Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

Hi, I'd just like to know if the 85mm f/1.8 is a good lens to obtain sharp shots of subjects in movement ? Thanks... and sorry if I made english mistakes it's not my first language

superboy77 wrote in post #10367784
I found… a duck!

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Canon EOS-1D Mark III, +1 EV, ISO 100, f/1.8, 1/800 (Av). Used a preset in LR 3 Beta 2 called Wedding Look.

I like shooting like that

were do you find presets for this "wedding look" and does LR2.6 have any presets?

also i have LR2.6 and LR3.0 which one is better? im guessing 3.0 but then again the new version of anything sometimes doesnt mean its better...

Octowl wrote in post #10386766
were do you find presets for this "wedding look" and does LR2.6 have any presets?

also i have LR2.6 and LR3.0 which one is better? im guessing 3.0 but then again the new version of anything sometimes doesnt mean its better...

Examples of this wedding look??

I've used LR for a while and LR3 is definitely the best, with many new features and improvements. I like it very much.

no, superboy77 said he "Used a preset in LR 3 Beta 2 called Wedding Look." and was wondering where the presets are located.

and thanks for the input on 2.6 vs 3.0. i just upgraded to 3.0 about to install it.

I'm sure it is user error, but like half my shots are pretty soft, while the other half are mind blowingly sharp. Frustrating to see the softies next to what I know it can really do. Is it just the crazy thin DOF? Anyone else have this problem?

tkbslc wrote in post #10388972
I'm sure it is user error, but like half my shots are pretty soft, while the other half are mind blowingly sharp. Frustrating to see the softies next to what I know it can really do. Is it just the crazy thin DOF? Anyone else have this problem?

While it does have a thin DOF, it's also a longer lens w/o IS. If you're hand holding it, the theoretical slowest shutter speed is 1/(effective focal length) or 1/(85x1.6) = 1/136. Slower than that and you may tend to blur the image from shaking. If however you're using a tripod, then you may be encountering something else.

What are you doing when you're getting the soft shots?

A few from today...

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

I want to contribute with this full body portrait:

5DMKII
85 1,8
1/2000
ISO 100
f 2,0
jpeg straight out of the camera. No PP

thanks

Riccardo

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

Crucco, the focus seems a bit off ? I mean, not on her head...

Does anyone know if this lens works well with a 450D ? thanks.

Elvye wrote in post #10394004
Crucco, the focus seems a bit off ? I mean, not on her head...

Does anyone know if this lens works well with a 450D ? thanks.

Hhmmm.....at f2 DOF is very shallow. Perhaps I made some mistake when I recomposed the image, but also consider the compression for the web.

I used this lense also on a 40D (APS-C) but I didn' t like too much. If you are looking for a fast medium telephoto for sport, or head shot I think it could be right also on a 450D (IMHO...).

Ciao

Elvye wrote in post #10394004
Crucco, the focus seems a bit off ? I mean, not on her head...

Does anyone know if this lens works well with a 450D ? thanks.

It worked great with my old 400D! Cheers.

mathogre wrote in post #10389976
While it does have a thin DOF, it's also a longer lens w/o IS. If you're hand holding it, the theoretical slowest shutter speed is 1/(effective focal length) or 1/(85x1.6) = 1/136. Slower than that and you may tend to blur the image from shaking. If however you're using a tripod, then you may be encountering something else.

What are you doing when you're getting the soft shots?

Man, you nailed it. Most of the softies, were under 1/100 shutter speed. Don't know why I didn't check that, but I was in AV and the camera was picking crazy low shutter speeds for me. Almost all the ones where I used a manual AF point selection over the target and shot 1/200+ are insanely sharp. Glad it was just me being stupid, but like I said, I was sure it was user error based on the good ones being so sharp. Did a photoshoot last night with it and got some great ones.

That said, I do kinda feel like this is probably the wrong focal length for me for a prime. Probably going to sell it as I have some duplicate lenses in this range.