Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 59 of 59

Thread: DA* lens combination ?

  1. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,984

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Quote Originally Posted by evolutioner View Post
    Which is the better choice? DA* 50-135 or Sigma 70-200/2.8 HSM II or Tamron 70-200/2.8?
    The 50-135 and 70-200 are very different beasts leh, cannot really compare. I'd choose to have the 50-135 'cos the size and weight is small and light enough that I'll carry it around as a walkabout lens.
    My photos - see just some or all of it =)

  2. #42
    Senior Member darrrrrrrrrr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,208

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Day to day the 50-135 is more easy to live with. It's not that heavy and bulky, not much bigger than a consumer zoom.

    With a 70-200 you need to plan to bring it out and deal with the weight and the size, especially with it mounted on the camera.

    But it's really great hehe..

  3. #43

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Quote Originally Posted by edutilos- View Post
    Well, I don't think you really need such a fast UWA.... I'd rather have a pancake 10mm F/8, truth be told, just needs to be sharp enough.
    I see, I was thinking of a UWA for bokeh. what options will I have?

  4. #44
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    The Far East
    Posts
    1,466

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Piscator View Post
    I see, I was thinking of a UWA for bokeh. what options will I have?
    Since there is no Tokina 11-16/2.8 for K-mount, the closest alternative is the Sigma 10-20/3.5.

    Then again, why would one need bokeh for UWA, unless you're doing creative portraits? There's always the gaussian blur tool for that.
    Brand loyalty? Pffttt...| Got Flickr?
    I shoot JPEG (got a problem with that?)

  5. #45

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Thanks Baracus, How about the DA limited 15mm F4.0? Can get some bokeh too right? Gaussian as in a PP thingy?

  6. #46

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Piscator View Post
    Thanks Baracus, How about the DA limited 15mm F4.0? Can get some bokeh too right? Gaussian as in a PP thingy?
    if you shoot up close, at f/4, you should get good bokeh from the DA 15, which can shoot subjects just 17cm away. So it's quite amazing.
    --

  7. #47

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Quote Originally Posted by darrrrrrrrrr View Post
    Day to day the 50-135 is more easy to live with. It's not that heavy and bulky, not much bigger than a consumer zoom.

    With a 70-200 you need to plan to bring it out and deal with the weight and the size, especially with it mounted on the camera.

    But it's really great hehe..
    More details please.. haha

  8. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,984

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Piscator View Post
    I see, I was thinking of a UWA for bokeh. what options will I have?
    Not easy to get UWA bokeh, have to go really close. What's the subject you have in mind? Something like these?

    DA*16-50mm, @16mm f4


    DA10-17 fisheye, @15mm f5.6
    My photos - see just some or all of it =)

  9. #49

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    that's exciting to know! Am checking the internet for 15mm bokeh but it is very rare. And then saw our venerable Frank lurking in many forums with his stunning photos.

  10. #50

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gengh View Post
    Not easy to get UWA bokeh, have to go really close. What's the subject you have in mind? Something like these?

    DA*16-50mm, @16mm f4


    DA10-17 fisheye, @15mm f5.6

    Wow, nice photos! More of half body human potrait.
    Last edited by Piscator; 12th April 2011 at 11:54 AM.

  11. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    "River end"
    Posts
    4,249

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Piscator View Post
    that's exciting to know! Am checking the internet for 15mm bokeh but it is very rare. And then saw our venerable Frank lurking in many forums with his stunning photos.
    this is with the DA15mm




    to shoot half body with 15mm, one got to go very close and it's too close for people to feel comfortable.
    Last edited by istDeS; 12th April 2011 at 01:00 PM.

  12. #52
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,984

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Piscator View Post
    Wow, nice photos! More of half body human potrait.
    Sorry I don't think I have any good examples of that... to go that close for a portrait, you'll probably end up with pretty heavy distortion on the features (like "The Dog" if you know what that is), most people don't like that.
    My photos - see just some or all of it =)

  13. #53

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    I see.... distortion.... thanks guys!

  14. #54
    Senior Member edutilos-'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    The Universe
    Posts
    5,991

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gengh View Post
    Sorry I don't think I have any good examples of that... to go that close for a portrait, you'll probably end up with pretty heavy distortion on the features (like "The Dog" if you know what that is), most people don't like that.
    To add on, please DO NOT confuse this with lens distortion.

    I had huge troubles trying to explain this to one of the CS "portrait masters" who insisted that his lens was distortion free based on lens tests on the net.

