charles.K wrote:
Superb series !!! What f stop were you using as the exiff is not intact? Thanks
Thank you Charles! Unfortunately I don't have a buy sell membership and am not able to upload with exif.
In order, the f-stops were: 1.4, 1.4, 2.0, 1.8, 1.4, 1.6.
I usually try to shoot at slightly above wide open, unless aiming for maximum background creaminess, because I find that the sharpness/bokeh trade-off of the 58 to be perfect around 1.6-2.0.
milkod2001 wrote:
That's very good set. If you don't mind me asking, how is this done? /what is a process? Do you set exposure for background first and then just add external flash and play with flash settings? I always end up with way too dark background and you have it just right. Wonder what's the trick
My process is like you described, exposing for the background first without flash and then adding flash gradually until I feel the balance is right. For night shots, strobe power does not go low enough to allow for proper background exposure while not blowing out the subject. Instead, I use the LED modeling light on my Godox XPLOR 600 instead of the flash and am then able to crank ISO higher to lighten the background while keeping my subject properly lit.
The first two and last two in the series were shot this way. The camera setting for the first photo is ISO 1000, f/1.4, @ 1/125.
sheldy wrote:
Thank you Charles! Unfortunately I don't have a buy sell membership and am not able to upload with exif.
In order, the f-stops were: 1.4, 1.4, 2.0, 1.8, 1.4, 1.6.
I usually try to shoot at slightly above wide open, unless aiming for maximum background creaminess, because I find that the sharpness/bokeh trade-off of the 58 to be perfect around 1.6-2.0.
My process is like you described, exposing for the background first without flash and then adding flash gradually until I feel the balance is right. For night shots, strobe power does not go low enough to allow for proper background exposure while not blowing out the subject. Instead, I use the LED modeling light on my Godox XPLOR 600 instead of the flash and am then able to crank ISO higher to lighten the background while keeping my subject properly lit.
The first two and last two in the series were shot this way. The camera setting for the first photo is ISO 1000, f/1.4, @ 1/125. ...Show more →
Thank you very much These are similar f stops I use also between 1.6 to 2.2
Another thing people don't talk about enough is how BEAUTIFULLY this lens renders backlight. This is one of the only nano coated lenses I have in my collection and I can really see the difference in how it holds warmth, saturation, and contrast, even where there is a large amount of flare or direct sun in frame; this is especially noticeable compared to my 85mm f1.8g, which renders quite cool and quickly loses contrast and colour when there's any amount of flare.
charles.K wrote:
Thank you very much These are similar f stops I use also between 1.6 to 2.2
That's definitely the sweet spot at close up to medium portrait distances! When shooting from further away, the 58 is actually quite sharp even wide open.
Many thanks Charles! Your contributions throughout this entire thread, especially the close up portraits, helped me to decide to buy this lens. Best decision ever
I used to have the 58mm and used it for a wedding and for some random shots before it was stolen. I have not replaced it yet, probably will not because it is not sharp wide open. Many of you will argue that point, but I’ve reviewed my d810 files from it and it is soft for me.
These are nice portraits, quite bright, but good. The posing is really good, the girl is beautiful, that helps, but I’d like to see more detail in the sky instead of a blown out sky, that is where my eye goes first.
I now have the Zeiss Milvus 1.4/50 which I think renders better than the 58mm and is much sharper. I think the 58mm is overpriced for what you are getting, but to each their own. I really debated heavily on buying another one, I tested it out again and again on my d850 from the local camera store, but that Zeiss Milvus 50mm was much more desirable and I’m glad I went with it... Yeah it’s manual focus, but that Zeiss glass is amazing...
J.Marcus Photo wrote:
Have you tried it in the field ?
By Field, do you mean on location outdoors or location in general?
I don't shoot much with the 58 as it is difficult or next to impossible to recuperate sharpness.
With the 200/105/50A/24, the files are more flexible as the sharpness is present and can be softened while the reverse is not true.
The 58 is more of an Arty drawing lens which is great if the shoot requires Arty style.
Almass wrote:
By Field, do you mean on location outdoors or location in general?
I don't shoot much with the 58 as it is difficult or next to impossible to recuperate sharpness.
With the 200/105/50A/24, the files are more flexible as the sharpness is present and can be softened while the reverse is not true.
The 58 is more of an Arty drawing lens which is great if the shoot requires Arty style.
Or just stop down it a little, say f1.6~f2.2, Maybe? It will give a little more DOF and sharpness at the same time keep the rendering.
Almass I love your style and images n the Nikon threads. With the utmost respect I suspect your shots maybe not in focus with the 58G and is causing you grief. This lens can difficult as it can have a focus shift. As Michael suggested just stopping the lens to f/1.8 or 2.2 will change the look and rendering to a sharp feel. If not you may have a soft copy of the lens.
I agree I also have the 105E and 50/24 Art which are superb for sharpness.
I read night and day on the 58mm for over a month before I purchased it. I got mine about 5 weeks ago, shot with it a while, and ended up returning it. Not SO much over the softness, as much as I needed to put that incredible sum of money toward a different lens. If I was "wealthy" I am pretty sure I would have kept it - and just kept working at perfecting the needed technique. It was a mixed bag for me, I would get some soft, and some sharp, so at least I knew it wasn't the lens, it was "capable" of sharpness. However, as many on here have said, it takes work and or practice. Yes, I can see and very much appreciated the "character" of the lens; I understood its "special rendering" and all that good stuff. In the end I felt (for me) I needed something a little less niche, for now. I am looking forward to Nikon releasing a newer 50mm f/1.4E that "may" be sharper and better over all. I would actually prefer the 58mm focal length, but might go for the 50 when a replacement to the G comes out... although I understand that could be 2018 or 2028. I purchased the new 28mm f/1.4E about a month prior to the 58, so I was feeling that a little in the pocketbook, as well. Side-note, I couldn't be happier with the 28 - amazing lens. Happy holidays.
zhangyue wrote:
Or just stop down it a little, say f1.6~f2.2, Maybe? It will give a little more DOF and sharpness at the same time keep the rendering.
---------------------------------------------
charles.K wrote:
Almass I love your style and images n the Nikon threads. With the utmost respect I suspect your shots maybe not in focus with the 58G and is causing you grief. This lens can difficult as it can have a focus shift. As Michael suggested just stopping the lens to f/1.8 or 2.2 will change the look and rendering to a sharp feel. If not you may have a soft copy of the lens.
I agree I also have the 105E and 50/24 Art which are superb for sharpness.
Yes, I guess you are both right. The issue is I do not have time to finesse my shooting with the 58. I am shooting practically 5 days a week and you always gravitate towards the gear which is most reliable in terms of results.
Yes, I guess you are both right. The issue is I do not have time to finesse my shooting with the 58. I am shooting practically 5 days a week and you always gravitate towards the gear which is most reliable in terms of results.
Almass I agree. Sometimes you just need a work horse of a lens like the 50 Art
