frosty1987 wrote:
Thanks! And I actually did it even worse. I actually didn't know how to post from flickr so I hit view page source for each one photo and scrolled through the code until I found something with a .jpg extension .
Let me see if I can re-edit the original post with the proper links.
EDIT: I just re-linked the photos in the original photos to Flickr.
yea that worked much better and you could even go to the next size up next time for the pictures. but thats the easier way of doing it and it has the IMG tags for you already.
Elijah -- What is that adapter you are using to connect the light with the modifier to the light stand without using the mount on the light itself? Is that truly sturdy enough to hold the B1 with a large modifier?
cambyses wrote:
Elijah -- What is that adapter you are using to connect the light with the modifier to the light stand without using the mount on the light itself? Is that truly sturdy enough to hold the B1 with a large modifier?
It makes a huge difference between mounting the octal on the B1 and SBA!
I bought the SBA and the octa together because I assumed that I'd need it in the future, in case it will be too heavy for my octa... And I'm glad I did.
I tried mounting the octa on the B1 itself and it was quite a significant sag. The SBA was a great investment.
And no, the B1 is not too heavy to be mounted on a speeding by itself.
4mpx wrote:
Elijah, I really love your wedding series above. I'll have to shoot a whole wedding for one of my cousins next September, as an official photographer. I've been looking for this 58mm (a second hand copy) for many months and today saw an ad of one for AUD 1350 (about USD 990). I'm still thinking...
You should get it without even thinking.
I've said this a ton of times, the 58G is my favorite lens for wedding since 2014.
It's a "normal" lens that acts like a mini 85mm for portraits, has a phenomenal booked, versatile, can be used pretty much everywhere.
Wow. You didn't exaggerate when you wrote this lens has a learning curve. And when you wrote "you're gonna hate it at first". Well, I wouldn't say I hate it, but this one really doesn't like testing charts. Shooting cereal boxes doesn't help, either - I can't get rid of that haze at f/1.4. Funny thing, though - from 1.8 onward, no haze, sharpness all over. The haze can easily be removed using a high pass filter though, so maybe I could live with it... still I wonder if there are copies that are sharper at f/1.4.
I also noticed there seems to be a "sweet zone" for shooting at f/1.4, it's the first lens I encountered that actually gets better at 1.4 in the distance. This will need a lot of experimenting over the next months...
I'll show you in the next post, just for discussion (and I hope not as fodder for the 58G haters... ).
But first let me talk about the CHARACTER. It's amazing - when you take the same shot at f/1.8 and then at f/1.4, it's like hitting the "character" button. The photos at f/1.4 just have a special look, hard to describe.
But enough text. No portraits yet, I'm sorry - I only got out late afternoon today to do some quick nature and landscape shots, but at least they're all at f/1.4, as requested by the thread rules! (The idea of shooting landscapes at f/1.4 never crossed my mind before, but this lens seems to ask for it.) The weather was so-so, overcast but I think the light was not too bad.
So far for the good and bad, now for the ugly... or maybe not. Here are some comparisons, 100% crops from the OOC shots (converted from NEF with View NX).
Sorry to ask - but is the amount of "lesser sharpness" or haze (especially visible in the dandelion shot) within spec for this lens? Or do you own sharper copies?
Bohemien wrote:
Sorry to ask - but is the amount of "lesser sharpness" or haze (especially visible in the dandelion shot) within spec for this lens? Or do you own sharper copies?
Thanks!
Everything I've seen and read indicate that it's close to being great. The quality of the images can be special but yes, it's has some issues and is typically butter at 1.4. I'm testing it for the second time (this round on Dx which makes it a f2.1 lens and the results are better).
A version II would be most welcome by me as I think I prefer Fx and this lens holds a lot of potential IMO
Bohemien wrote:
So far for the good and bad, now for the ugly... or maybe not. Here are some comparisons, 100% crops from the OOC shots (converted from NEF with View NX).
Sorry to ask - but is the amount of "lesser sharpness" or haze (especially visible in the dandelion shot) within spec for this lens? Or do you own sharper copies?
Thanks!
What you are seeing at F1.4 is more a loss in contrast than a loss of sharpness. Set your white an black levels & boost contrast slightly to match the F2.8/higher f-stops and you will see the sharpness really isn't all that different at F1.4.
I was just heading to bed when I replied but here I did a slight correction to the overall tones with a paint brush in lightroom to correct the contrast. No sharpening done on the f1.4 crop.
