Interestingly, I see I'm not the only one who doesn't usually correct the vignette on the 58. I let Lightroom do its thing with distortion via the lens profile, but leave the vignette correction at zero.
Interestingly, I see I'm not the only one who doesn't usually correct the vignette on the 58. I let Lightroom do its thing with distortion via the lens profile, but leave the vignette correction at zero.
Ah, that 3D look... Love it.
Same here, I think the rather strong vignetting at f/1.4 adds to the overall character. I switch on the lens profile correction and then dial down the de-vignetting. I also bought a ND4 filter to be able to shoot at f/1.4 under all circumstances.
Interestingly, I see I'm not the only one who doesn't usually correct the vignette on the 58. I let Lightroom do its thing with distortion via the lens profile, but leave the vignette correction at zero.
My default setting in lightroom is to add vignette to every shot. I also don't use any of the lens corrections, including distortion.
I usually don't make any lens corrections either because I feel like it takes away from the lens character. I do it more often if I'm shooting landscapes with the 58
Elijah wrote:
You're not the first one, you won't be the last either
Here is a question, I almost have enough saved to buy the 58mm 1.4. If I sell my 85mm 1.8G I can move on it now. Does anybody continue to use the 85mm 1.8G once the 58 is acquired?
On the other hand the 85 1.8G doesn't cost very much and is probably worth keeping around just in case.
InlawBiker wrote:
Here is a question, I almost have enough saved to buy the 58mm 1.4. If I sell my 85mm 1.8G I can move on it now. Does anybody continue to use the 85mm 1.8G once the 58 is acquired?
On the other hand the 85 1.8G doesn't cost very much and is probably worth keeping around just in case.
I bought and sold the 85G five times, if not more.
I used the 85mm for ceremonies, and moving subjects at weddings because the 85 1.8G has faster and more acurate AF, whereas 58G is a hit or miss, which is why I hate it sometimes.
Now that I got a 24-70G, I no longer need the 85G. So in my opinion, depending what you shoot, I would definitely keep the 85.
I was in the same dilemma and I kept the 85mm because it's and awesome lens and it's amazing for tight cropped portraits. I even kept it after I got the 70-200mm 2.8
Yup, the 85 does shallow DoF like no 2.8 lens ever can. I have a 70-200 too, but the 24-70 2.8 leaves me cold. I'd rather have a fast prime in that range any day.
Went to the old railroad depot in Dennison Ohio with my 3 year old. He loves trains. Snapped some shots of him on the trains with the 58. Just something about this lens.
200mm f2 just too much glass and not enough variety? I have been thinking about saving up for a fast 200, 300, or 400 but i don't think that I can justify the price at this point in my life. I'm kinda of glad i don't have one because i think I would be deciding if i should sell it about every other day haha. Honestly though, your portraits are pretty amazing in that 200mm forum. Great work!
branana19 wrote:
200mm f2 just too much glass and not enough variety? I have been thinking about saving up for a fast 200, 300, or 400 but i don't think that I can justify the price at this point in my life. I'm kinda of glad i don't have one because i think I would be deciding if i should sell it about every other day haha. Honestly though, your portraits are pretty amazing in that 200mm forum. Great work!
Thanks! The 200 is amazing for everything BUT ceremonies and receptions lol I find myself always switching from 85mm to 200mm back and fourth.
I desperately need the 70-200 back.. But we'll see, maybe the 24-70 + 200 for ceremonies + receptions will do the trick.
