Haven't shot many photos with Sonnar T* 3.5/100 C/Y, considering how much I like the rendering. I guess it's because having Makro-Planar T* 2/100 ZE almost always with me. However checked Aperture Library for some Sonnar photos.
Lens has really great bokeh, even wide open. Also all other aspects are very good already wide open, however I tend often prefer f/4 which helps with vignetting (and specially issues vignetting causes to bokeh) and causes small improvement to contrast. Worst in lens is magenta/green color errors in bokeh.
Agree, I may be a sucker for old cars including Volvo 142's but that 3.5 rendering is very attractive and 3D:ish in that first image. But I would doubt using it having a CY 100/2.
Very clever, Walrus. I'm not at all a fan of tilted pics, but this one had my scratching my head for at least two minutes. It works so well with the extra headroom to accentuate the "vertical" corrugation, and the complete lack of other cues - not even a plumb-line. Love the square, too.
That one's neat, would have loved to come across the location. I do believe it would have an even stronger visual impact if you ran it through, say, PS distortion correction. There's both perceptive distortion and some barrel distortion that is easily correctable.
rico wrote:
Very clever, Walrus. I'm not at all a fan of tilted pics, but this one had my scratching my head for at least two minutes. It works so well with the extra headroom to accentuate the "vertical" corrugation, and the complete lack of other cues - not even a plumb-line. Love the square, too.
Thanks rico. I am always happy to confuse you and suppose two minutes of viewing time is long for images posted in this forum.
Rodluvan wrote:
That one's neat, would have loved to come across the location. I do believe it would have an even stronger visual impact if you ran it through, say, PS distortion correction. There's both perceptive distortion and some barrel distortion that is easily correctable.
You are right. I am annoyed with myself for not getting it right on location and for being too lazy to apply the corrections before presenting the image to an audience.
I have just replaced the image by an improved version.
Bit different way than I shoot flowers usually, this time ended better than regular shot (due my inability to focus decently and underexposure). Contax 50/1.4 MM isnt exactly great near MFD, but still pretty decent. What isnt decent are Fuji S5 Pro colors. No matter what color profile I try, its always bit off (usually due red cast). That and exposure meter doesnt play nice with this lens (or is S5 set to "heavy underexpose" on default). At least it doesnt have much problems with noise..
Well, enough b*tching, time to get another camera.
Foto dude, you really have to experiment, a close look in the VF and instant review are your best friends (almost typed 'fiends', might be a better description).
Anyway, for variable blue skies the Pol will accentuate the effect, it can be artistic, sometimes very off-putting. More often the best use is to quell reflections and glare, if you have the 2 stops to spare. 35mm looks pretty normal as a starting point, but it is all case specific sadly. No golden rules..
Love the square, too.
