Raptor_Fan76 Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
RoamingScott wrote:
The 58/1.4 really does clean up starting around 2.2 and seems "fully functional in the low 3s...1.4 to 2.8 is a "funky" dial, and then you have a regular "character" 58 after that. These are at 2.2
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53907502945_c34a9d4600_o.jpg
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53907407779_872494d758_o.jpg
So would you say the 58 is somewhat similar to the 40mm 1.2? My experience with my 40 so far is (referring to centre to mid-frame):
1.2 is extremely hazy (some would say dreamy) but improves the farther out I go from MFD.
1.4 tightens things up a tiny bit… in fact, there is a slow progression from 1.4 to 1.8 where contrast slowly starts to increase, as does perceived sharpness.
At f2 the lens is quite contrasty but the sharpness is riding that line for the perfect balance of sharp, but not too sharp for portraits, but I wouldn’t describe it as exhibiting a 3D pop.
f2.8 and the lens is very sharp (even to the corners)… not APO levels, but very good for a modern lens. Things improve only slightly from there, with 5.6 seeming to be the peak.
It’s a fun lens to use… but the combo between the dreamy character and how thin the dof is at 1.2 make it a tough lens to make a quick portrait with… a tiny move forwards or backwards by the subject and the focus goes to the eyelashes or cheeks.
If I were only going to have one, and 3D pop was at the top of my list of priorities, I’d definitely go 35 APO… the micro-contrast is as good as any lens I’ve owned and I personally find the Bokeh to be extremely attractive and it’s a much more reliable portrait lens (at least for my unskilled butt).
Both images with APO 35 on Zf:
|