rji2goleez wrote:
What's interesting in this discussion is how some push the rights of the photographer without consideration of the people on the other end and their desire for privacy and/or anonymity.
I considered it, I just didn't come to the same conclusion you did. Firstly privacy in public is an oxymoron, but I don't know their names, I don't explicitly mention place or time photo was taken and in comparison to being photographed every time they enter a subway, a bank, a shop or even just walking down the street in many places where time and place is recorded for someone's questionable benefit I find my use of little bother to anyone. And secondly and more important, even if it was a bother, it's one important aspect of photography, an art-form really, that should not be restricted because someone may feel uncomfortable with it. What would we be left with, photos of sunsets and puppies? Bye bye Bresson, Parr, Gilden, Fisk, Autio, Snoek etc
I'll voice my rights to photography but when it comes to photographing people, I would prefer to ask. Sometimes, it's not possible. When it is, and you have a willing subject, the images tend to be that much more powerful.
You do realize that that is your opinion, and your alone. Pinning portraits and street photography against each-other and declaring a winner, is, with lack of a better word, silly.
I don't disagree with your approach at all. I hope I didn't give the wrong impression or offend (certainly NOT my intention). Yes, it is my opinion/perspective and I draw no conclusions of right or wrong. I just wish I had your ability to go for it no matter the circumstance. It's more my own fears than anything. No situation is black or white (except maybe the resulting image). You're also right about pinning street photography and portraits against each other. It only points out some similarities where I, personally, have trouble . . . nothing more.
I don't disagree with your approach at all. I hope I didn't give the wrong impression or offend (certainly NOT my intention). Yes, it is my opinion/perspective and I draw no conclusions of right or wrong. I just wish I had your ability to go for it no matter the circumstance. It's more my own fears than anything. No situation is black or white (except maybe the resulting image). You're also right about pinning street photography and portraits against each other. It only points out some similarities where I, personally, have trouble . . . nothing more.
Ok, cheers. I may have misunderstood the tone of your post. I wish you all the best with your future street and portrait photo then
I have been too busy to look here for a few days and OMG I don't have enough time to devote to all of these wonderful images. DJ, love the first leaf shot a few pages back , and the cow as well. Luka, the canoes are excellent, as well as your last post! Many interesting and compelling shot from you, Rodluvan, and a lot of great ones from Martynas as well. Apologies to the 14 or so other great photogs who I missed! I have nothing to offer this thread today beyond these shots from my professional work today, a high school senior; shot with the ZF 100/2 at f/2:
I love your second shot of leaves on stone, Lars!
Your third shot is alsolutely stunning, Boris!
Wonderful Halloween shot, Diploneis!
Congratulations to all.
Here are some more shots of Dresden (Altstadt and Semper-Opera). If you want to compare between Canon and Zeiss lenses you can find my images shot with a Canon lens in this thread: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/952161
To be honest, I don't see much differences regarding drawing style and 3D between theses lenses.
Bobu wrote:
To be honest, I don't see much differences regarding drawing style and 3D between theses lenses.
Hmmm - I don't see it that way. Looking at your pics from this and the Canon thread I remember a comparision made by diglloyd.com (I think it was that site) - one of his findings was that the TS-E had paler colours (which also shows in your pics). In respect to drawing style or 3D it is difficult to tell based on 2 different photos, but I can say that I bought the 24TS-E II shortly after the 5dII, and it was also my first lens (together with the boring 24-105mm F4) that I resold.
I found the TS-E II to be sharp with reasonably ok colours (nothing more) but otherwise the drawing style quite on the flat, lifeless side of things. The pictures I took with this lens were technically speaking "good", probably even very good, but none of them did anything to me. They totally lacked something like "feeling" or "charme" -
So I sold it. Everybody has different preferences.
alba63 wrote:
Hmmm - I don't see it that way. Looking at your pics from this and the Canon thread I remember a comparision made by diglloyd.com (I think it was that site) - one of his findings was that the TS-E had paler colours (which also shows in your pics). In respect to drawing style or 3D it is difficult to tell based on 2 different photos, but I can say that I bought the 24TS-E II shortly after the 5dII, and it was also my first lens (together with the boring 24-105mm F4) that I resold.
I found the TS-E II to be sharp with reasonably ok colours (nothing more) but otherwise the drawing style quite on the flat, lifeless side of things. The pictures I took with this lens were technically speaking "good", probably even very good, but none of them did anything to me. They totally lacked something like "feeling" or "charme" -
So I sold it. Everybody has different preferences.
i partly agree with you. I also have the 24TSEII and the images of this lens look somewhat flat. Although the 24TSEII is technically even better than the 21 Distagon (sharper, less distortion ...) I prefer the look of the 21ZE and will probably even sell the 24TSEII.
But the 17TSE is in a different league. This lens is not as sharp as the 24TSE but has much more character. In my opinion the 17TSE is one of the most 3D-looking lenses I have. And any color differences between these lenses could easily be corrected in LR.
