they are growing a little impatient with their "modeling careers".

John


"Loving the learning and all the memories captured along the way"
Canon 6D
Full Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wrussi
Senior Member
788 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Dec 2007
Location: miramar FL
     
Jul 03, 2009 13:00 |  #29

ok while i had my lensbaby composer the lens was an awesome fun thing to shoot with!
i had it attached to my rebel XT and took that combo everywhere! i was shooting anything and looking for ideas on what to shoot! the images come as good as you make them to be.
unfortunately i sold it to finance my 5d but when i have the money again i will definitely buy one along with an XT to have as a "fun setup"


ohh and one last thing! if you are using it it a camera with a poor viewfinder camera like the XT or if you have poor eyesight i recommend using it at F4 you have wider margin for focus


Gear List
my website
www.wrphotostudio.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Citizensmith
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,386 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 7
Joined Dec 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA USA
     
Jul 03, 2009 23:34 |  #30

jraggio wrote in post #8217392 (external link)
Any ideas on what my first subjects should be? Mid kids may oblige, but they are growing a little impatient with their "modeling careers".

Some of my favorite photos with mine are people shots and particularly my kids. Seems to me at least to be one of the things is best at.


My POTN Gallery, Complete gear list,
Tradition - Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,142 views & 0 likes for this thread
NEW Lens Baby Composer
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is protocolscg
1374 guests, 271 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.