tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17534827.post272126011333418167..comments2024-03-29T05:53:42.260-04:00Comments on Digital ProTalk: PhotoFavs Wednesday: The Case Against Fast Glass; Follow My Twitterview TomorrowDavid Ziserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02674227631785266632noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17534827.post-51671969005746340972010-04-09T15:10:09.480-04:002010-04-09T15:10:09.480-04:00A little while ago, I decided to byte the bullet a...A little while ago, I decided to byte the bullet and put out over 1k for a 17-55 2.8 Nikon glass. Home tests were great. took the lens on the job only to realize that it focuses SLOWER then "crappy" 18-105 of mine. So I switched the bodies on the job (when had some free time) and same result. After exchanging this glass 3 times at B&H, on 4th time I just returned it. <br />As for primes, after bronika, as much as i miss med-format film, I DO NOT MISS PRIMES.<br />JoePicture Perfect NYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02208859008158979301noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17534827.post-7502001545326897452010-04-06T14:25:18.230-04:002010-04-06T14:25:18.230-04:00Dear Skippy,
You are sooo correct. In fact I h...Dear Skippy,<br /><br /> You are sooo correct. In fact I had a Canon rep tell me that as a wedding photographer, that I should get the 85 1.8 over the 85 1.4 lens due to the slower focus of the lens with all of that heavy glass. Faster focus and a lot less coin. Made sense to me.<br /><br />BuffyMark Ghttp://www.markgarber.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17534827.post-55448404979132477312010-04-02T01:08:22.467-04:002010-04-02T01:08:22.467-04:00Okay, not to tell an obviously very successful pho...Okay, not to tell an obviously very successful photographer what kind of equipment to use, but you cannot replace the qualities of fast glass in the slower models. First, on the occasion you want it (maybe 5% of the time) it is available. I find myself in the wide extreme far more often than I do the small extreme regardless of the range. My experiences with comparing fast and slow glass is the manufacturer simply makes the faster, more expensive lenses better. They have been sharper in the corners and the distortion is less noticeable.davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13043940361328866010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17534827.post-24707656689132719362010-04-01T21:24:39.087-04:002010-04-01T21:24:39.087-04:00Hello David,
thanks for another great post.
I agr...Hello David,<br />thanks for another great post. <br />I agree with you on the shallow depth of field at f/1.4. I got my 50 mm f/1.4 last year, and, as beginner, I just couldn't take a decent picture with it wide open. I did it gradually, and when my technique progressed, now I can take a shot at f/1.4. Fast glass takes time for rookies.Suselekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02764888111999628008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17534827.post-33580353198012615252010-03-31T19:59:03.315-04:002010-03-31T19:59:03.315-04:00This is not really an argument for or against fast...This is not really an argument for or against fast glass, but one of personal photographic style. <br /><br />Mr. Ziser's style just happens to work well with zoom lenses.Chris Pikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16435964043441598767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17534827.post-78801015022068293872010-03-31T17:21:04.656-04:002010-03-31T17:21:04.656-04:00I agree with your post, David! Tho I do own fast g...I agree with your post, David! Tho I do own fast glass I rarely shoot at 1.2. I use the 85 1.2 for my bride/groom portraits and for dramatic shots for seniors. Other than that I had to buy another 24-105 f4 because my wife I were always wanting to use it at weddings.<br /><br />I will say that when a shot is nailed with the 1.2 lenseit is astounding to look at.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17534827.post-35909500317240396522010-03-31T15:46:55.743-04:002010-03-31T15:46:55.743-04:00David, I understand your points however, there is ...David, I understand your points however, there is yet another very good reason to consider fast glass, and that has to do with focus. This is especially true at the reception which is usually very dark. TTL relies on good focus and certainly this can become an issue at f4.0 or 5.6 in a dark setting. The faster glass will give the user a more accurate focus under the same conditions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17534827.post-74528866378358089042010-03-31T14:38:06.059-04:002010-03-31T14:38:06.059-04:00While I tend to use the fastest glass I can get be...While I tend to use the fastest glass I can get because my theatrical photography requires that I work in dim light without any flash, I completely agree that the best choice for a person is not always the "best" thing available. Often times, the most expensive items are a waste of money.<br /><br />What I do find interesting about this article is how quickly it came after the posts talking about how you should use "Pro" level bodies to be a Professional, but apparently you don't need "Pro" level glass.j.goforthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04053313997374217759noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17534827.post-16123325630728369532010-03-31T14:02:27.012-04:002010-03-31T14:02:27.012-04:00While I'm not disagreeing with your points, Da...While I'm not disagreeing with your points, David, here are the three advantages I see in fast glass (I don't like primes so I'm talking specifically about f/2.8 zooms ):<br /><br />1, brighter viewfinder and 2, easier focus in low light when not using the AF-assist lamps:<br /><br />Both of these are becuase, when looking through the viewfinder of a modern DSLR you are looking through the lens at it's maximum aperture and the camera stops this down to your chosen aperture before the shot is taken.<br /><br />and 3, it's generally accepted that lenses are sharpest a few stops from their maximum aperture. Shoot at f/5.6 at 300mm on the 70-300 and you are wide open. Shoot at f/5.6 on the 70-200 and you are not wide-open and get the benefits to sharpness that entails.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10460894748085954676noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17534827.post-21695998860193977012010-03-31T12:26:51.993-04:002010-03-31T12:26:51.993-04:00In the "fast glass - no fast glass" argu...In the "fast glass - no fast glass" argument I couldn't agree more. As a macro shooter I could never understand the purpose of a f2.8 macro lens. I could see more utility in a f4 macro lens that doesn't double in length when focusing close to my subject. Insects hate that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com