Todd wrote:
Not everything needs to be shot at f/1.4. Don't bash others because they used f/4! In my opinion, f/1.4 is used too much, overdone! It's great for portraits but that's about it. Think about it, if Nikon intended for this lens to be shot wide open all the time, they wouldn't have installed an iris to stop it down!
I tend to agree. For instance, the excellent shot by bernardi above of the young girl: I would prefer that the shirt stay in focus and the background be blurred out. It's just a matter of individual taste.
Keiththom wrote:
For instance, the excellent shot by bernardi above of the young girl: I would prefer that the shirt stay in focus and the background be blurred out. It's just a matter of individual taste.
Although I agree with you that not every portrait benefits from an extremely shallow DOF, I really like the "f/1.4 look" in Bernard's picture above. DOF is one of the "tools" we have for creative expression, and here the shallow DOF works IMHO to focus the attention on the girl's eyes. Together with the b/w processing the photo has a very "classic" look to it, beautiful!
There are times when the shallow dof is warranted, there are times it isnt, but that is discretionary to each photographer/artist. Here's an blog entry by Joe McNally when doing a live demo at a show with the 105/1.4 shot at 1.4
webmstrk9 wrote:
There are times when the shallow dof is warranted, there are times it isnt, but that is discretionary to each photographer/artist. Here's an blog entry by Joe McNally when doing a live demo at a show with the 105/1.4 shot at 1.4
I agree with you 100%. I really like Joe McNally he's one of my favorites. I use F1.4 myself but not all the time. for any new comer or person posting to this thread or reading its content, might pick up on the fact that they are not welcome to post anything here unless it a shot at F/1.4, that's just a narrowminded feeling I get from reading these threads and when I post a comment about it, I get mocked along with others. Lenses are designed to be shot at all apertures not just wide open. But like you said wide-open does have its moments. It is true that the further you are away from your subject, F/1.4 tends to work better than up close where you would need at least F/4 on a close up portrait of a face, head and shoulders shot. Anyway continue as you are with your wide-open shots, I just would like to see more creativity out of this thread with people using different apertures instead of just being close minded to F1.4 all the time. Options like that I think would make the thread more well-rounded and present possibly a deeper learning curve. However I think that's not happening because whenever others try to post something at a different temperature, They just get laughed at and no longer want to participate in the thread. So, to get away from the F/1.4 junkies, I might just start up a 105mm F/1.4 thread at all apertures .
Although I agree with you that not every portrait benefits from an extremely shallow DOF, I really like the "f/1.4 look" in Bernard's picture above. DOF is one of the "tools" we have for creative expression, and here the shallow DOF works IMHO to focus the attention on the girl's eyes. Together with the b/w processing the photo has a very "classic" look to it, beautiful!
Markus
Markus: I don't disagree with anything you said. The DOF does indeed focus attention to the eyes. It all just depends on the look the photographer is shooting for.
Keiththom wrote:
Markus: I don't disagree with anything you said. The DOF does indeed focus attention to the eyes. It all just depends on the look the photographer is shooting for.
Sure, and I don't disagree with you, no worries! As you said, it's a matter of taste/what the photog is shooting for.
Driveitputtit wrote:
Me thinks Elijah is just having fun, and you're taking his responses too seriously
You beat me to it!
I didn't say a SINGLE negative thing about shooting stopped down. Zero.
Posting memes and having a good laugh once in a while is what I'm all about.
It all came from the 58mm f/1.4G thread, it's a little joke among us 58G owners
I think the truth about Elijah's joke is that, why on earth would you spend that much money on a lens like this if you're primarily going to be shooting at f/2.8-f/5.6, when the incredibly sharp and well corrected 105mm f/2.8 macro exists.
Even Nikon's own samples pre-release were predominantly wide open. That's the whole reason you buy a lens like this...for subject isolation.
eke2k6 wrote:
I think the truth about Elijah's joke is that, why on earth would you spend that much money on a lens like this if you're primarily going to be shooting at f/2.8-f/5.6, when the incredibly sharp and well corrected 105mm f/2.8 macro exists.
Even Nikon's own samples pre-release were predominantly wide open. That's the whole reason you buy a lens like this...for subject isolation.
Ha, that was my thought when I saw that as well. The 105 Macro can be had used/mint for 1/4 the price if you want to shoot @ f/3.2 on up, plus some VR and a kick-ass MFD.
The point of a 105mm F1.4E isn't that one MUST shoot wide open all the time, the above three examples bolster my position.
For torso head shots at F1.4 the DOF is too thin to be practical if one is to get a reasonably sharp face. At my recent boudoir session for giggles I chose to try it wide open as I learn about this new lens. Well, if one only wants one eyelash in focus then you are golden however, to include eyes, at least one, stopping down is the "right tool for the job". At full body length distances F1.4 can give you that right shot where a 105mm F2.8 Micro would be different.
JBPhotog wrote:
The point of a 105mm F1.4E isn't that one MUST shoot wide open all the time, the above three examples bolster my position.
For torso head shots at F1.4 the DOF is too thin to be practical if one is to get a reasonably sharp face. At my recent boudoir session for giggles I chose to try it wide open as I learn about this new lens. Well, if one only wants one eyelash in focus then you are golden however, to include eyes, at least one, stopping down is the "right tool for the job". At full body length distances F1.4 can give you that right shot where a 105mm F2.8 Micro would be different....Show more →
That's ridiculous. The subject isolation is *specifically* for that sharp-to-soft look. If you really want both eyes in focus, there are ways you can bring them into the plane of focus by simply changing the pose.
This was shot specifically at f/1.6 so I could have that painterly look. .
eke2k6 wrote:
That's ridiculous. The subject isolation is *specifically* for that sharp-to-soft look. If you really want both eyes in focus, there are ways you can bring them into the plane of focus by simply changing the pose.
This was shot specifically at f/1.6 so I could have that painterly look. .
I beg to differ. Your example is very different, and effective, from the previous shots, the eyes are not the intended focal point. If one looks carefully at the previous three where the face is visible, the focal point is not even on the face, which looks like an error and not by design.
JBPhotog wrote:
I beg to differ. Your example is very different, and effective, from the previous shots, the eyes are not the intended focal point. If one looks carefully at the previous three where the face is visible, the focal point is not even on the face, which looks like an error and not by design.
The eye closest to the camera is perfectly in focus in those shots of the girl. Check again.
As you said, it's a matter of taste/what the photog is shooting for.
? You can stop down the 105 E 
