You're never going to get the degree of blur from a 35mm FOV that you would get with a longer lens so there's that. Just about any lens will have great bokeh up close though.... it loosely framed shots where the subject is 5+ feet away is where the GM bokeh is good but not great. You see it in the samples here too. The structure and contrast in the OOF areas tend to dominate when you frame loose, the degree of blur drops, and pull a lot of the background details into the frame...plus focus shift widens the FOV at longer focus distance, so it's exaggerated as you frame more loosely and the subject is further away.
I really like the lens and its a keeper, but it's fair to critique it in areas where its not the best too.
saxguy wrote:
I really hate that I'm mostly a 50mm guy. I like the 35 GM more than the 24 and even though it makes no sense to always carry Same here. I'll probably do one or the other when I go out paired with a wide in my pocket like the 21 Voigtlander F3.5. Maybe 35 indoors or multiple people.
I love this little lens... I just wish it would stop raining so I could explore with it. Here's a quick snap from the garden from a break in the showers.
Here's another, taken yesterday, of the blues singer I photographed last week, this one at f/2.0.
Lighting was much stronger, so I had to compensate in post for the greater contrast and deeper shadows.
Let me know what you think of it.
Bruce Sawle wrote:
Fort Funston to be exact. It was a great day. Weather was perfect.
Funny. I saw your photo and immediately thought it might have been taken there. I lived nearby (Golden Gate Heights) until recently and hung out there virtually every day for over ten years walking my dear doggie. I love it there. Have taken thousands of photos of the place: landscape, flowers, birds, graffiti. Many, many wonderful memories.
I just got the 35 GM yesterday but haven't had a chance to use it yet. I'm going to visit Funston next week with my my new lens (and a new pooch) and will bring it with me to test out.
RSSmith wrote:
Here's another, taken yesterday, of the blues singer I photographed last week, this one at f/2.0.
Lighting was much stronger, so I had to compensate in post for the greater contrast and deeper shadows.
Let me know what you think of it.
The background looks a bit ... hmm painterly I'd say .
I'm not a fan of fixing background blur in post, but I did it once recently as a test and what worked for me (for what it's worth) in CaptureOne is applying negative Clarity and Structure Mask/Layer to the background.
Introduced the pup to our favorite mountain range this weekend and drove around to see how quickly the snow is melting. First time trying to take milky way shots with the 35GM. Absolutely love this lens.
RSSmith wrote:
Here's another, taken yesterday, of the blues singer I photographed last week, this one at f/2.0.
Lighting was much stronger, so I had to compensate in post for the greater contrast and deeper shadows.
Let me know what you think of it.
I like it, but honestly the background is more distracting than the original. The original in b/w I thought it was great as it was. I didn't notice the background until I saw it in color, interestingly enough.
.
