p.39 #4Portrait and People Image Thread using Sony
The is no sport on TV, I cannot socialize, I cannot even see my grandkids although they live about an hour drive from me for fear of infecting each other (yes, out of abundance of cautions here). I cannot go eat out, and I am tired of listening to increasingly alarming news, etc. And I did my morning exercise already. I did go out to take pictures of falcons, foxes, even fox puppies 4 times in the last 7 days. How many images can we take... So, I end up spending a lot time on-line and guess where? On FM! Plus, I go over folders and folders of images that didn’t get edited and edit them.
A little bit about the lens - it is big and heavy but it generates awesome images like none other. The existence of this is in my lineup was jeopardized after I added Sigma 35mm f/1.2, which is also a great performer. But not only the 40mm lens matches the performance of the Sigma 105mm f/1.4, the focal length seems to transition better, more than the mere 5mm the difference in official focal length indicates. The Sigma 35mm acts more like a wide angle while the 40mm acts more like a standard lens. Again, the focal lengths are specified by Sigma and sometimes their specifications in that respect are off a little.
For local photo sessions, the weight and bulk do not matter much, if any. So, it looks like I will be keeping this lens for a while, especially after I had purchased a lens collar that makes the handling of this lens better. Here is an image captured with that lens then...
p.39 #5Portrait and People Image Thread using Sony
AGeoJO wrote:
The is no sport on TV, I cannot socialize, I cannot even see my grandkids although they live about an hour drive from me for fear of infecting each other (yes, out of abundance of cautions here). I cannot go eat out, and I am tired of listening to increasingly alarming news, etc. And I did my morning exercise already. I did go out to take pictures of falcons, foxes, even fox puppies 4 times in the last 7 days. How many images can we take... So, I end up spending a lot time on-line and guess where? On FM! Plus, I go over folders and folders of images that didn’t get edited and edit them.
A little bit about the lens - it is big and heavy but it generates awesome images like none other. The existence of this is in my lineup was jeopardized after I added Sigma 35mm f/1.2, which is also a great performer. But not only the 40mm lens matches the performance of the Sigma 105mm f/1.4, the focal length seems to transition better, more than the mere 5mm the difference in official focal length indicates. The Sigma 35mm acts more like a wide angle while the 40mm acts more like a standard lens. Again, the focal lengths are specified by Sigma and sometimes their specifications in that respect are off a little.
For local photo sessions, the weight and bulk do not matter much, if any. So, it looks like I will be keeping this lens for a while, especially after I had purchased a lens collar that makes the handling of this lens better. Here is an image captured with that lens then......Show more →
Hang in there, Joshua. It’s going to be a doozy of a year or however long it takes but we will get through it. I had wanted to get into all sorts of portrait opportunities that have pretty much vanished because of this thing. That is the least of our worries now, though. It is a mad house doing home office stuff and switching off doing home schooling for two little kids. No time for anything anymore. I take my camera with me walking to the store if I can’t do delivery. This and at home are some of the only times I get images now. But now they have even closed most of the stores here too.
You have an affinity for beastly lenses. Sigma 35 f/1.2, 40 f/1.4, 105 f/1.2. Even your 600mm lens. Who needs the gym? But all worth it because of the amazing images you create with them. Keep up whatever you can. To keep sanity without being able to get out we can seek out socialization wherever possible, even if it is somewhere like FM. That still counts as socializing right?
Mar 22, 2020 at 05:06 PM
RoamingScott
Offline
Activity
[X]
p.39 #6Portrait and People Image Thread using Sony
I'm surprised that there isn't more at-home portraiture being posted during our lockdowns...although, my family's willingness to be a subject is decreasing by the hour
A7R3 and Helios 44-4 edited to emulate Kodak Plus X stock
p.39 #7Portrait and People Image Thread using Sony
I haven't posted any images from the Mask Carnival in Venice here. Although they are people behind each mask, I will try to limit my images from that even to folks wearing half mask to without mask...
p.39 #8Portrait and People Image Thread using Sony
abadger wrote:
Hang in there, Joshua. It’s going to be a doozy of a year or however long it takes but we will get through it. I had wanted to get into all sorts of portrait opportunities that have pretty much vanished because of this thing. That is the least of our worries now, though. It is a mad house doing home office stuff and switching off doing home schooling for two little kids. No time for anything anymore. I take my camera with me walking to the store if I can’t do delivery. This and at home are some of the only times I get images now. But now they have even closed most of the stores here too.
