How often do U shoot af F1.4 and F1.8? 24mm and 85mm lenses

[rob_piontek]

<p>I think the responses would be more useful to you if you were to ask the question to people who's work you admire. Even better is to ask yourself... do you like your f2 shot or your f3.5? I know which one I like. Asking a room full of photographers you'll clearly get answers all over the map. And what do you do if most people shoot at f8? Shoot at f8 too?</p>

[vancouverphotographer]

<p>Well I guess the main reason for the f1.4 and f1.8 lenses is the option to use shallow DOF, a brighter viewfinder and better focussing, and better quality when stopped down to f2.8 than a f2.8 lens as mentioned above and those are the reasons why I own these lenses as well. I agree with the "too shallow" DOF some of mentioned above and I try to shoot at f2.8 and f4 more nowadays for portraits but I also shoot a lot of low light events and when I want to use a lower ISO, I will often shoot wide open with those fast lenses. But I am more apt to shoot wide open on my 30mm rather than my 85mm.</p>

[KenPapai]

<p>I love my 85 1.8 but rarely shoot it wider open than f/3.5</p>

[StuartMoxham]

<p>I shot this 50mm F1.8 at F2.5 and it has just about enough DOF. I do use F4 quite alot with a 28-75 f2.8.</p><div></div>

[Dave Luttmann]

<blockquote>

<p ><a name="00XcF9"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=1652793">Lilly W</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"></a>, Nov 04, 2010; 09:17 a.m.</p>

</blockquote>

 

<blockquote>

<p>There's a common misperception among amateurs shooting portraits that 1.4 lenses ought to be regularly shot wide open. That's OK for an artsy effect but pro-shooters will tell you otherwise. (Unlike pros, many amateurs have a fixation with 'wide open'.) Too little DOF may give the bizarre-looking effect of your key subject (e.g. face) floating in space/detached from the shoulders. Pros buy 1.4 lenses because they're performance is superlative at 2.8 and 4. The same cannot be said of a 2.8 lens. Shooting 'detail' wide open may be more appropriate to isolate your subject.<br>

That's a nice image of you've posted but I find a little more DOF would be pleasing as her left eye would then be sharper (e.g. at 2.5 or 2.8). Furhter experimentation will solidify the opinion that matters most - yours.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You should change that to "your opinion is...." as many pro shoot wide open. Take a look at some fo the PDN wedding winner and you'll see this to be true. Check out the work of some of the best out there, Jonathan Canlas, Jose Villa, Riccis Valaderes, Leah Mccormick, Tracy Tessmer, etc, etc, and you'' quickly see that they use 35mm and MF, wide open.</p>

<p>Many of us shoot wide open. And this pro won't tell you otherwise!</p>

 

[john_walsh7]

<p>I like my primes a few stops down from their largest opening. I shoot canon and with the exception of the 85mm they are all a little soft wide open. I suppose if I owned a noctilus ( spelling ) it would be different perhaps but I dont. If im really backed into a corner ill shoot at the full opening apperture but try to avoid it. </p>

[ty_mickan]

<p>John, you might have been referring to the Noctilux, however it is soft wide open. The Summilux is sharp as a tack wide open at f1.4.</p>

[john_walsh7]

<p>lol yes I was , see what gear lust does to you, i cant even pronounce her name :) I think it does depend a lot on the lens itself. Some professionals really dig for example the canon 50mm F1.4 prime which bests ( imho ) the 50 F1.2L when stopped down ..so many go for the 1.4 due to the price differential , including professionals .. but its generally accepted that the 1.4 consumer lens is mushy at 1.4 ( my experience is that it is ) , the 85mm F1.2L is in my experience sharp wide open so im more inclined to go there If i need it open and am happy to manage the dof one gets at that apperture. The OP in thread title doesnt specify which 24 and 85 primes. Im still working toward managing in the artistic sense DOF ,, i think " bokeh " can be abused a little in the beginning..sometimes a dreamy but discernable bokeh imho is appopriate and very pleasing. </p>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>The OP in thread title doesnt specify which 24 and 85 primes</p>

</blockquote>

<p>But does in the text:<br>

<em>“yesterday I was shoving some pictures to my friend and we spoke about the bokeh of <strong>24mm F1.4 II</strong> and <strong>85 F1.8</strong> - used for portraits, wedding and detail.”</em></p>

<p>WW<br>

<em> </em></p>

[vancouverphotographer]

<p>Hey while on the topic of fast primes, I had a Canon 85mm f1.8 for the longest time (since 2001 I think) but never shot with it much until these last two years and these last couple of years and been thru a couple Rebels and now just got a 60D. I never noticed what I see is maybe a backfocus or focus shift issue. For sure I saw it on the T2i but I don't recall offhand if I noticed it on the T1i body, haven't tried the lens out much on the 60D yet. I wonder if you guys that used this lens before noticed any focus issues ... I have had 2 of 3 friends routinely complain about not getting sharp pics from this lens - one's sold hers and the other does not use his much but when I see him use it, he seems to have similar incorrect focus to what I describe. I shoot at f2.8 and f4 with this lens a lot and for example I could be shooting a person not facing me straight on and I'd focus on the eye closest to me and the other eye would come out sharp instead. Maybe this problem was always there but maybe I was shooting from further out and not framing so tightly that I did not notice before. But just wondering you guy's experience with this lens. Thanks.</p>

[martindomok]

<p>My version is dead sharp...</p>

[john_walsh7]

<p>Sorry William I believe those to be Canon lenses but Im not certain hence the doubt..are canon the only show in town at those focal distances?</p>

[john_walsh7]

<p>oh boy do i feel thick. i just realised this is the canon forum. I think i found the topic on the front page and just went straight to it.</p>

[William Michael]

<p>:) Don't sweat it - you have the answer now.</p>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p><em>"But just wondering you guy's experience with this lens. Thanks."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p><em><strong>"My version is dead sharp..."</strong></em></p>

<p>Ditto.<br>

A larger version here: <a href="../photo/10963088&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/10963088&size=lg</a><br>

F&R; Centre Point AF on the far eye;<br>

EOS5D + EF 85./1.8 <br>

Shooting: F/1.8 @ 1/80s @ ISO400; Manual; AWB; Spot Meter; HH.</p>

<p>F/1.8 used at close SD is a very small DoF.<br>

F&R technique needs to be accurate, as does your hand need to be rock steady so as not to move the shooting position.<br>

In some circumstances, even one half inch movement by Photographer or Subject after Focus is achieved can result in error.<br>

Why not do a bench test with a rule and shoot from a tripod at 45 degrees to re assure yourself it is the lens / camera combination and not user error.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<div></div>

[model mayhem gallery]

<p>I shoot with Canon 85 1.2L but use it at F8 most of the time. I use a lot of studio strobe lighting and use light fall off to control DOF not aperture. I prefer my pictures very sharp not soft and burry so I like using tripods, small apertures and as high a shutter speed as will sync with strobes. However, when I am shooting video where I can't use strobes, the 1.2L and 1.8 lens on 5D2 rule.</p>

[Mark Keefer]

<p>Well I shot this with a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 but it was set at f/2 for this shot. Awesome Bokeh with this lens.<br /> Here's the small look,<br /> see bigger here to appreciate detail. http://www.photo.net/photo/9252332&size=lg</p><div></div>

[vancouverphotographer]

<p>MM and William, thanks.</p>