The odd thing about Nikon is they tout the 58mm F1.4 as being high contrast wide open. I disagree and totally blame this loss of contrast/haze to be 99% of the reason that people think this lens isn't sharp at MFD. Thankfully it is something that you can easily correct for.
Hardcore wrote:
The odd thing about Nikon is they tout the 58mm F1.4 as being high contrast wide open. I disagree and totally blame this loss of contrast/haze to be 99% of the reason that people think this lens isn't sharp at MFD. Thankfully it is something that you can easily correct for.
Thanks Corey, very interesting! I hope you're well over there in Canada, saw the fire in the news this week, really bad.
I did some more comparisons today (went to a local shop and tried their copy) and decided to keep my 58G as it seems to be completely in spec. I'll post my findings here for people who are in the same situation I was in, searching the web for help making the decision whether to buy this wonderful lens or not. And then I'll just go out and shoot!
There has been a lot of discussion about whether this lens is sharp or not. I'm writing this post to help people like me, who have maybe read all 196 pages of this thread, gazed at the amazing photography displayed here, lusted over the beautiful swirly, creamy bokeh and amazing rendering of this lens and asked themselves "but will it also be SHARP?". When I got my 58G in the mail 2 days ago, I didn't expect it to be "clinically" sharp at f/1.4, the question I asked myself was "will it be sharp enough for ME?".
It has been said before that this lens seems to be worse near MFD and better over a distance, and I can underline that. My intention here is to show what this lens can do and where it's weaknesses are regarding sharpness, and how to deal with it.
But let me state my conclusion first:
1. This is not the ideal lens for shooting flat panels of text. If you want to do that, use another tool. (Although stopped down it doesn't work too bad with the 58G, either.)
2. For amazing rendering where sharpness is not your main concern, use f/1.4, at all subject distances. If the shot is not sharp enough for your intended use (e.g. printing large posters), sharpen in post. (For example, my landscapes above were all shot at f/1.4!)
3. If sharpness is your main concern, stopping down to f/1.8 already sharpens up the picture a lot, still giving you very beautiful bokeh.
4. Don't worry about sharpness so much - get this lens, go out and shoot, be amazed!
5. Never leave the house without your Camera+58G!
6. One last tip - get a 2-stop ND filter for shooting wide open in the sun!
Now for the comparisons (all shots that are not marked as "sharpened" are SOOC, from my D600):
1. Front of a local winery, shot from approx. 200m away (!!). See how easy it is to sharpen the f/1.4 shot!
2. A house front, shot from approx 100m away (!). Slightly sharper at f/2, but negligible. The spots are rain!
3. Sign in a parking garage (German for "Exit"), approx. 5m away. Note this is at ISO 800, so there's a bit of noise.
4. A colleague's pretty eyes at f/1.4 from 1.5m away. The crop shown is maybe 1% of the total image size!
OK, one more post then I'm done mulling over sharpness, I promise!
I hope I don't bore you with these "technical" posts, and that some might find them useful.
Last comparison, only nice photos from here on! And sorry for posting large photos, but I wanted to provide 100% crops for those who are interested.
To check how the 58G performed at MFD and to put its performance in context, I shot a box with the 58G and 24G, both at their MFDs. Due to different MFDs (you can get much closer with the 24G), the shot from the 24G is larger, of course, so I downsized it just a bit for convenience.
Draw your own conclusions - I think the 58G is not much worse than the stellar 24G wide open. (And it's bokeh is much more beautiful here, although the 24G's in general is very creamy, too!)
And now, happy shooting and have a nice weekend everyone! And keep posting those amazing portraits and other photos!
1. Medicine Box with 58G. Focus is on the number 10
2. Medicine Box with 24G. Focus is on the number 10
mp0363 wrote:
Everything I've seen and read indicate that it's close to being great.
A version II would be most welcome by me as I think I prefer Fx and this lens holds a lot of potential IMO
Thanks, that's helpful! Although it's really not bad on FX, see above. And I personally think the vignetting at f/1.4 adds to the overall rendering (and can easily be corrected in post), if that was your concern on FX.
But please, no version II - I just bought version I!
I actually like to use its behaviour at MFD for some dreamy look in abstracts. (and some negative clarity in C1Pro added) Soft Fluff by micke vmix, on Flickr
.
).
(The idea of shooting landscapes at f/1.4 never crossed my mind before, but this lens seems to ask for it.) The weather was so-so, overcast but I think the light was not too bad.
or haze (especially visible in the dandelion shot) within spec for this lens? Or do you own sharper copies?
Post some portraits for a change of topic, please! 
