Fixcinater
Never enough smoky peat
It's hard to judge the lens' performance when the light levels are so low and therefore overall IQ is being limited by higher noise in the camera as well as potential/very apparent in some cases camera movement.
Also, using a lens capable of covering full 35mm film on a 2x crop body could limit the interest in results to those using similar setups. Someone using 35mm film or full frame digital would have an entirely different opinion (most likely) of the lens.
tl;dr: The night shots really display the photographer's talents more than the lenses', IMO.
Also, using a lens capable of covering full 35mm film on a 2x crop body could limit the interest in results to those using similar setups. Someone using 35mm film or full frame digital would have an entirely different opinion (most likely) of the lens.
tl;dr: The night shots really display the photographer's talents more than the lenses', IMO.
raid
Dad Photographer
It is my dream to use this lens on a full frame digital camera. The only film camera this lens works with is the Rollei 35SL or similar in QBM mount. Amedeo is working on creating an M adapter for the 50mm QBM lens. I would need an M240 or similar camera that is full frame and that takes most lenses with the right adapter. Maybe a SONY is more affordable.
Thanks.
Thanks.
mh2000
Well-known
looks like a cool lens to add to the m43 bag, but I don't really find the OOF rendering very pleasant to my eyes. Just adds a very agitated feel to the images. Like seeing the Chicago shots since I lived just up the street at Dearborn and Huron... my old stomping grounds! Best!
raid
Dad Photographer
This is very useful to me. What type of OFF rendering do you view as unpleasant? Thanks.
mh2000
Well-known
I see it in many of the photos, but evident here:
it's more than the bright lines too. Seems very tense and high energy instead of "soothing" to my eyes. look at the blur around the girl's legs. But, take my opinion with a grain of salt, it's all very subjective.
it's more than the bright lines too. Seems very tense and high energy instead of "soothing" to my eyes. look at the blur around the girl's legs. But, take my opinion with a grain of salt, it's all very subjective.
raid
Dad Photographer
It is a 85mm /1.4 lens used wide open. It looks "similar" to my Canon FD 85/1.2L when used wide open. The fast tele lenses give images that may seem as having an OOF rendering that is "not that pretty" when used wide open. I agree that a Sonnar 50mm lens will have a smoother looking OOF look. A Planar is flat and very sharp, by design. Had I taken this shot at f 11 or so, the results will be different looking.
mh2000
Well-known
I'm not really familiar with the FD 85L, but the EF 85L is pretty darn smooth looking! So was my EF 100/2 when shot wide open. I hate having a fast prime that doesn't render nicely (for my tastes) because it means I never want to shoot it wide open. I'm ok with my Oly 45/1.8 and really like what I've seen from the Sigma 60 wide open... though not f1.4!
Best!
PS You asked for comments, so I gave you my honest thoughts.
raid
Dad Photographer
I want honest input so that I can benefit from such input.