POST YOUR HEADSHOTS!

I dont have a 135mm.. but ive shot 85mm on crop cameras... and i couldn't get a sharp image at 160th.. not with my shake hands ..
Even an 85mm on FF i need to be very careful with shutter speed

The whites of her eyes are edited quite heavily, why? Too soft? Don’t shoot wide open or send it into Canon to check it out.

rantercsr wrote in post #18496618
I dont have a 135mm.. but ive shot 85mm on crop cameras... and i couldn't get a sharp image at 160th.. not with my shake hands ..
Even an 85mm on FF i need to be very careful with shutter speed

Yep... It's my own fault. I know this about the 135L I learned it the hard way but seem to be condemned to relearning it again and again ... and always by the hard route.

Hey ho ... I still like this shot. And the softness seems to suit the subject.

Am I clutching at straws?

Slow process from Nigeria. There's nothing wrong with the lens, anyway. It is razor sharp when I get it right.

I was playing around with editing the eyes and wondered if it would be noticed.

I didn't want to suggest that it was user error but when you miss the focus it's not a usable image. I have been shooting since '92 and have always focused manually, the day that a camera can focus at the point I need is the day that I'll utilize autofocus. In the past, I've owned the Nikon 8008s, F4 and F5 bodies and was shooting fashion so shooting between F1.8-F4 was normal. The focus point I use is always changing and the subject is not always stationary so it would slow things down too much.

tcphoto1 wrote in post #18497023
I didn't want to suggest that it was user error but when you miss the focus it's not a usable image. I have been shooting since '92 and have always focused manually, the day that a camera can focus at the point I need is the day that I'll utilize autofocus. In the past, I've owned the Nikon 8008s, F4 and F5 bodies and was shooting fashion so shooting between F1.8-F4 was normal. The focus point I use is always changing and the subject is not always stationary so it would slow things down too much.

It's OK ... in the end, it is usually user error in my case. The mistake I have too often made with the 135 f/2 has been to use too low a shutter speed. Combined with the fact that my natural preference is to use 'focus and recompose', this has resulted in shake-induced blur plus, probably, a little bit of mis-focus because of narrow depth of field with the lens wide open. End result ... soft images.

This particular shot was taken almost a year ago. I've got a little more on top of the 135 f/2 since then. But I still have this old tendency some of the time, I think partly because I'm trying to get to grips with shooting using full manual exposure settings and I'm not yet completely comfortable with it.

I'm all for manual focusing for static or predictably moving subjects and I can see that it should lead to more considered picture taking. But, without proper old-style split screen and microprism focusing aids, I think it would be a waste of time and just more soft images in my case.

DaviSto wrote in post #18496632
Yep... It's my own fault. I know this about the 135L I learned it the hard way but seem to be condemned to relearning it again and again ... and always by the hard route.

Hey ho ... I still like this shot. And the softness seems to suit the subject.

Am I clutching at straws?

I like it too, but in my opinion the bright vibrant colors don't seem to go with the soft focus. I wonder how it would look if you decreased the saturation (primary) and brightness (secondary) of the green and yellows in the out of focus area.

s1a1om wrote in post #18497440
I like it too, but in my opinion the bright vibrant colors don't seem to go with the soft focus. I wonder how it would look if you decreased the saturation (primary) and brightness (secondary) of the green and yellows in the out of focus area.

Interesting thought ... I'll try that.

My niece graduating from NKU.

Infectious, iam01100101. Just the right moment.

JWdlft wrote in post #18497781
Infectious, iam01100101. Just the right moment.

Thank you! She hasn't graduated yet, but will in December.

chris_holtmeier wrote in post #18498246

IMAGE LINK: https://photos.smugmug​.com …/LCP_5954-X2.jpg&lb=1&s=A on Smugmug

dalibort82 wrote in post #18498362

Gallery photo:
posted by dalibort82 originally in forum: People

These are both really good, seem to be similar style for DOF...However, is the DOF exaggerated some in PP by bluring nose/hair and keeping eyes/eyebrows and mouth tack sharp?

Chris and Dalibort seemed to have shot wide open on these. This would give the shallow depth of field. This is from their choice in lenses not PS