When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I've learn to go with the lens for my needs, rather than the lens for what everyone is raving. I used to have the 135 F2 on my Canon. Very nice lens, but used it only for 3 shootings and quickly sold it. I now have a 16mm and 56mm on my Fuji and through all the trial and errors I made with owning different lenses, these focal lengths are all that I need for the stuff I shoot. I learned not to own expensive paper weights any more.
I've learn to go with the lens for my needs, rather than the lens for what everyone is raving. I used to have the 135 F2 on my Canon. Very nice lens, but used it only for 3 shootings and quickly sold it. I now have a 16mm and 56mm on my Fuji and through all the trial and errors I made with owning different lenses, these focal lengths are all that I need for the stuff I shoot. I learned not to own expensive paper weights any more.
Right, but everyone has different needs. I have a boat load of lenses and y'know what? I use them all (well, the current lenses anyways)
Right, but everyone has different needs. I have a boat load of lenses and y'know what? I use them all (well, the current lenses anyways)
I 100% agree with you because that was my point. If you have a bunch of lens and you actually use them, then in my personal opinion you're doing it right.
My original post is also in response for SamDoe1. If he's not using the 85 Batis more than he'd like, then I think he should trade it for a focal length that suits his needs rather than keeping it because it's so highly praised (by those that use it more).
I go with lenses for my needs as well, and each lens I own has its own "look" - when I want that "look" I get out that lens.
I must say though, I haven't been using the 200L 2.8 much at all. If I sold it, I wouldn't miss it. hmmm. That's the only lens that gives me that feeling, though.
Also the 135L has been on my wish-list forever - I need!
Also the 135L has been on my wish-list forever - I need!
That's a great focal length for portraits... But then again, a lot of the fashion stuff you've been doing lately are full body shots, you'd need the room to back up with that lens
That's a great focal length for portraits... But then again, a lot of the fashion stuff you've been doing lately are full body shots, you'd need the room to back up with that lens
well, that IMO is where that lens shines, when you back up for full shots - that's when that stellar bokeh shines through
the 135 is not hard to find and not that expensive compared to others. Just get a used one. If you don't like it, you'll be able to sell it and not lose that much... or rent it. borrow lenses is great for that. Renting it is not going to make you want it less though, that's for certain.
I like that animation. I disagree that there is a focal length that is "best" for something as broad as "portraits" though. Everything depends on what you are trying to say with a photo. A rectilinear wide angle or even a fish eye can be good for a portrait if you are trying to show some sort of personality trait that lends itself to that "look"
maybe you're talking more about a "headshot" which would definitely tend to look best at about that focal length.
check this out and you can see why 85mm is the "best" for portraits - I also use 100mm:
but doesn't compression also depends on the distance to the subject? So, suppose you're using the 20mm, but you're stand further back, would you still see it the same way? (like in this sample)
I've been wanting to get into portraits so maybe I'll hold onto it for a bit longer. I have no real reason to get the Batis 25 as the FE28 has never left me wanting more so I'm not sure I can justify spending triple price for no real benefit to me.
but doesn't compression also depends on the distance to the subject? So, suppose you're using the 20mm, but you're stand further back, would you still see it the same way? (like in this sample)
Well in this example it was to show all of the frames with similar subject size on the frame. It is true if you stepped back with a 20mm you would get a flatter image. And, that might work for you if you have enough megapixels, because you would have to crop to get the same frame.
I've been wanting to get into portraits so maybe I'll hold onto it for a bit longer. I have no real reason to get the Batis 25 as the FE28 has never left me wanting more so I'm not sure I can justify spending triple price for no real benefit to me.
Hmm...decisions, decisions.
What lenses do you currently have? Do you think that buying a new lens will make a huge difference in your photography?
I've been wanting to get into portraits so maybe I'll hold onto it for a bit longer. I have no real reason to get the Batis 25 as the FE28 has never left me wanting more so I'm not sure I can justify spending triple price for no real benefit to me.
Hmm...decisions, decisions.
That Batis 85mm is almost a no-brainer to get imo.
What lenses do you currently have? Do you think that buying a new lens will make a huge difference in your photography?
I have a FE 28, Zeiss 55, and Batis 85. I like to shoot wide so I was seriously thinking about getting a 16-35 but at this point, I'm leaning towards just getting a Roki 14...