You have an affinity for beastly lenses. Sigma 35 f/1.2, 40 f/1.4, 105 f/1.2. Even your 600mm lens. Who needs the gym? But all worth it because of the amazing images you create with them. Keep up whatever you can. To keep sanity without being able to get out we can seek out socialization wherever possible, even if it is somewhere like FM. That still counts as socializing right?...Show more →
Thank you, Adam! I manage okay and I still go out to walk around and I exercise on a regular basis. I need all the exercise I can get while awake. I have been back home from our European trip for almost a month and we still have not been able to see our grandkids. They live only an hour away from us. We went to see them 2 weeks ago but there was a glass door between us. We are leery about infecting each other. I know the chance is slim and we do it out of abundance of cautions. But we miss hugging and cuddling them...
Yes, as long as I don't have to carry them the whole day, I can handle big and heavy lenses alright. And I do like the results I can get out of them. But for real walk-around lenses, I prefer smaller and lighter lenses, of course.
Again, thank you, stay safe and see you around.
Joshua
p.39 #11Portrait and People Image Thread using Sony
This image taken during a session at an orchard some 2 years ago... I edited the file and I cropped it to render a horizontal format now from the original vertical format. The aperture displayed here is not quite right. The aperture of the lens is f/1.8 and not f/1.7. There was a glitch in the FW of Metabones I used back then. Yes, mine was a Canon EF mount lens.
A little bit about the lens - I bought this lens new when it became available in 2017 and used it for a little over a year. I really loved that lens; it ticked all the boxes for me. I used it for portraits and really enjoyed that lens tremendously. But, I sold in anticipation of getting the GM 135mm but I was on a lengthy trip when it was supposed to be delivered. I cancelled the order and bought it used a few months later for quite a bit less. On paper and the AF performance, the GM is a better lens but the Sigma is no slouch either. The AF, even with this older camera back then was right on the money, maybe a tad slower but for portraits, the speed was plenty.
It is for sure a matter of preference, I used the Sigma lens way more and grabbed it each time I was out to shoot portraits. The GM..., well, it is a superb lens alright but somehow, it stays home more than the Sigma did when I still had it. I am sure, it has to do also with the fact that I do have and use the Sigma 105mm for the bokeh...
p.39 #13Portrait and People Image Thread using Sony
Shot with the FE 85, Xplor 400 Pro and a Glow EZ Lock 48” Octabox.
This was a very simple color grade but in my never ending quest to find new ways to dodge and burn to add depth to my shots, I have just recently started to dodge and burn faces with solid color adjustment layers in PS. It is a subtle but powerful effect, and it is easy to do quickly. There is also a before and after of this edit on my instagram illustrating this technique if anyone is interested. I’m at @mattyfein on IG.
Anyway, here is the breakdown of my solid color D&B for this shot...
Eye lids and brow bones: faint lilac color, soft light blend mode
Cheek bone: bright tan color, soft light
Cheeks: darker reddish brown, soft light
Cupid’s bow and nose: tan, soft light
Lips: pink with screen, dark red with soft light
If you have Lumenzia or any other means to create simple luminosity masks, you can make selections of the regions you are going to D&B before painting and the results will be more realistic and enhance micro contrast as they will vary in intensity with the model’s skin texture. In other words, since a pore has a lower luminosity value than a tiny piece of non-recessed skin that is ever so slightly closer to the camera, it will be brightened proportionately less when dodging.
Maintaining the skin texture is especially useful for realistic lip retouching. To dodge, I used a pink color that was lighter than the lips in screen mode, selected a lights mask in Lumenzia, and then painted over the highlights. To burn, I used the darker red color in soft light blend mode, selected a darker mid tones mask that excluded the highlights, and then painted over the lips. The net result enhances depth and volume with luminosity and color without smearing the details of the lips by brightening and adding pink to the highlights in the middle (making them appear closer to the lens) while darkening and adding red to darker mid tones surrounding them (pushing them further away from the lens).
p.39 #14Portrait and People Image Thread using Sony
fuzzykeys wrote:
Shot with the FE 85, Xplor 400 Pro and a Glow EZ Lock 48” Octabox.
This was a very simple color grade but in my never ending quest to find new ways to dodge and burn to add depth to my shots, I have just recently started to dodge and burn faces with solid color adjustment layers in PS. It is a subtle but powerful effect, and it is easy to do quickly. There is also a before and after of this edit on my instagram illustrating this technique if anyone is interested. I’m at @mattyfein on IG.
Anyway, here is the breakdown of my solid color D&B for this shot...
