 |
|
22-03-2006, 19:16
|
#1
|
|
LARGE MEMBER.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Harrogate Yorkshire UK
Posts: 2,141
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Very first shots with my 85mm f/1.2
Only just got this lens and I love it... 
Any comments welcome.. 
1
2
|
|
|
|
22-03-2006, 19:21
|
#2
|
|
Dead
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Hell
Posts: 10,543
Thanks: 38
Thanked 53 Times in 38 Posts
|
Looks wonderfull to my eyes the 1st picture just looks great with a lot of the hairs standing out perfectly and the side of her little face in focus just enuff to grab my attention.
The second picture is fantastic, shame the sun wasnt out a little more but if thats your family, its a great family shot thats for sure
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2006, 19:42
|
#3
|
|
Trusted User
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Leeds
Posts: 422
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Shot one is sure a little cutie, very sharp
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2006, 19:47
|
#4
|
|
XBL: Wolfgang Winkle
Join Date: May 2000
Location: ... of the dead
Posts: 10,124
Thanks: 102
Thanked 91 Times in 73 Posts
|
Lovely DoF ... have you tried shooting anything living with it at f1.2?
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2006, 20:20
|
#5
|
|
fosterphotography.co.uk
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Brighton
Posts: 3,505
Thanks: 12
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
I'd presume the little girl was "living". Whats the point of this lens btw, good in low light because of the aperture?
Last edited by Pheonix; 22-03-2006 at 20:25.
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2006, 20:37
|
#6
|
|
XBL: Wolfgang Winkle
Join Date: May 2000
Location: ... of the dead
Posts: 10,124
Thanks: 102
Thanked 91 Times in 73 Posts
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pheonix
I'd presume the little girl was "living".
|
That maybe so, but he shot it at f3.2 ... 
We want uber-wide-open-focusing-trickery like radiohead went through when he got his poxy 85mm f1.4.
I'm guessing the first one would have come out something like this ...
Last edited by sideshowbob; 22-03-2006 at 21:04.
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2006, 20:40
|
#7
|
|
fosterphotography.co.uk
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Brighton
Posts: 3,505
Thanks: 12
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
So does having a big aperture increase the size of your manhoo
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2006, 20:44
|
#8
|
|
Turned out nice again.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Part of Europe
Posts: 24,158
Thanks: 1,521
Thanked 4,109 Times in 1,363 Posts
|
Yeah, what's the point of having f/1.2 if you don't use it.
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2006, 20:45
|
#9
|
|
Trusted User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Walking on water
Posts: 4,241
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pheonix
So does having a big aperture increase the size of your manhoo |
No, but because it's a prime, it has no 'zoo'.
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2006, 20:49
|
#10
|
|
fosterphotography.co.uk
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Brighton
Posts: 3,505
Thanks: 12
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
rofl. Hadn't noticed that
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2006, 22:08
|
#11
|
|
Marble Mad
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Warsaw
Posts: 3,428
Thanks: 14
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
BB Is this the new 85mm?
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2006, 22:14
|
#12
|
|
LARGE MEMBER.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Harrogate Yorkshire UK
Posts: 2,141
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brozyniak
BB Is this the new 85mm?
|
Its new but the Mk1 Brozyniak..
I was seriously wanting the MkII but really only wanted this lens for candid and portrait work so speed isnt an issue.
And I cannot imagine the latest Mk2 version can be any sharper than the Mk1's proven record..
|
|
|
|
|
23-03-2006, 09:23
|
#13
|
|
Marble Mad
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Warsaw
Posts: 3,428
Thanks: 14
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by busterboy
Its new but the Mk1 Brozyniak..
I was seriously wanting the MkII but really only wanted this lens for candid and portrait work so speed isnt an issue.
And I cannot imagine the latest Mk2 version can be any sharper than the Mk1's proven record.. |
Thought that you were camped at the top of the wanting list!
Still evidently a gorgeous lens Very jealous 
|
|
|
|
|
23-03-2006, 09:26
|
#14
|
|
Trusted User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Walking on water
Posts: 4,241
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
So how much did the 85 set you back man?
|
|
|
|
|
23-03-2006, 09:36
|
#15
|
|
Vanderlyle Crybaby Geek
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Button Moon
Posts: 24,884
Thanks: 37
Thanked 194 Times in 134 Posts
|
Lovely shots BB - is that Mrs BB?
Really like the first image - beautiful portrait.
|
|
|
|
|
23-03-2006, 12:15
|
#16
|
|
Trusted User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: close to the end of the Road to Hell
Posts: 3,474
Thanks: 23
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
|
that first image is excellent. so much detail.
is the detail level to do with the lens? or is it more the 1d or both?
Last edited by belly; 23-03-2006 at 12:15.
|
|
|
|
|
23-03-2006, 12:56
|
#17
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,067
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
is that your wife?
|
|
|
|
|
23-03-2006, 13:07
|
#18
|
|
Vanderlyle Crybaby Geek
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Button Moon
Posts: 24,884
Thanks: 37
Thanked 194 Times in 134 Posts
|
It is - we're going to do a swap.
Mrs R for Mrs B
|
|
|
|
|
23-03-2006, 13:15
|
#19
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,067
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
what? have i stumbled into www.wifeswapforums.co.uk instead of the photo branch of the dvd one?
|
|
|
|
|
23-03-2006, 13:42
|
#20
|
|
That Bloke
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Manchesterford, England.
Posts: 2,271
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Out of interest, how far away are the subjects (roughly) in the two shots?
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:41.
|
|
