This is the first really compelling image that clearly separates the 58G from the rest of the pack that I have seen. The style is very Sam Hurd (which I love). Well done. Exactly how do you achieve such good focus on a 'selfie' with a lens such as this where focus is so critical?
Jason_Brook wrote:
Well, I think I found the sweet spot. After this photo and the following in the set, I have no problem justifying the price.
This is just spectacular. Well done. What was the approximate distance to subject here? How would you describe the performance of the 58G at various distances in terms of both sharpness and the quality of the bokeh and specular hightlights?
An image like this really pushes my understanding of the 58G. I am having a HUGE internal struggle with which lens to get: Sigma 50 Art vs 58G. Almost daily I go back and forth. I've waited years for a premium 50mm (ish) focus length lens. I loved the original Sigma 50 but focus was a nightmare. Now in 2014 we appear to have so much choice its impossible to make a decision.
While I am not a pixel peeper, I do crave a degree of sharpness in my subjects. The difference in sharpness between subject and background contributes to how we perceive an image in terms of both drawing our attention to the sharp subject versus as well as the overall three dimensional appearance of the image. It seems to me, please correct me if I'm wrong, that the 58G is 'sharp enough' to achieve this?
Thanks for this image. You'll treasure that one for years.
The 58/1.4G isn't as sharp as the Sigma's 50/1.4 Art... but when you stop down to f/2.8-4.5, it's sharp enough that unless you're pixel-peeping, it's not going to make that much of a difference.
It's about character and feeling.
But that 58 will beat the Sigma 50 in terms of OOF rendering, and do better when shooting at night. Those lights produce lovely little balls at night when using the 58/1.4.
deej2005 wrote:
This is the first really compelling image that clearly separates the 58G from the rest of the pack that I have seen. The style is very Sam Hurd (which I love). Well done. Exactly how do you achieve such good focus on a 'selfie' with a lens such as this where focus is so critical?
you didn't quote anything so which image are you talking about?
deej2005 wrote:
This is just spectacular. Well done. What was the approximate distance to subject here? How would you describe the performance of the 58G at various distances in terms of both sharpness and the quality of the bokeh and specular hightlights?
An image like this really pushes my understanding of the 58G. I am having a HUGE internal struggle with which lens to get: Sigma 50 Art vs 58G. Almost daily I go back and forth. I've waited years for a premium 50mm (ish) focus length lens. I loved the original Sigma 50 but focus was a nightmare. Now in 2014 we appear to have so much choice its impossible to make a decision.
While I am not a pixel peeper, I do crave a degree of sharpness in my subjects. The difference in sharpness between subject and background contributes to how we perceive an image in terms of both drawing our attention to the sharp subject versus as well as the overall three dimensional appearance of the image. It seems to me, please correct me if I'm wrong, that the 58G is 'sharp enough' to achieve this?
Thanks for this image. You'll treasure that one for years....Show more →
Distance to subject? Probably 20ft
The 58G is incredibly difficult to nail focus with when up close, on top of that, up close is when it is at its softest. With a little distance between lens and subject there is no sharpness problem, period. At distance it's just as sharp as any other 1.4 lens wide open.
Thanks guys. To answer the question on how I got critical focus... I had the camera setup on a tripod and i had a wireless remote trigger release setup. I know that these cameras have priority for finding eyes in the scene so I opened up my eyes as much as I could when I half pressed the shutter and once it locked focus I set my expression for the capture. Most of the time it worked, a few times it didnt lol. sometimes it would focus on my nose but i would say 90% of the time it grabbed my eyes or at least my eye lashes.
As far as Sam Hurd, I was going for a copy of his George Clooney portrait. I am just amazed at that guys work. He makes it look so simple but I know its not.
pmac1985 wrote:
i would expect this, as its the only selfie and looks similar to sam's work… just realised its yours
Here are a few from a wedding I got to 2nd shoot this past weekend. Cleared it with the main photo that it was ok to post these here but no where else.
I could not track with this lens on the DF. I can all day with the D4. I'd say 50% of my shots were OOF with the DF & 58. On the D4, out of 60, I missed 4 or 5.
Jason_Brook wrote:
So much damn fun using this on the D4. Just bang on everytime.
I could not track with this lens on the DF. I can all day with the D4. I'd say 50% of my shots were OOF with the DF & 58. On the D4, out of 60, I missed 4 or 5.
Plugging my ears!! Looking away!!
*whispering* I don't need a D4, I DONT NEED A D4!!
, you don't need a D4..... I guess in reality you don't. 16mp is really not a large enough sensor these days... But I guess if you don't print much it may be ok. 36.3 mp has spoiled me, I don't want to use anything lower.
I need to start using my 58mm more, I mostly prefer my 85mm f/1.4G
Todd wrote: , you don't need a D4..... I guess in reality you don't. 16mp is really not a large enough sensor these days... But I guess if you don't print much it may be ok. 36.3 mp has spoiled me, I don't want to use anything lower.
I need to start using my 58mm more, I mostly prefer my 85mm f/1.4G
T
Not to get too off-topic and I'm not trying to be a jerk, but saying 16MP isn't really enough if you don't print much is pretty ridiculous...
, you don't need a D4..... I guess in reality you don't. 16mp is really not a large enough sensor these days... But I guess if you don't print much it may be ok. 36.3 mp has spoiled me, I don't want to use anything lower. 
