Alright guys. Somebody sell me this thing. I’m looking through my archives, and a lot of my favorite photos are from this very lens. I’m going to try adapting it to Sony.
So please if you’re not using yours as much shoot me a PM
Can I expect the 58 to approach the 105 for sharpness wide open? Its sharp but noticeable not as sharp as the 105. Fiddle more with the AF fine tune? Resign myself to stopping down? Consider mirrorless for better AF with this lens?
my 12 year old in her mom's wedding dress, I've done this once a year since she was 4.
Can I expect the 58 to approach the 105 for sharpness wide open? Its sharp but noticeable not as sharp as the 105. Fiddle more with the AF fine tune? Resign myself to stopping down? Consider mirrorless for better AF with this lens?
my 12 year old in her mom's wedding dress, I've done this once a year since she was 4.
Nice photo. I have them both as well and have never considered the 58 to be near as sharp wide open. I think that topic is well documented over time.
I love using the 58 when I can give it bit of space and the 105 for tighter portraits.
If I need sharp wide open at the 50 range I reach for the Sigma 50 Art but it is a different lens than the 58. I still prefer the 58.
Spectro wrote:
Nice photo. I have them both as well and have never considered the 58 to be near as sharp wide open. I think that topic is well documented over time.
I love using the 58 when I can give it bit of space and the 105 for tighter portraits.
If I need sharp wide open at the 50 range I reach for the Sigma 50 Art but it is a different lens than the 58. I still prefer the 58.
I prefer the longer focal length over 50mm and I can immediately tell I like the rendering better than everything but the 105. I just wish I could get it sharper wide open. Maybe i should pixel peep less and just enjoy it.
As stated previously, the 58 is not famous for it's wide open sharpnes, but I think it really shines around f./2-2.2 or there abouts. It sharpens up nicely and shows that lovely rendering.
Can I expect the 58 to approach the 105 for sharpness wide open? Its sharp but noticeable not as sharp as the 105. Fiddle more with the AF fine tune? Resign myself to stopping down? Consider mirrorless for better AF with this lens?
my 12 year old in her mom's wedding dress, I've done this once a year since she was 4.
Lovely shot and great ritual. My 58 definitely gain better focus accuracy with z6 over D810. Still, at 1.4, depending on the light condition, veiling flare can give image soft when viewed at 100% especially at close distance. Use of additional light, such as flash giving more contrast does seem to help.
By the way, it was a bit uncanny to see your shot from a year ago on 28E thread and then came to this thread and see this year’s on this thread. For a moment I thought my browser glitched.
akul wrote:
By the way, it was a bit uncanny to see your shot from a year ago on 28E thread and then came to this thread and see this year’s on this thread. For a moment I thought my browser glitched.
Luka
I traded that 28e for the 58 straight up. The 28 was collecting dust, I never used it and never got comfortable with the focal length.
I love the 28e. With the 58 and 105 I have lenses I will never sell regardless of camera format. To me, the 28e in 1.2 crop mode becomes a close approximation of 35 1.4.
gear-nut wrote:
Careful what you assert -- live long enough like me you will likely change your mind a few times
Haha. I’m a retired youngster myself and will no doubt make changes in general. However I began putting my photo revenue towards exceptional glass a few years ago and these three along with the 70-200e will be mainstays for a long time. The primes will be for personal use 90% of the time so no need/urge to switch.
Vcook wrote:
I traded that 28e for the 58 straight up. The 28 was collecting dust, I never used it and never got comfortable with the focal length.
---------------------------------------------
Spectro wrote:
I love the 28e. With the 58 and 105 I have lenses I will never sell regardless of camera format. To me, the 28e in 1.2 crop mode becomes a close approximation of 35 1.4.
AT one point in 2017, @DJ R and I had a trio of 28E, 58G and 105E and While it was a great setup, the 28E was a bit too wide for my taste as a normal wide lens.
I then traded it for a 35G and shot with it for two more years until I switched to Canon.
Now I just roll real simple... 35 and 85 for 95% of my work, both R mount.
Spectro wrote:
Haha. I’m a retired youngster myself and will no doubt make changes in general. However I began putting my photo revenue towards exceptional glass a few years ago and these three along with the 70-200e will be mainstays for a long time. The primes will be for personal use 90% of the time so no need/urge to switch.
I have bought and sold my forever stuff at least twice. I mean...if you don't sell it you won't know you miss it so you if you buy it back it is a forever thing, right? Or maybe you just need to sell and buy a 3rd time just to be sure...
AT one point in 2017, @DJ R@ and I had a trio of 28E, 58G and 105E and While it was a great setup, the 28E was a bit too wide for my taste as a normal wide lens.
I then traded it for a 35G and shot with it for two more years until I switched to Canon.
Now I just roll real simple... 35 and 85 for 95% of my work, both R mount.
Makes sense to me for what you photograph. Being primarily a sport shooter I use mainly the 70-200 and larger for my work and these primes make a wonderful diversion for my personal photography, mainly of people. Therefore I’m able to be a bit more flexible with focal length choice, etc. All of these prime focal lengths are covered by amazing lenses from most of the manufacturers now so I don’t really think there is a bad answer here.
! 
So funny you made my day !
