Upload & Sell: Off
| p.809 #16 · ZE/ZF/ZM Images (Official Thread!) |
bpark42, Nicola - thank you !!
Picture this - Very nice scene. Beautiful rows of flower neckless (?). They look similar to Hawaiian lei.
Nicola - Beautiful BW works. I am drawn to the last shot. Very nice texture giving history of the wall.
Regarding 35 2 vs 35 1.4.
They are both really good lenses. I still have both at the moment. I might, however, replace 35 2 with 25 2.8 at some point as 35/2 does not get used enough these days. Big difference is the DOF. Even at same aperture, say f2 or f4, 1.4 has shallower DOF compare to 35/2. The uniquely deep DOF of 35/2 might have also given the impression of similarity to 21/2.8. Also notable with 35/2 is its rendition of three dimensional objects, which tends to do very well in close to mid distance. In long distance, I always had a bit of trouble with 35/2 in long distance shot but It could be my focusing. Now, 35 1.4, is a great lens, with beautiful color and bokeh, but I find focusing to be much more challenging than 35/2 throughout. I figured out that there was a consistent relationship to focus indicator on my D700 and actual focused area, which tends to be closer than focus indicator 'thinks' it is in the range of 'focused' zone. Clearly, the focusing tolerance of Nikon AF lenses vs Distagon 35 1.4 are not on the same page. . When I don't have time, I tend to use the technique I described above, and shoot a few shots in the hope one of them would give me a proper focused image. When I have a little more time, I use Live View then shoot hand-hold like a point and shoot camera. This trick is OK with 12MP D700, however, I suspect it won't yield too much success with 36MP D800 as such shooting is more prone to shaking blur. One other thing about 35 1.4 is the haze at 1.4. It is rather strong, and makes Live View focusing challenging especially in high contrast scene. In lower contrast scene, haze seems to be reduced. One last thing on 1.4 is Longitudinal Chromatic Abberation. Lloyd Chambers talks about it on his site. High contrast oof area ( tree branch against white sky, for instance), you would notice purple fringing in the oof edge. This may bother some people. I personally do not get bothered by it that much for the kind of photos I tend to take. Once you increase DOF, this would mostly disappear.
Like I said both are superb lens, but 1.4 has the magical 1.4 look, 2 has the great three dimensional rendition in close distance. For what you are looking for, 1.4 might fits your style really well.