Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
That nikkor image is a lot like Zeiss. Nice!
cogitech wrote:
The first one is not complimentary to the subject at all, but this is only my subjective opinion.
Sure, it's all subjective at this point!
The second one seems to have an odd colour balance but otherwise it looks OK. No idea what lens you used, but not sure what the point of guessing would be.
My point is that I owned the c/y and for me it is simply the last 50mm I would choose for portraits. So many other 50's I have used will provide results more suited to my particular tastes, and compliment the subject so much more, IMO.
Here is the Rokkor 58/1.2 wide open on 5D, for instance:
I see what you're meaning. It fits with what Rusty was saying too. To me I'd rather have the detailed pours look as a starting point. That way I can take it in any direction I like. If I want the smooth skin tones it's just a single click:
Zeiss Planar 50mm 1,7 : 1/80s, f/1.7, ISO100
Zeiss Planar 50mm 1,7 : 1/800s, F/?, ISO100
And I can go even smoother if I like.
Or if I want to create the uber-grunge almost HDR look then the detail is there to deal with - whereas it might not be with the softer Rokkor, Zuiko, or Takumar. Again it's all subjective as you say and for me it totally depends on my mood rather than the popular opinion of a specific lens. And by mood I mean like answering questions like:
How far off will the BG be?
Will there be lots of point lights in the BG?
Indoors or outside?
Day light or Night time?
Overcast or direct Sun?
What's the presumed mood of the event?
Are these images I want to add FX to in post?
etc.
The answers to those things are what prompts me to select a particular lens or pair of lenses. For me it's not so simple as to say: Oh, there will be portraiture so I need to leave my Zeisses and Nikons at home. If that makes any sense... 
|
I know the feeling.