Would it change my photography? Probably. It would allow for some more flexability.
Originally Posted by asianspec
That Batis 85mm is almost a no-brainer to get imo.
It's an awesome lens and I love the images it produces. I just need to get out there and start drumming up some business to get going. Downside is I have no idea how to do that (advice would be helpful) as I'm an engineer and not a sales guy.
If you're interested in getting something wide but not spending a fortune, I have a 17-40 that I wouldn't mind parting ways with. not as wide as the 14, but zoomier...
If you're interested in getting something wide but not spending a fortune, I have a 17-40 that I wouldn't mind parting ways with. not as wide as the 14, but zoomier...
I have that lens, bought it used from a local guy who takes care of his gear. I paid something like $520 CAD which was equivalent to around $380 USD (at the time), I'm using it with the Metabones adapter and couldn't be happier. For that much money saved (not buying the 16-35mm F4) I can live with the 1mm difference on the wide end but actually gain 5mm on the long end.
lose 1mm of wide angle, gain 5mm of length, but lose 1 stop of light collection. the 1 stop bothered me the most, but usually with a lens that wide, you're at f8 anyway.
lose 1mm of wide angle, gain 5mm of length, but lose 1 stop of light collection. the 1 stop bothered me the most, but usually with a lens that wide, you're at f8 anyway.
you got a smoking deal on that lens.
The Sony version is a f4, not a f2.8 like the Canon one so no loss of light.
The downside is that on top of the cost of buying the Canon lens (probably $450), I'd have to drop another $300 on an adapter which would bring me awfully close to the cost of the FE 16-35 anyway.
The Sony version is a f4, not a f2.8 like the Canon one so no loss of light.
The downside is that on top of the cost of buying the Canon lens (probably $450), I'd have to drop another $300 on an adapter which would bring me awfully close to the cost of the FE 16-35 anyway.
For me, I already had the Metabones adapter for the 17mm F4 L TS-E (Tilt/Shift), I wasn't suggesting you to buy it, I was just chiming in on the lens
For me, I already had the Metabones adapter for the 17mm F4 L TS-E (Tilt/Shift), I wasn't suggesting you to buy it, I was just chiming in on the lens
Thanks, appreciate the recommendation. I always wanted that lens when I shot Canon but never got around to buying it. Never heard anything but good things about the 17-40.
The Sony version is a f4, not a f2.8 like the Canon one so no loss of light.
The downside is that on top of the cost of buying the Canon lens (probably $450), I'd have to drop another $300 on an adapter which would bring me awfully close to the cost of the FE 16-35 anyway.
oh sorry, I don't know why I assumed you shot Canon! even with your list of non-canon lenses. lol.
I am actually toying with the idea of a tilt shift lens. seems cool for product photography and I want to take photos of my house and workplace as well. Just can't justify the expense yet. I'm sure I will eventually.
It's an awesome lens and I love the images it produces. I just need to get out there and start drumming up some business to get going. Downside is I have no idea how to do that (advice would be helpful) as I'm an engineer and not a sales guy.
Youtube is a good place to start or an even better way is to find a somebody who is in the business and work for them for free.
Found a 24mm pancake on CL. Met with him to pick it up and he says interested? "I also have a 10-18" been looking for a 10-18 or 10-22 for a while. Got lucky and got both lens.
Just got my Fuji 16-55 2.8 and 50-140 2.8 from the person I bought them from.
I am currently "borrowing" a XT-1 from Best Buy (they were out of of Xpro 2's) to test them out on and start getting used to the switch. So far...lots to learn. With all the film simulations etc. I see my shooting jpeg/RAW combo a lot. And also making a lot of custom preset configs. Sorts of things I never felt the need to do on my Nikon.
Yea same here. The only time I really need the RAW is when I need to fix the exposure. But other than that Fuji's JPEG comes out really good.
My only gripe about Fuji lens' so far is how easily the aperture ring moves. I would set it, stow the camera away, and when I take the camera out I would accidentally move the aperture ring to a different setting. I've made it a habit to check what F stop I'm at through the view finder now.
07-26-2016, 11:59 AM
hmmm. That's the only lens that gives me that feeling, though.
