f/0.95 Photos

[Will]

Hello Guys:

Finally have a chance to pay with the f/0.95.

All photos at f/0.95; 1/125 or 1/60; BW400 film, rated at ISO200

Foucs to either the left or right eyes, 2 side head shots foucsed to the nose.

 

[Will]

More Photos!

I need a female subject next time 😀

Cheers





Will

 

[lmd91343]

Hi key portraits shot wide open. Looks great. The dof and oof in hi key is wonderful.

I've got to try that. I've only used it for still life and available light.

 

[jlw]

More Photos!

I need a female subject next time 😀 Will

Heck, I think somebody should have hired you to shoot Olympus Fashion Week with this setup. Your photos have really got a "look."

This is a good reminder to me that I should be making at least an occasional effort to use this lens for its aesthetic qualities, and not simply for editorial work under really crappy lighting conditions, as I was today:

 

[harry01562]

This is a good reminder to me that I should be making at least an occasional effort to use this lens for its aesthetic qualities, and not simply for editorial work under really crappy lighting conditions, as I was today:

Nice shots. And some "experts" still say this is a very poor lens. Which makes the large number of M mount conversions appear strange.

I agree about use, though. It can be used, but with the bulk and weight, I tend to just shoot it when the speed is needed. Maybe add it to my weight training... naahhhh...

Harry

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

this lens has a very interesting signature to it, thanks for posting.

 

[jlw]

I agree about use, though. It can be used, but with the bulk and weight, I tend to just shoot it when the speed is needed. Maybe add it to my weight training... naahhhh...

At approx. 1 lb 5 oz, it's only weighty compared to other 50s. It's three ounces lighter than an 85/1.5, for example...

 

[Trius]

Great tonality, but the bokeh makes me dizzy!

 

[broadie]

I really like your shots....the lens seems to work really well with the scene you picked, and I really like how the focus just disintegrates away from his face... it's quite nice. thanks for posting them!

 

[Will]

I've only used it for still life and available light.

Hi,

The (lack of) DOF is fun, isn't it?

This is a good reminder to me that I should be making at least an occasional effort to use this lens for its aesthetic qualities, and not simply for editorial work under really crappy lighting conditions, as I was today:

At approx. 1 lb 5 oz, it's only weighty compared to other 50s. It's three ounces lighter than an 85/1.5, for example...

Hi J,

Your R-D1 colour shots are great! I still return to the two treads (changing to M mount) from time to time. The lens definitely would do better covering a smaller area on the R-D1 (vs 36mm x 24mm).

Used my Prominent Ultron with the adapter on the 7s in the last 7 or 8 photos on the same roll, the 7s felt more balanced with the big lens. I am not using the UV filter (it is now a second lens cap) to avoid filter flair.

I think I will hold off converting to M mount (Now in more doubt), now I want a Canon 100mm f/2.0 or 85mm f/1.8!

Nice shots. And some "experts" still say this is a very poor lens. Which makes the large number of M mount conversions appear strange.

I agree about use, though. It can be used, but with the bulk and weight, I tend to just shoot it when the speed is needed. Maybe add it to my weight training... naahhhh...

Harry

Hello Harry,

I still found the 7s hard to foucs (vs a M2); would a cleaning on the RF help?

With just the 7s and the f/0.95, is a manageable small package. I even took it to a family gathering shooting it at f/1.4~f/2.8.

Cheers





Will