Jason_Brook wrote:
I'm going to be shooting some salsa dancing stuff next week for an e-session.
I wasn't very well prepared. The light was really crappy and ISO easily went up to 24k even when SS was as low as 1/320. A lighting system is inevitable for such a venue.
hijazist wrote:
I wasn't very well prepared. The light was really crappy and ISO easily went up to 24k even when SS was as low as 1/320. A lighting system is inevitable for such a venue.
I see a lot of shots with the softness being across the whole frame. I know when its sharp somewhere else it was likely my fault and a back or front focus but I get a lot of shots that are just soft.
I find far away shots very tricky but maybe I am using the side AF points. I have the best success rate with midrange shots with the lens.
I might send it in to nikon and see if it helps. I really like the look I get with the lens so I really want to make it work.
Do you guys mostly use single point with this lens for people?
stevez32 wrote:
When you say soft shots are they misfocused or soft across the board? When focusing closely wide open it seems like this lens can be soft across the board, but there should always be a sharp plane if your focus point is beyond 10 feet or so. If it is mis-focusing not due to user error then you just have a bad lens and should send it in for repair. Shouldn't be something you should have to struggle with if you don't have problems with other 1.4 lenses.
---------------------------------------------
twistacatz wrote:
You have to AF tune it at 1.4 and then adjust to the odd field curvature of this lens. In my experience the closer you are to your subject the more you need to frame whatever your trying to focus on in the middle of the viewfinder. As you move away the sweet spot gets bigger and bigger.
For the most part it seems like a good deal of the pictures on this thread that were shot at 1.4 are from a good distance away and with the subject in the center of the frame.
mysh wrote:
I see a lot of shots with the softness being across the whole frame. I know when its sharp somewhere else it was likely my fault and a back or front focus but I get a lot of shots that are just soft.
I find far away shots very tricky but maybe I am using the side AF points. I have the best success rate with midrange shots with the lens.
I might send it in to nikon and see if it helps. I really like the look I get with the lens so I really want to make it work.
Do you guys mostly use single point with this lens for people?
Elijah wrote:
While some of you continue to bash this lens, here, I'll piss you off even more: Some more softies!!!
I agree they are soft. However, I assume that comment was your attempt at sarcasm. Is there anyone here who doesn't consider those shots soft? They look like what we were getting.
I will say that there are some photos in the thread that are acceptably sharp, which brings me back to my original comment that there seems to be a significant copy to copy variation with this lens.
Yes I did AF fine tune at +15 with a D810. I will try again and try a different method. I have seen the method that doesn't require shots and done with manual focusing. I have wanted to give it a try
stevez32 wrote:
You haven't said whether you already AF tuned the lens? Did it need any compensation in the body? Which body?
Vancouver47 wrote:
I agree they are soft. However, I assume that comment was your attempt at sarcasm. Is there anyone here who doesn't consider those shots soft? They look like what we were getting.
I will say that there are some photos in the thread that are acceptably sharp, which brings me back to my original comment that there seems to be a significant copy to copy variation with this lens.
I think the perceived softness from Elijah's shots are his post processing, not the lens.
Vancouver47 wrote:
I agree they are soft. However, I assume that comment was your attempt at sarcasm. Is there anyone here who doesn't consider those shots soft? They look like what we were getting.
I will say that there are some photos in the thread that are acceptably sharp, which brings me back to my original comment that there seems to be a significant copy to copy variation with this lens.
---------------------------------------------
Jason_Brook wrote:
I think the perceived softness from Elijah's shots are his post processing, not the lens.
Seriously, what are you guys smoking? How many times do I have to tell everyone that the shots I post on here are RESIZED!!! See for yourself! Here's an example, I'm editing this wedding at the moment. Full size: https://www.flickr.com/photos/iluxa/18319346940/sizes/o/
I have a 5K imac, the resolution and sharpness is amazing. Am I missing something?! Maybe your low res monitors are showing something else? ....or?
Crap, I think i'm so used to this lens and it's rendition that I don't even pay attention to sharpness anymore Maybe I ought to get an 85mm f/1.4G and see what sharpness really is...
See, that one appears "sharper". It's not the lens, it's your processing...almost like the midrange contrast is really low. I wouldn't worry about it at all dude; it's your style, no one can say that's wrong or bad.
Vancouver47 wrote:
One of my Otus photos was used by Ziess at their recent Photokina booth display series. Another six are displayed on their Otus web sites. Obviously all accidents.
I'm here by an accidental search and responded to a misguided comment about manual focus but couldn't resist responding to a 58 comparison. Our experience with the 58 was less than satisfactory. It's a soft, but less schizophrenic version of the Canon 50L. Both have their following among those who look at bokeh first and consider anything at the centre of the bokeh fringe to be sharp. By comparison it is, but.....
Vancouver47 wrote:
I agree they are soft. However, I assume that comment was your attempt at sarcasm. Is there anyone here who doesn't consider those shots soft? They look like what we were getting.
I will say that there are some photos in the thread that are acceptably sharp, which brings me back to my original comment that there seems to be a significant copy to copy variation with this lens.
I often come here to admire the photos produced by this lens (though not for a while)..I really don't get this 58G bashing, sample variation or not. It's not as if they're shooting your wedding or event with it, or using your money to buy it. Never understood fanboys or people who are so keen on shoving their opinions down everyone else's throats.
The Otus is brilliant, the weight isn't my thing. The Sigma Art is sharp, but bokeh isn't my cup of tea. The Leica 50 Noctilux isn't as sharp as the Otus when shot wide open (though 0.95 vs 1.4), and it's 3x more expensive. So what? A lovely lens for the people who appreciate it.
Maybe I ought to get an 85mm f/1.4G and see what sharpness really is... 
