Whats the sharpest, most colorful lens for modeling?

forno wrote in post #3483688
LOL, pixel peeping hey Rich

Is that what you call them down under, pixels? We call them lots of things in the US but that's never been one of them

Honestly, I think I've seen your name from about 5 SEPERATE places in the last week. Not to mention having discussions brought up about you in 3 SEPERATE conversations with other photographers, even internationally (none of which did *i* bring your name up to start with.)

I would say you're definately doing pretty good at making a stir already. Your name is getting out to a lot of people.

Second of all, I just got done reading an article on medium format, in the latest issue of digital photo pro. (Check it out, I'm not sure if this is the WHOLE article, without reading it all...: http://www.digitalphot​opro.com …2007/julyaug/co​meback.php )

Anyways, the medium format guys would like you to believe that carrying a med format digital is the prerequisite to shooting professionally. As if noone will buy from you without a hasselblad in your hand. Honestly, that is SILLYNESS. I've no doubt that the industry is moving to higher and higher standards. If you shot with a digicam with 1.5 mp and offered the images to elle, I'm sure there would be a problem, even if you had all the talent in the world.

I've no doubt that color depth and print size requirements are certainly going to push the industry to bigger sensors, but the medium format craze is overrated. A good shooter that prefers his 1ds, or EVEN a 1d mk 3, could shoot fashion without being laughed at. Programs from onONE (genuine fractals) and alienskin (blowup) are doing a fantastic job of uprezzing images. Sure, gradation from a 12 bit to a 14 bit to a 16 bit will all be vastly different. Theres no doubt that a large sensor with equal pixels is better. Theres no doubt that a large sensor with more pixels is even better. Color depth is fantastic, but it won't keep you from making it.

I'm considering moving to med format digital in the next 5 years. With the release of Mamiya's 22mp 645 system for under $10k (despite it being the least technically impressive), I'm SURE the industry is going to be lowering prices. Technology will improve, and as more photographers see medium format in their reach, more units will be sold. Until then, if a job requires it, renting seems pretty viable to me.

HOWEVER, even when I make the leap to a medium format capital expense, I have no intention of walking away from 35mm sensor cameras. They are just too good at what they do, and you lose lot of versatility by shooting strictly a medium format system.

bleh, as money allows, it seems that 16-35L, 24-70L, 70-200L is the way to go. More money in, you can move to primes as well.

I have gotten to an understanding with dust. I won't take my lenses off my bodies on locations when I can avoid it, and in return, dust won't get on my sensor. This is why zooms have an edge in my book.

but... what do I know?

To roll back to the beginning of my post... GREAT work, I can't wait to see more!

Bruce

Lots of good lens choices have been mentioned with the exception of the absolute best, a coffee can, pinhole aperture and lots of duct tape.

WMS

cdifoto wrote in post #3483732
I hear any of the 70-200s look good in a skirt. The 135L is good if you like 'em petite and dark.

This was good for an early morning laugh.

135L

Andy_T wrote in post #3481986
Of course ... do not underestimate the Sigma 30/1.4 EX.

Or ... as Doc said some time ago ... a nice cheap Zeiss.
e.g. the CZJ (Carl Zeiss Jena, from the old German Democratic Republic) Flektogon 4/25, 2.4/35 or similar... available from eBay for less than 100$ (in manual M42 mount, of course)

Best regards,
Andy

I really want a 2.4/35 Flek... had one, but that one had problems focussing. Too bad they all have artifically inflated prices.