mtoroglu wrote:
A few portraits of our kid, Eileen.
---------------------------------------------
InFocus2014 wrote:
I convinced myself that I didn’t need this lens with all my fast primes in this range plus my GM 70-200mm f2.8 II. These images, plus other image posts, have lead to a weakened resolve… so I just broke down ordered it. Thanks a lot, guys.
Same here. I just placed an order, but I’ll be moving the 135 GM, yet can’t bring myself to moving my excellent excellent 70-200 GM II, no way.
patotts wrote:
I've never seen people being so happy to be photographed! :-) Fun series!
Yeah, I don't often photograph people...so it was a little outside my norm with this trip. I believe most of the core staff are actors, but they genuinely seemed happy (or are REALLY good actors...)
I just shot a Diwali event for the company I work at yesterday using the 50-150, Sigma 135, and Sigma 200. Most of my shots were with the 50-150 and it performed flawlessly.
It was in a darkly lit auditorium and the F2 really came in handy. There were a few occasions where 50mm was still a bit too tight, but I managed perfectly fine.
I can't post the images but thought I'd share my experience with the lens. It's perfect for indoor events and sports. If anyone is on the fence, try it out for this purpose and you won't be disappointed.
Let me firstly say that I'm by no means a pro portrait or wedding photographer which seems to be Sony's main target market for the lens - I'm a dad with GAS who shoots the occasional kids' football (soccer) game or church event and sneaks in travel photography during business trips. I'd never intended to keep this outrageously expensive yet gorgeous lens. But the purple tones on the Samyang 35-150 annoyed me too much so I sold it, and then I tried the Sony, and one thing led to another...
Here's a quick sample from a recent Legoland outing. AF speed and accuracy probably better than any lens I have used in this zoom range on Sony. The bokeh rendering could be considered clinical, but it is not a bad thing IMHO - the in-focus areas are dangerously sharp, the OOF areas are blown out of focus as they should be, just what you want in a fast lens. https://www.amazon.co.uk/photos/share/EAvUG92jxB6Yf3YdVnGcYor6bWxpbWLVvjxySR9k0xT
I wonder how people have been pairing this lens for different kinds of photography? For Legoland I paired it with a second body (Panasonic S9 with 18-40) which worked extremely well. For more "serious" trips I get the feeling that the 50-80mm range is so usable in F/2 that it would be hard for me to get much use out of the 28-70/2 which I also own and love. I'm going away on a countryside trip shortly with the family - think forest scapes and autumn leaves - so will give some thought to my own question, and obvious bring far more lenses than I'll actually need.
ryanli wrote:
Let me firstly say that I'm by no means a pro portrait or wedding photographer which seems to be Sony's main target market for the lens - I'm a dad with GAS who shoots the occasional kids' football (soccer) game or church event and sneaks in travel photography during business trips. I'd never intended to keep this outrageously expensive yet gorgeous lens. But the purple tones on the Samyang 35-150 annoyed me too much so I sold it, and then I tried the Sony, and one thing led to another...
Here's a quick sample from a recent Legoland outing. AF speed and accuracy probably better than any lens I have used in this zoom range on Sony. The bokeh rendering could be considered clinical, but it is not a bad thing IMHO - the in-focus areas are dangerously sharp, the OOF areas are blown out of focus as they should be, just what you want in a fast lens. https://www.amazon.co.uk/photos/share/EAvUG92jxB6Yf3YdVnGcYor6bWxpbWLVvjxySR9k0xT
I wonder how people have been pairing this lens for different kinds of photography? For Legoland I paired it with a second body (Panasonic S9 with 18-40) which worked extremely well. For more "serious" trips I get the feeling that the 50-80mm range is so usable in F/2 that it would be hard for me to get much use out of the 28-70/2 which I also own and love. I'm going away on a countryside trip shortly with the family - think forest scapes and autumn leaves - so will give some thought to my own question, and obvious bring far more lenses than I'll actually need....Show more →
I've used it quite a bit paired with the Fuji GFX100S II and GF 35-70 (and GF 20-35). I've also used it along with my Sigma 28-45 and 14-24.
ryanli wrote:
I wonder how people have been pairing this lens for different kinds of photography? For Legoland I paired it with a second body (Panasonic S9 with 18-40) which worked extremely well. For more "serious" trips I get the feeling that the 50-80mm range is so usable in F/2 that it would be hard for me to get much use out of the 28-70/2 which I also own and love.
Maybe you should pair it with a lens, covering a normal range at a small aperture, so the other lens doesn't require lens changes for range.
City scapes >> 20-70mm f/4.0
hiking / walk around / landscapes >> Tamron 25-200mm.
I have the Tamron 35-150mm, and if you have 35mm it's not like you never use it, but for me most portrait stuff actually starts around 45 or 50mm. If you have f/2.0 from 50mm, the lens covering wider stuff doesn't desperately need to have a large aperture.
ryanli wrote:
I'm going away on a countryside trip shortly with the family - think forest scapes and autumn leaves - so will give some thought to my own question, and obvious bring far more lenses than I'll actually need.
20-70mm f/4.0, 50-150mm f/2.0, 135mm f/1.4.