    You have to think of it in extreme terms. Just look at the standard UWA landscape, where a huge key element is emphasized, say, a rock with background as sea, water and sky. Is the rock larger than the cloud in the distance? Definitely not, but the focal length makes this so.

    Now back track about 200 steps with the same focal length (UWA). Look at the rock and the sea now, does the rock seem more in proportion to what your eyes see? For sure.

    Now replace the rock with someone's nose, for example, and picture it as the foreground with the ears and the eyes as the background. The use of a too-wide focal length when you are too close can over-emphasize the features nearer to the lens surface, making them larger than is proportionally so. This can be used to great effect, but most of the time it is frowned upon. This applies to all focal lengths - for example if you shoot a head shot with a 35mm lens, i.e. fill the whole frame with the head, you would get it too. There is no need to be over pedantic about this, but knowing it's there is important, so that you can determine whether you WANT it there.

    Hope this helps.
    Last edited by edutilos-; 12th April 2011 at 01:58 PM.

  15. #55

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    This is distortion caused by perspective, and it gets worse the close you need to physically stand from the subject.

    Normal lens distortion is the same irregardless of your position with regards to the subject, and is relatively easy to correct for.

    Perspective distortion is very hard to correct for after the shot, only careful positioning of the subject can help reduce the effect.

    This is another reason why portrait lenses tend to be longer - the longer focal length enables you to stand further away and this greatly reduces the effect of perspective distortion.

  16. #56

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Quote Originally Posted by edutilos- View Post
    To add on, please DO NOT confuse this with lens distortion.

    I had huge troubles trying to explain this to one of the CS "portrait masters" who insisted that his lens was distortion free based on lens tests on the net.

    You have to think of it in extreme terms. Just look at the standard UWA landscape, where a huge key element is emphasized, say, a rock with background as sea, water and sky. Is the rock larger than the cloud in the distance? Definitely not, but the focal length makes this so.

    Now back track about 200 steps with the same focal length (UWA). Look at the rock and the sea now, does the rock seem more in proportion to what your eyes see? For sure.

    Now replace the rock with someone's nose, for example, and picture it as the foreground with the ears and the eyes as the background. The use of a too-wide focal length when you are too close can over-emphasize the features nearer to the lens surface, making them larger than is proportionally so. This can be used to great effect, but most of the time it is frowned upon. This applies to all focal lengths - for example if you shoot a head shot with a 35mm lens, i.e. fill the whole frame with the head, you would get it too. There is no need to be over pedantic about this, but knowing it's there is important, so that you can determine whether you WANT it there.

    Hope this helps.
    Many thumbs up for this!

  17. #57
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,984

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Quote Originally Posted by edutilos- View Post
    To add on, please DO NOT confuse this with lens distortion.

    I had huge troubles trying to explain this to one of the CS "portrait masters" who insisted that his lens was distortion free based on lens tests on the net.

    You have to think of it in extreme terms. Just look at the standard UWA landscape, where a huge key element is emphasized, say, a rock with background as sea, water and sky. Is the rock larger than the cloud in the distance? Definitely not, but the focal length makes this so.

    Now back track about 200 steps with the same focal length (UWA). Look at the rock and the sea now, does the rock seem more in proportion to what your eyes see? For sure.

    Now replace the rock with someone's nose, for example, and picture it as the foreground with the ears and the eyes as the background. The use of a too-wide focal length when you are too close can over-emphasize the features nearer to the lens surface, making them larger than is proportionally so. This can be used to great effect, but most of the time it is frowned upon. This applies to all focal lengths - for example if you shoot a head shot with a 35mm lens, i.e. fill the whole frame with the head, you would get it too. There is no need to be over pedantic about this, but knowing it's there is important, so that you can determine whether you WANT it there.

    Hope this helps.
    Good point, I guess people who shoot land/cityscapes are just a lot more attuned to the effects of perspective distortion than people who don't.

    Actually, istDes' pic of the shopkeeper uncle is a good example. His hands are disproportionally large due to the wide angle perspective. And if TS is looking for half-body, UWA portrait with OOF background, it also shows how difficult it might be. Need to pose correctly to tackle the distortion, and it's still pretty difficult to throw the background really out of focus 'cos the working distance is just not close enough.
    My photos - see just some or all of it =)

  18. #58

    Default Re: DA* lens combination ?

    Thanks Edutilos for explaining further. I suppose you mean every woman's face looks like bitch when we look at it at kissing range. They probably feel the same about mine.

  19. #59
    Member lionel lim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Ang Mo Kio
    Posts
    22

    Default

    Thank everyone share your idea to me
    Lionelim

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

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
  •