Really nice image for both street and City. I especially love the #2 and last from 2nd city series. awesome.
Hi, and thanks Zhangyue!
The trick I have is really see through the viewfinder and judge the focus by eyes but not rely on Focus dot, however that require close to subject and good light like your #3&4 street shots. still it can be used to capture the moment but is slower to track moving subject.
Agreed, I seldom, almost never, use focus dot as I don' find it to be accurate and more importantly fast enough for moving targets.
For running people like #1,2&5 from your street shots, I am sure you can do it with Zone focus or just turn the scale to 2.5M and use Continues shooting 5-7frames/s. I am also curious what is your keep rate for shots like this.
Keeper rate is a function of expectation and acceptability. Landscape photographs need to be pin sharp (for most cases), street imo, doesn't have to be to the same extent. Keeper rate for me can change from day to day (probably due to how lazy my eye is that day), but I don't think it's any lower than any any photographers rate regardless of gear (let's just think how many photos any now famous street photographer has taken without having printed, much less published them). Sure it's hard enough without a MF 1.4 setting, and logically I should have even less, perhaps it's so, but it's a craft imo, I need to get it right using my hand and eye, not relying on an AF so it's forth it. Granted I'm no journalist or wedding photog who rely on photography on bringing home the bacon. If I was my tune might be a little bit different.
If I ever was to get a Leica rangefinder, I would not care for a fast prime, but opt for a 2.8/35 or even slower as I would use it stopped down (zone focus).
I guess it is still depend on what you do. For some people, we certainly can afford to miss a shot or two, but for some professional require critical focus say on eyes on assignment, it may not acceptable. It is all about requirement and expectation.
Exactly!
don't get me wrong, I love 35f1.4. It is one of my favorite lens, but just don't want pass wrong information to the people potentially use it other way.
You're setting a good example for many of us who rave about our gear, perhaps sometimes not considering or mentioning the negative aspects.
Btw, here's an example of manual tracking @2.0 - 50mm lens (planar ZF)
OneAnt wrote:
Rodluvan you are not the king of 'fast moving people' that title goes to me.
This guy was lightning fast, a blur. My focusing hand was going flat out like a lizard drinking and would have been the pride of any teenage boy in a bathroom ...
Ant.
ɹǝpun uʍop puɐl ǝɥʇ ɯoɹɟ
Very impressive, and I think you have me beat (not in the bathroom though)!
Smridevan wrote:
I also have to agree that the 35/1.4 is the most difficult of all my Zeiss lenses to focus including the 100/2. The focus confirmation dot on my D90 works pretty well with the 100/2 but fails miserably with the 35/1.4. Rodluvan, I really like the micro contrast on all your portrait images and I am among one of the stalkers on your Flickr page.
some more images with the 100/2… Every time I put it on my camera, I fall in love with this lens all over again.
Charismatic photos, especially like the first one! Never knew it would feel so great having a stalker.
It's funny how I find the 2/100 way more difficult to focus, perhaps it's just a matter of preference and experience (I'm much more experienced with 35mm).
Young, excellent 21 mm shots! I just got this lens and notice the focus ring is a little on the loose side if I compare to my 28 mm or 35 mm, something more like my 100 MP only a little looser. Is this normal? Anybody could chime in?
Anyways, 2 with the 28 mm. Wondering if I better sell this one after getting the 21 or just keep it..
Keep it! The 28, if you work around its weaknesses, it has such a lovely way of drawing. It is a really special lens.