Eye lids and brow bones: faint lilac color, soft light blend mode
Cheek bone: bright tan color, soft light
Cheeks: darker reddish brown, soft light
Cupid’s bow and nose: tan, soft light
Lips: pink with screen, dark red with soft light
If you have Lumenzia or any other means to create simple luminosity masks, you can make selections of the regions you are going to D&B before painting and the results will be more realistic and enhance micro contrast as they vary will vary in intensity with the model’s skin texture. In other words, since a pore has a lower luminosity value than a tiny piece of non-recessed skin that is ever so slightly closer to the camera, it will be brightened proportionately less when dodging.
Maintaining the skin texture is especially useful for realistic lip retouching. To dodge, I used a pink color that was lighter than the lips in screen mode, selected a lights mask in Lumenzia, and then painted over the highlights. To burn, I used the darker red color in soft light blend mode, selected a darker mid tones mask that excluded the highlights, and then painted over the lips. The net result enhances depth and volume with luminosity and color without smearing the details of the lips by brightening and adding pink to the highlights in the middle (making them appear closer to the lens) while darkening and adding red to darker mid tones surrounding them (pushing them further away from the lens).
Thanks for sharing your process, this is very interesting (nice photo also). I feel like makeup artists have to be naturally pretty good at this sort of thing. I hadn't even considered dodging and burning with colors but it makes sense.
Also I have a request, if anyone is game. Throw me a PM with a RAW file you are not going to use or could share (portrait)? I started up some photoshop tutorials, bought a small wacom tablet and am looking to practice technique with this sort of thing. No shoots scheduled at the moment with the city basically on lockdown.
p.39 #15Portrait and People Image Thread using Sony
Yeah it is very much like applying makeup. My wife has been very helpful in helping me refine the technique! To me anyway, besides color grading, dodging and burning is the most valuable tool we have in the shed for post production. It just makes such a big difference toward simulating 3D space in a 2D medium.
@abadger I have plenty of shots I’d be happy to send you to take a whack at if you’d like, whether I’m using em or not! I’d be happy to share finished shots and my PSD’s too. Whatever you want man! It’s the end of the world after all.
abadger wrote:
Thanks for sharing your process, this is very interesting (nice photo also). I feel like makeup artists have to be naturally pretty good at this sort of thing. I hadn't even considered dodging and burning with colors but it makes sense.
Also I have a request, if anyone is game. Throw me a PM with a RAW file you are not going to use or could share (portrait)? I started up some photoshop tutorials, bought a small wacom tablet and am looking to practice technique with this sort of thing. No shoots scheduled at the moment with the city basically on lockdown....Show more →
p.39 #18Portrait and People Image Thread using Sony
AGeoJO wrote:
The is no sport on TV, I cannot socialize, I cannot even see my grandkids although they live about an hour drive from me for fear of infecting each other (yes, out of abundance of cautions here). I cannot go eat out, and I am tired of listening to increasingly alarming news, etc. And I did my morning exercise already. I did go out to take pictures of falcons, foxes, even fox puppies 4 times in the last 7 days. How many images can we take... So, I end up spending a lot time on-line and guess where? On FM! Plus, I go over folders and folders of images that didn’t get edited and edit them.
A little bit about the lens - it is big and heavy but it generates awesome images like none other. The existence of this is in my lineup was jeopardized after I added Sigma 35mm f/1.2, which is also a great performer. But not only the 40mm lens matches the performance of the Sigma 105mm f/1.4, the focal length seems to transition better, more than the mere 5mm the difference in official focal length indicates. The Sigma 35mm acts more like a wide angle while the 40mm acts more like a standard lens. Again, the focal lengths are specified by Sigma and sometimes their specifications in that respect are off a little.
For local photo sessions, the weight and bulk do not matter much, if any. So, it looks like I will be keeping this lens for a while, especially after I had purchased a lens collar that makes the handling of this lens better. Here is an image captured with that lens then......Show more →
I'm exactly in the same position as you are (potentially, for now at least). I'm considering buying the ART 40, to go with the ART 35 f/1,2. ART 40 would be more of a standard lens for me, but can't decide the 5mm difference is visible enough, perspective wise. The bokeh of the 35 will be hard to beat, but if it comes close it will be worth it. The files should be much cleaner with regards to aberrations, as far as I can gather from online resources. This with the flatter perspective would be my reasons to add the lens to the arsenal. Can you persuade me otherwise?
p.39 #19Portrait and People Image Thread using Sony
stjepan wrote:
I'm exactly in the same position as you are (potentially, for now at least). I'm considering buying the ART 40, to go with the ART 35 f/1,2. ART 40 would be more of a standard lens for me, but can't decide the 5mm difference is visible enough, perspective wise. The bokeh of the 35 will be hard to beat, but if it comes close it will be worth it. The files should be much cleaner with regards to aberrations, as far as I can gather from online resources. This with the flatter perspective would be my reasons to add the lens to the arsenal. Can you persuade me otherwise? ...Show more →
With me, it was the other way around. I have the 40mm f/1.4 Art lens first that I was really happy with. I do have and I am using a double strap with Arca-style clamp. So, I bought a lens collar for it for a more balance handling of this in combo with the Sigma 105mm f/1.4 Art. Yes, both lenses are heavy and not small . But like I said, if I use them locally, I do not mind the weight nor bulk of this combo. What made me get the 35mm is more the f/1.2 aperture than anything else.
