astro8
Well-known
I try and shoot at around f4 if possible, but sometimes just can't pull it off.
I suppose my f1.4 lens is a kind of security blanket. I use it outside at night, but still try and use it at f2+ if possible
Here's an example 1/9@1600 probably at f/2
I suppose my f1.4 lens is a kind of security blanket. I use it outside at night, but still try and use it at f2+ if possible
Here's an example 1/9@1600 probably at f/2
back alley
IMAGES
GaryLH
Veteran
For everyone why u need is faster lens is different. I think a different way to look at do u need a faster lens...
How many times have u asked yourself after u have taken a picture, this shot would have been better if I had a faster lens... If the answer is never then why worry about it.
Gary
Ps gas is a entirely different issue :bang:
How many times have u asked yourself after u have taken a picture, this shot would have been better if I had a faster lens... If the answer is never then why worry about it.
Gary
Ps gas is a entirely different issue
:bang:
Last edited:
Sylvester
Well-known
f8 and be there. Still, my fastest lens is f1.8.
DNG
Film Friendly
Easy Toni, back away from the coffee pot. The OP just asked the question because he's embarrassed about being too cheap to buy faster glass
Joe has owned some of the finest Glass (Nokton 1.1, and ZM 50 1.5).. Joe, like me find a small percentage of images needing fast glass.
I own one Canon FL 50mm f/1.4 for my E-M5, and a 20mm f/1.7 Panny, all else is f/2.8 or slower.
LOL... Made me laugh
Corto
Well-known
sepiareverb
genius and moron
I like shallow DOF from time to time, but I don't have anything faster than 1.4. My main problem with the M9 is that it is too fast- ISO 160 is far faster than I want- Sunny 16 gives f2.8 and a half at 1/4000. My most used summer films are the Rollei Ortho 25 and PanF+ and I shoot at f4 or 5.6 most often. I've started accumulating ND filters and have spent the last week shooting the M9 with a 2 stop ND filter on all day long.
ChrisN
Striving
With crop-sensor digital cameras a fast lens becomes even more important. Some people like to be able to isolate the subject by limiting depth-of focus with a large aperture. Many take that to the extreme, and that might not please some other people. So what? Rather than inviting people to another round of bashing something we don't understand or don't want, why not just accept that other people see things differently and enjoy making different images.
gilpen123
Gil
I don't usually use wide open unless the result I wanted calls for it i.e portrait, macro. Actually too sick looking at pictures with very shallow DOF specially street shots. I can settle for 2.0 anytime though I have a 1.4 M and some below 2.0 M43 lenses. Digitals' high ISO capabilities IMO lessens the need for fast lenses if it's lowlight shot one is looking for.
MikeL
Go Fish
RichW
Established
I sometimes want to shoot in low light where it can be an EV of usually not any lower than 3. I don't like to use faster than 1600 ISO (film) for grain reasons and I don't like to use a shutter speed slower than 1/60 unless I have to (1/30 can be ok but sometimes it creates too much motion blur for people shots - even with a steady hand) therefore a lens of f/1.4 can sometimes be very useful. I like my lenses to have at least an aperture of f/2 anyway, it's not about bokeh - it's about getting the shot.
Most of the time I stay between f/8 and f/16 although
Richard
Most of the time I stay between f/8 and f/16 although
Richard
back alley
IMAGES
is that what you think i'm doing? inviting people to bash others?
that was certainly not my intention...
my curiosity is genuine...
back alley
IMAGES
....
....
i am sincerely asking folks about their reasons for fast glass...
I don't read that he's inviting you to do that.
back alley
IMAGES
i read it as he's thinking i am stirring the pot to get people to bash each other.
For me, it's nice having fast glass with an APS sensor, as the DOF is expanded by the equivalent of 1.5x the f/stop. With full frame, f/2 is plenty fast for me, and f/2.8 works with wider lenses.
What gets interesting is with larger formats, like 645. There is very little DOF with f/2.8 or even f/4 so focus accuracy is critical. But shooting at ISO 50 at f/4 in fading daylight can sometimes be challenging...if you want more in focus, it can be impossible without a tripod.
What gets interesting is with larger formats, like 645. There is very little DOF with f/2.8 or even f/4 so focus accuracy is critical. But shooting at ISO 50 at f/4 in fading daylight can sometimes be challenging...if you want more in focus, it can be impossible without a tripod.
Contarama
Well-known
One advantage with fast glass is you have the extra stop or two for the lens to get up to optimum performance...for example a Nikkor 105/1.8 is gonna be rocking and rolling by 2.5 where a Nikkor 105/2.5 is gonna be wide open and not up to speed yet...so you get the extra stop if you need it. Sometimes the extra stop is a good thing. That is my logic for having a fast lens...that being said I prefer 5.6 or 8 to hell with bokeh...most people don't truly understand the concept anyway really at least that is my take on it...
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
Two reason for fast lenses: (1) shallow DOF and (2) speed.
Regarding (1) I don't really care much about fast lens/wide open "bokeh" any more. These days, I'm a sucker for "f5.6 bokeh", just enough to get some 3D but recognize what's in the background. Regarding (2) fast lenses are nice indoors, or when traveling and limiting myself to 400 ASA.
Roland.
[Aside from OP's thought: Wonderful image, Roland - interesting commentary on technology today.]
back alley
IMAGES
i have to admit...i think i would love the hex 60...
benmacphoto
Well-known
For me it has always been a "just incase" scenario.
I'd rather have the extra stops if I needed them.
Even though 90% of my photos are taken stopped down.
I'd rather have the extra stops if I needed them.
Even though 90% of my photos are taken stopped down.