Trying some new processing. I've been really liking the cinematic / matte look. Happened to get a nice foggy fall morning today, which made for some perfect subject material.
AGeoJO wrote:
Here are 2 images from the same session and captured under similar conditions using two different lens on two different cameras. The idea was to compare the Sony 135mm f/1.8 to the Sony GM 70-200mm f/2.8. Quite informal comparison as I didn't bother to do that at the same aperture, for example both at f2.8, but both at their respective wide open to get the feel of what each lens can do at f/18 and f/2.8, respectively..
I kicked my self for not realizing that one of them was set at 1/1000sec as the minimum shutter speed, and that's was the body where the GM lens was mounted on. That's why the resulting ISO for the GM lens was a tad too high. Oh, well. BTW, I made am effort to process the images that they look similar in color rendition, contrast, etc. ...Show more →
Wow. That Sony 135 comes highly recommended as one of THE best portrait lenses out there. You can see why here. Absolutely nails it. Gorgeous shot Joshua.
Frogfish wrote:
Wow. That Sony 135 comes highly recommended as one of THE best portrait lenses out there. You can see why here. Absolutely nails it. Gorgeous shot Joshua.
Thank you very much, Kevin! You are very kind...
Yup, I love the rendition coming off that 135mm lens better than that off the GM lens. The GM is sharp though but still it cannot match that of the Sony 135mm for portraits. To be fair however, the GM is an f/2.8 lens while the other is an f/1.8. But the comparison was more to show what both can pull off at their respective wide open aperture. Plus, functionally, the 135mm is less convenient to use....due to the lack of Eye-AF capability. Oh, well. I considered selling the 135mm lens a few times but each time that comes across my mind, I take it out and use it. After seeing the results, I change my mind each time .
AGeoJO wrote:
Thank you very much, Kevin! You are very kind...
Yup, I love the rendition coming off that 135mm lens better than that off the GM lens. The GM is sharp though but still it cannot match that of the Sony 135mm for portraits. To be fair however, the GM is an f/2.8 lens while the other is an f/1.8. But the comparison was more to show what both can pull off at their respective wide open aperture. Plus, functionally, the 135mm is less convenient to use....due to the lack of Eye-AF capability. Oh, well. I considered selling the 135mm lens a few times but each time that comes across my mind, I take it out and use it. After seeing the results, I change my mind each time ....Show more →
+1, don't sale it. I have that mistake awhile back by keeping the canon 135 instead of Sony one. Awesome shots like usual, Joshua.
I'm sure I'm in a minority, but I think I like the GM better. The 135 almost looks fake the way it's blured but with faint outlines on the OOF areas. It's amazing, but it's almost too much.
Mathieu18 wrote:
I'm sure I'm in a minority, but I think I like the GM better. The 135 almost looks fake the way it's blured but with faint outlines on the OOF areas. It's amazing, but it's almost too much.
I see what you mean about the blur with the 135, but the fact that it isn't fake, makes it more impressive to me...this is just pure optical wizardry. Personally, though both look very good, I prefer the lower contrast of the 135 and the amazing bokeh. Having said this, I would really like to see a 135/2.8 comparison with both when Joshua has a chance.
BTW, beautiful images Joshua and by others on the above page...HelenaN, Bluloo, Frogfish, and you, Mathieu18!
alba63 wrote:
That is one stunning shot - Great great capture...
May I ask how you process it? I mean was it a default color profile in LR or some special sauce? Looks really great also color wise, just as the first one with the 3 cars...
Thank you kindly.
No color profiles. But the start is a good overcast sky and I think Contax colors count. After initial global adjustments in ACR I use PS add global and local contrast while masking unwanted areas (here: the background). Darken and lighten selectively. I prefer doing it with masks too though dodge/burn can be a more precise but time consuming alternative. Reiterate according to taste - or as I prefer to see it, closer to what your eyes caught compared to SOOC... hope it helps.
No color profiles. But the start is a good overcast sky and I think Contax colors count. After initial global adjustments in ACR I use PS add global and local contrast while masking unwanted areas (here: the background). Darken and lighten selectively. I prefer doing it with masks too though dodge/burn can be a more precise but time consuming alternative. Reiterate according to taste - or as I prefer to see it, closer to what your eyes caught compared to SOOC... hope it helps.
Thank you for sharing this. Your pictures are simply outstanding.
Mathieu18 wrote:
Trying some new processing. I've been really liking the cinematic / matte look. Happened to get a nice foggy fall morning today, which made for some perfect subject material.
What lens would that be? Sry if I missed something. I like the images and processing too.
Olaf G wrote:
Thank you for sharing this. Your pictures are simply outstanding.
Thanks so much Olaf. Here's another one following the same scheme. Renault R4, quite common behind more plentyful Volvos and Volkswagens when I was a kid.
Thanks so much Olaf. Here's another one following the same scheme. Renault R4, quite common behind more plentyful Volvos and Volkswagens when I was a kid.
Long time, no post, too busy with life, but here are some snaps from late. Sony A7+Sony 28-70. Extremely different, to say the least: 500px Photo ID: 175583493 by Xavier Barceló, on Flickr
I traveled from central Massachusetts to NYC yesterday with a friend to attend PhotoPlus Expo and, of course, I spent some time around the Sony booth. One of my objectives while I was there was to talk to Sony about my FE 16-35mm lens, that I had brought with me on my A7II, that is extremely soft at the 35mm end of the zoom range (unless stopped down to f/11-f/14).
Right from the start, the folks I spoke with from Sony were extremely helpful. The Product Support Manager, Johnny Pham, tested my camera and lens right there at the show, and agreed that it was a problem. He immediately gave me his business card and instructed me to get in touch with him after the show at which time he will provide me with an address for a Sony repair location, not a third party, and they will check it out and do their best to take care of the soft focus. This was good news since Precision Camera repair (one of the Sony third party repair shops in the U.S.) quoted me $300+ just to look at the lens. I'll see how this plays out, but I was very encouraged by the level of support and seemingly honest concern they had regarding this problem.
With my camera and lens cleaned and checked at their booth, I then walked around to another area within the large Sony exhibit where attendees could shoot a model who had been painted in a camouflage motif. After taking a shot at the 35mm-f/4 setting (I had to see if anything they had done in the clean and check process had affected the soft focus issue...it hadn't) I thought that maybe this wasn't a problem after all, as I liked the look the soft focus gave me in this particular image. Here is that shot, heavily cropped (she was pretty far away from me) and adjusted only slightly for sharpness, noise, and color profile in Lightroom. I suspect that in some circles, this soft focus "problem" may be referred to as a "feature."
The second image is a classic capture of Grand Central Station. I don't get to NYC often, so I ask to be forgiven for this tourist shot, since I am one!
.
