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 Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 17 Jan 2012 (Tuesday) 08:15
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Show us your "Brenizer Method" shots!

 
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,282 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
     
Aug 31, 2017 12:56 |  #1576

What if you had a 135mm f1.0 lens? :D


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
InPhoto
Cream of the Crop
11,866 posts
Likes: 9751
Joined Jan 2011
     
Aug 31, 2017 13:00 |  #1577

Perhaps the result can be reproduced with a 35mm f1.8 lens? :rolleyes:


Some simple photos

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,282 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
Post edited 9 months ago by TeamSpeed. (3 edits in all)
     
Aug 31, 2017 13:13 |  #1578

DOF would be more than the shot manufactured here, assuming you only change the lens and not the distance. 18' or so at 1.8 at 35mm would be 8-9', but a 135L shot 15 times over the scene at hand at f2 is less than a foot for each of the frames.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pulsar123
Goldmember
2,098 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 348
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Canada
     
Aug 31, 2017 14:27 |  #1579

The shot I made is the same you'd get with a medium format film 3x larger in both dimensions than FF, with a non-existent medium format lens 135mm f2.0. (Though the Hasselblad's MF 110mm f2.0 comes pretty close.)

Alternatively, the same effect (with the same framing, same distance from the model and background) can be derived on FF with another non-existent (in SLR world) lens - a FF 45 mm f/0.7. (The Kubrik's f/0.7 lens doesn't count - it's not for SLRs.)

That's what makes the Brenizer photos stand out - lenses/cameras which can make the same shot in a single exposure simply don't exist.


6D, Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC, 135L, 70-200 f4L, Laowa 15mm 1:1 macro, 50mm f1.8 STM, Samyang 8mm fisheye, home studio

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
12,709 posts
Gallery: 1101 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 8048
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Aug 31, 2017 14:33 |  #1580

pulsar123 wrote in post #18441578 (external link)
The shot I made is the same you'd get with a medium format film 3x larger in both dimensions than FF, with a non-existent medium format lens 135mm f2.0. (Though the Hasselblad's MF 110mm f2.0 comes pretty close.)

Alternatively, the same effect (with the same framing, same distance from the model and background) can be derived on FF with another non-existent (in SLR world) lens - a FF 45 mm f/0.7. (The Kubrik's f/0.7 lens doesn't count - it's not for SLRs.)

That's what makes the Brenizer photos stand out - lenses/cameras which can make the same shot in a single exposure simply don't exist.

Heya,

Yes, agreed, this is understood.

The statement I'm saying regards the field of view which absolutely can be recreated. The only thing you cannot recreate is the depth of field associated with that field of view. You absolutely can recreate the "wide angle coverage" as you put it, that angle is the angle of view, which we refer to commonly as field of view, and can be recreated exactly. It's only the depth of field that is different and the combination of focal-ratio for the focal length that normally would be associated with a given field of view for a smaller sensor size that doesn't exist in a lens (like a 38mm F1 for example) to get a similar look that is truly different.

The statement is to simply see the difference in the look of the depth of field given similar/same FOV with the 135 doing a BM pano and doing it from a distance that produces the same composition FOV with the greater DOF. Just to compare.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pulsar123
Goldmember
2,098 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 348
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Canada
     
Aug 31, 2017 15:38 as a reply to  @ MalVeauX's post |  #1581

Ah, no problem. A FF zoom lens set to ~38mm would have the same angle coverage. Unfortunately I didn't make such a shot, but will do in my future Brenizer shot.

In fact, the best will be to take a UWA lens shot, and then crop it as needed (because it is hard to know exactly what will be the equivalent FL of the Brenizer composite shot).


6D, Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC, 135L, 70-200 f4L, Laowa 15mm 1:1 macro, 50mm f1.8 STM, Samyang 8mm fisheye, home studio

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,282 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
     
Aug 31, 2017 15:43 |  #1582

correct, you won't know for certain, because after all the shots are merged, you have to then crop for composition and to cut off all the mis-matched edges, and that will then determine your approximate single-shot focal length.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pulsar123
Goldmember
2,098 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 348
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Canada
     
Sep 01, 2017 21:00 |  #1583

My second attempt with a 6D + 135L combo (30 shots; hand-held):

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4370/36161036263_5ffbf1cca2_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/X6qL​ft  (external link) Untitled (external link) by SyamAstro (600,000 views - thank you!) (external link), on Flickr

6D, Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC, 135L, 70-200 f4L, Laowa 15mm 1:1 macro, 50mm f1.8 STM, Samyang 8mm fisheye, home studio

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
InPhoto
Cream of the Crop
11,866 posts
Likes: 9751
Joined Jan 2011
     
Jun 06, 2018 03:05 |  #1584

Shot with a Jupiter 21M 200mm lens @f4
Not very spectacular, needs a lot more shots closer


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


Some simple photos

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

440,868 views & 146 likes for this thread
Show us your "Brenizer Method" shots!
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
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 brotherbear86
784 guests, 248 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.