hasenbein wrote:
No particular 3D pop in that photo, sorry.
Perhaps we are making a similar point. The 85GM definitely provides a sense of separation between subject and the background, but the focal length without the proper lighting flattens the subject. So, "which lens" just isn't the correct question.
There are definitely some cases in which I prefer an older lens over the newer one.
Any Zeiss Milvus for example, simply because the Milvus design look ugly to me and I'm not willing to pay the premium for them.
Also I just mentioned in another thread how I prefer the AF 85mm f1.4 over the AF-S 85mm f1.4.
Wished Nikon would make some metal body lenses of their best optics. I'd certainly love all my AF lenses to be AF-S. There is no doubt an AF-S autofocus is superior, more precise and more silent, over the screwdrive design of AF lenses. Oh well.
Wished Nikon would make some metal body lenses of their best optics. I'd certainly love all my AF lenses to be AF-S. There is no doubt an AF-S autofocus is superior, more precise and more silent, over the screwdrive design of AF lenses. Oh well.
Ooooh, and I'd LOVE to have my AF-S 24mm f1.8 to have a real metal body. Its my only lens thats made from pastic.
Yes, the 35mm f2 has a very reliable and stronger 3D-rendering compared to the 28mm f2. However, my sample is the less common Pentax version of the Zeiss Hollywood from a short-lived collaboration between Pentax and Zeiss before Zeiss went on with Contax.
Another one is my old Pentax 50mm f/1.4 smc Takumar. This low res shots don't show it as well as what you see with the prints themselves.
When you look at this one printed those leaves in the top right area literally come right out of the paper.
Same strong effect with this when printed. The trunks on the aspens are truly 3 dimensional to the point you feel like you can reach out and wrap your hands around them.
It's interesting to see how some think they see it in their shots, and others don't (happens to me too.) It makes you wonder if it's part lens, part perspective, etc. I see it in this shot, but my guess there will be others who don't.
