Wayne Stroud Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
Had the 85 1.8, 70-200 2.8 L and then the 50mm 1.2, but nothing really approximates the image quality of this glass. But beware. It's much harder to score a high hit rate with this because there's so much glass moving about that any quickly moving subject (like children or action photography) and you're going to struggle on AF. At 1.2, no-one I've handed my camera to can get a decent shot with this. At 2.0 and above, sure, but you want this for the 1.2 right? I've learned to accept that this lens is harder to use than my other favourites, but when I score, I score big. It produces the best results, no question, but you have to earn it. OK, I'm making sound like it's near impossible, it's not. Just not as straightforward as using the pretty quick 85 1.8. Autofocus is slower than you'd like, but to be expected with this much heavy glass being shifted back and forth. Also, if you're suing this wide open in anything like strong natural light and you want your creamy bokeh, then you'll need a good ND filter at at least 4. Suggest ND 8 with this in strong light. And get a good copy and not cheap. What's the point of putting cheap glass over the end of this classic? So, apart from the acceptable sluggishness: flawless
Posted a recent shoot here - all at 85mm 1.2/1.8.
http://homepage.mac.com/wmstroud/noah
Edited by Fred Miranda on Feb 12, 2008 at 09:35 PM GMT
Edited on Feb 12, 2008 at 09:35 PM
|