Focal length-wise the 40mm tends to act more like a standard lens. But is it enough to distinguish it from the 35mm lens? IMHO, it depends what you will combine it with for a serious portrait session. In other words, the 35mm works great with the GM 85mm while the 40mm does so better with the 105mm more so.
Here is the bottom line, since you already have the 35mm and it is a faster lens, it may not be worth it for you to get the 40mm, regardless of the slight flatter perspective. If you want to get a more standard perspective of the same f/1.4 aperture, you may want to consider the highly regarded Sony FE 50mm f/1.4.
I hope this helps and feel free to ask any additional questions,
Joshua
____________________________________________
A longer lens that can be considered is the 135mm lens, which fits the transition better from the 85mm than from the 105mm. This image was captured using the Sigma 135mm Art that I already sold, but as you know, Sony has the GM version of that focal length.
Wake up and smell the coffee... uh, flower - Claire
p.39 #20Portrait and People Image Thread using Sony
AGeoJO wrote:
With me, it was the other way around. I have the 40mm f/1.4 Art lens first that I was really happy with. I do have and I am using a double strap with Arca-style clamp. So, I bought a lens collar for it for a more balance handling of this in combo with the Sigma 105mm f/1.4 Art. Yes, both lenses are heavy and not small . But like I said, if I use them locally, I do not mind the weight nor bulk of this combo. What made me get the 35mm is more the f/1.2 aperture than anything else.
Focal length-wise the 40mm tends to act more like a standard lens. But is it enough to distinguish it from the 35mm lens? IMHO, it depends what you will combine it with for a serious portrait session. In other words, the 35mm works great with the GM 85mm while the 40mm does so better with the 105mm more so.
Here is the bottom line, since you already have the 35mm and it is a faster lens, it may not be worth it for you to get the 40mm, regardless of the slight flatter perspective. If you want to get a more standard perspective of the same f/1.4 aperture, you may want to consider the highly regarded Sony FE 50mm f/1.4.
I hope this helps and feel free to ask any additional questions,
Joshua
____________________________________________
A longer lens that can be considered is the 135mm lens, which fits the transition better from the 85mm than from the 105mm. This image was captured using the Sigma 135mm Art that I already sold, but as you know, Sony has the GM version of that focal length. ...Show more →
Thanks for the comprehensive answer, much appreciated. I too have the ART 105 and am constantly astonished by its output. It displaced effectively my GM 85 and has curved a bit my desire for the ART 135 (although I think I will get that one after all).
Anyway since I do have the ART 105 I was also lately leaning towards the ART 40, to better compliment each other. My path was the opposite of yours and the *problem* is that I got the 35 f/1,2 first. The 105 followed later on and completely blown me away (placing me firmly in the Sigma camp btw). The gap between 35 and 105 is kinda big for my taste and the 40 might be the answer I was looking for. My natural tendency is with the normal-ish FOV, so there's another plus.
To your suggestion, I've tried the Sony FE 50 f/1,4 and didn't love it (liked it, but not enough to keep it). I generally buy and test my lenses for dual purposes, portraits and landscapes. The FE 50 f/1,4 had FC issues which I couldn't get around of (at least the copy I tried). Next I wanted to try the ART 50, but somehow ended up inspecting online the ART 40 instead. The optical perfection of that lens is pulling me strongly and I too think it will better compliment the 105. I don't mind the weight nor the size, these lenses go regularly with me to hikes, I consider it good exercise.
One more thing, can you share the link to the lens collar for the ART 40? And can it be used in portrait and landscape orientation?
Once again thanks for your input, it is greatly appreciated. And your images are stunning, I enjoy following your work.
I'm considering buying the ART 40, to go with the ART 35 f/1,2. ART 40 would be more of a standard lens for me, but can't decide the 5mm difference is visible enough, perspective wise. The bokeh of the 35 will be hard to beat, but if it comes close it will be worth it. The files should be much cleaner with regards to aberrations, as far as I can gather from online resources. This with the flatter perspective would be my reasons to add the lens to the arsenal. Can you persuade me otherwise? 
