Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 54

Thread: Is fast lens necessary?

  1. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    floating in space.
    Posts
    795

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by cwtan12 View Post
    I get it now. Seems like I may need to spend more.
    Why do you think you need to spend more?
    D∞X, 1-∞ mm F0.17. I like to show off my equipment list because I'm pro. My Flickr

  2. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Novena
    Posts
    220

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by zj2000 View Post
    Because all lenses work best when stopped down by 1 / 2 stops. Generally when stopped down you'll get sharper images, less vignetting, better contrast etc. V seldom will you use a fast prime at wide open since at f1.4 or f1.8 even the dof shallow to the point of being impractical. ie model's face in focus but ears are out of focus / if model's face is at an angle to you 1 eye is in focus but the other is not....
    I agree with your points. Having aquired a 50mm 1.4AFD recently, I was totally blown away by the contrastiness of what this prime lens have to offer. However, shooting at wide open aperture at 1.4 most of time will have an effect on the subject's ears fading away.

    Fast lens imho is a great asset to have in your artillery.

  3. #23

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by zcf View Post
    I think he meant prime of the same focal length but different apperture size e.g. 50mm f/1.4 vs 1.8. No ?
    50/1.8 is as prime a lens as 50/1.4. The aperture doesn't make one any more prime than the other.

  4. #24

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by Artosoft View Post
    In my understanding, prime lens mean not-zoom lens. Prime lens only have one/fixed focal length. It might f/1.4 or f/1.8 or even f/4, it is still called prime lens regardless the maximum aperture.

    Regards,
    Arto.
    I don't think it's just your understanding. It's generally accepted that prime lenses refers to single focal length lenses.

    http://www.answers.com/topic/prime-lens
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_lens

  5. #25

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon View Post
    I don't think it's just your understanding. It's generally accepted that prime lenses refers to single focal length lenses.

    http://www.answers.com/topic/prime-lens
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_lens
    Yes yes yes... All these dictionary-diggers!

    By "baby" i meant the price... Lower due to smaller max aperture. My own nickname for the budget prime lenses that have a more expensive counterpart.

    Or should we all be running every word we type through a dictionary now?

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Tampines
    Posts
    3,287

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by C J GOH View Post
    Hi Guys,

    Would the SONY 20mm f2.8 at S$999 be considered Prime Lens??
    Yesssssss

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Tanjong Katong
    Posts
    3,710

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by C J GOH View Post
    Hi Guys,

    Would the SONY 20mm f2.8 at S$999 be considered Prime Lens??
    Its fixed and single focal length right, so it is prime lens REGARDLESS its maximum aperture.

    Regards,
    Arto.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Tanjong Katong
    Posts
    3,710

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon View Post
    I don't think it's just your understanding. It's generally accepted that prime lenses refers to single focal length lenses.

    http://www.answers.com/topic/prime-lens
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_lens
    So my understanding about prime lens is correct and/or inline with standard definition lah . Some don't .

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Tanjong Katong
    Posts
    3,710

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    Yes yes yes... All these dictionary-diggers!

    By "baby" i meant the price... Lower due to smaller max aperture. My own nickname for the budget prime lenses that have a more expensive counterpart.

    Or should we all be running every word we type through a dictionary now?
    Frankly I don't need dictionary for standard definition. Dictionary sometimes necessary too to avoid confusion.

    I think you should just type in slow (prime) lens and fast (prime) lens. Fast (prime) lens already known by people is more expensive than slow (prime) lens. No..., no, we talk about new lens. This more people will more understand (and they don't need to open dictionary).

    But, if you do not know about standard definition, it is better (rather than try to be smart to create your own) to go through dictionary. This will avoid any confusion .

    Regards,
    Arto.

  10. #30

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    He doesn't force you to use 'baby prime' this term, so please don't force him not to use 'baby prime' this term. let's take it light-hearted, Peace.

  11. #31

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Peace to all. :P

  12. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Tanjong Katong
    Posts
    3,710

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    Peace to all. :P
    I don't see any war here. Some correction is necessary to avoid confusion, my opinion.

    Regards,
    Arto.

  13. #33

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by entropy_h View Post
    Why do you think you need to spend more?
    Well, if i get a 85mm lens, it seems like if I will get f/1.4 rather than f/1.8 in this case. We don't have those money back satisfaction guarantee here.. So before buying, we need to get the right thing to avoid buy and sell later. I bought a 85mm f/1.4 when I was in Singapore but my friend took it the very first day I bought and decided to sell it to him at the price I bought.
    D40 + 2xSB800, 17-55mm f2.8, Micro VR 105 f2.8,VR 70-200mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8

  14. #34

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Do you need the f1.4 or the 85mm to begin with? And what is the rationale for you to buy those lenses in the beginning? Just buying for the sake of what people say or do you need them?

  15. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    floating in space.
    Posts
    795

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by valice View Post
    Do you need the f1.4 or the 85mm to begin with? And what is the rationale for you to buy those lenses in the beginning? Just buying for the sake of what people say or do you need them?
    My point exactly.
    D∞X, 1-∞ mm F0.17. I like to show off my equipment list because I'm pro. My Flickr

  16. #36

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by valice View Post
    Do you need the f1.4 or the 85mm to begin with? And what is the rationale for you to buy those lenses in the beginning? Just buying for the sake of what people say or do you need them?
    Hi Vincent,

    true...Bought it because people say good for potrait. That time bought a few lens when I bought my camera. Didnt even used all the lens. Even if i get 85 f2.8 again, I dont think I will use it much. Now I am i based in HK and lenses are cheaper here.. Say 1 day I am posted back to Sg, I can always sell it with minimal loss it I seldom use it.
    D40 + 2xSB800, 17-55mm f2.8, Micro VR 105 f2.8,VR 70-200mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Cons digger.
    Posts
    3,924

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by cwtan12 View Post
    I have got a copy of magazine (Japanese translated to Chinese) about Nikon's lens. There are a lot of photos there taken with each type of Sigma, Tokina, Tamron and of course Nikkor lens.

    1 thing I don't really understand is why most of the pictures taken with fast primes are more than f4? So does it make any sense to get a 85mm f/1.4 if most of the photos I take is f/1.8 and above?
    no necessarily but boosts the ego quite a bit
    “How fortunate for leaders that men do not think.” - Adolf Hitler

  18. #38
    Moderator ortega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    23,686
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    to shoot fast subjects, yes it is necessary

    fast subjects need fast lens, fast iso, fast camera and fast money

  19. #39

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by Canonised View Post
    Oh PLEASE! What utter nonsense! .... a "wise" guy once said
    400D + canon kit lens 18-55 3.5-5.6, let's all have a kit lens, you gotta start with the standard kit

    http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=244449
    Canon 400D:18-55:75-300:50F1.8:tokina 28-70F2.8:
    msn - viroxmk5@hotmail.com

  20. #40

    Default Re: Is fast lens necessary?

    can i easily conclude any prime lens below or f2.8 is considered as fast prime lens...the lower f, more faster lens...
    PM me if U Want Asst Wedding Photographer
    http://totoro17.multiply.com http://chinhaven.tripod.com

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •