I agree with you Philber. I haven't had it long but I've taken several shots that would have otherwise been mundane but became something more with this lens. Some might call it 3D but to me it gives the sense of presence in the image. A lot of that gets lost in the downsizing to upload here but on a big monitor it can be kind of stunning.
snowboarder wrote:
Sorry for a little OT, but as we're talking about the statues in France...
Philippe, this is just for you, taken a few years ago in Paris, a close-up
of the roof statue of your magnificent Opera (yeah, I had a pretty good view
from a nice room in a nice hotel there )
philber wrote:
2 more from the series, with the 21. This lens never fail to deliver dramatic shots for me. It lets me get real close, and then all I need to do is crop some. And while the 35 is a great lens, probably more flawless than the 21, it does not deliver the adrenalin that the 21 does IMHO. Sort of the 35 drawing attention to how good it is, while the 21 draws attention to how good the shot is. You know, like one red dress generating calls of "WOW! What a dress!", while another one begets "WOW! What a Lady!". ...Show more →
The 35 draws attention to itself (the red dress), whereas the 21 highlights the shot (the Lady), IMHO, Joe. But I already know that Snowboarder won't agree, and who am I to say that I am right, and he is wrong?
Either way, you are looking at something nice I suppose. philber wrote:
The 35 draws attention to itself (the red dress), whereas the 21 highlights the shot (the Lady), IMHO, Joe. But I already know that Snowboarder won't agree, and who am I to say that I am right, and he is wrong?
Q@ philber and others who 21mm...can you please post a typical landscape image made with this lens (FF or otherwise)?
You know something with a foreground and middle, background. Most of the lenses I own are quite good at the focused plane however sharpness and resolution reduces dramatically (of the distant objects). Wduld like to know how this legendary lens stands...
thanks
I think the first shot shows exactly what he is looking for, sharpness in detail in background....that is how all shots are that I have been getting with the 21 2.8 in my short time with it as well.
prashant wrote:
Q@ philber and others who 21mm...can you please post a typical landscape image made with this lens (FF or otherwise)?
You know something with a foreground and middle, background. Most of the lenses I own are quite good at the focused plane however sharpness and resolution reduces dramatically (of the distant objects). Would like to know how this legendary lens stands...
thanks
Here a couple. The first is hand held at f/2.8, the other is on a tripod at f/8. I think the second gets at your question.
thanks guys! i am planning on selling it though since i need the money to pay off some other stuff, but i did pick up a 50/1.7 planar for cheap to replace it with. and maybe the 35/2ZE in the future if the 35/1.4distagon doesnt work out .. i do like the 50mm for street though, its a good compromise for me where its not too long and not too short that I dont have to get too close to the subject.
philber, it depends on which f/stop im using. certainly wide open or close to it, keeper rates will be lower. i usually keep it between f2 - f2.8 and get better keeper rates with it. i even tried shooting from a moving van, using MF is quite a challenge. Only with luck would the shot be a keeper lol
I went again to shoot some wildflowers today and this time decided to use
my 21 ZE only. I have some great clouds captured, but need to work on those a bit more,
right now just a little flower shot I really like
)
