portrait lens for canon d5? - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

04/30/2007 12:51:35 PM · #26

thank you:)
I have bought a 5d today with 70-200mm f4 lens:)
yooohoo!!

dwterry

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

04/30/2007 01:21:24 PM · #27

Originally posted by hankk:

Originally posted by kirbic:
Because the 5D uses the full width of the image circle, the performance of a lens at the outer fringes of its image circle become important. Many otherwise good lenses show noticeable corner performance issues (softness, CA) on the 5D.

Yes, but the lens'es performance is no worse than it is on film :)

Actually, that's not true... Film is a flat surface. Light can fall on the film from any angle. Sensors have small "buckets" for each pixel. The buckets mean light needs to come into the lens closer to parallel or you lose part of the light. So a higher quality lens is needed to bring the light into the back plane of digital camera.

At least ... thats MY understanding of it. :-)

I also understand that Canon tries to mitigate this issue by placing tiny little lenses over top of these buckets to help gather the light in and focus it down on the sensor.

hankk

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Canon

04/30/2007 01:43:52 PM · #28

yea....forgot about the "buckets". But AFIK, that relates to vignetting, not to sharpness, barrel distortion, CA, and all the "other" stuff. vignetting is easily corrected in PS (although some people add it intentionally, especially to portraits.)

And to nit-pick, some say that film isn't always flat, or at least not as flat as a sensor. :-)

Message edited by author 2007-04-30 13:44:53.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

04/30/2007 02:16:19 PM · #29

Originally posted by hankk:

And to nit-pick, some say that film isn't always flat, or at least not as flat as a sensor. :-)

Film flatness is pretty much a non-issue with roll format cameras since the winding mechanism hold the film in slight tension and the pressure plate flattens it out. It's not until you get into using sheet film that it becomes "noticeable", especially with larger formats like 8x10 and even then, it's usually minimal.

It's also erroneous to consider color film as having no depth, since the different color sensitive emulsions are layered on top of one another and not spread out in one homogeneous layer. It's true that the different pixel "buckets" have a different effect on the image, but to assume that film is flat and without depth is false.

Message edited by author 2007-04-30 14:20:45.

dwterry

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

04/30/2007 02:30:37 PM · #30

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

It's also erroneous to consider color film as having no depth, since the different color sensitive emulsions are layered on top of one another and not spread out in one homogeneous layer. It's true that the different pixel "buckets" have a different effect on the image, but to assume that film is flat and without depth is false.

But at least, with film, there are no "vertical walls" which disrupt the entry of light onto the grain of the film. Instead, it just goes into the film at different angles.

Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX

04/30/2007 02:32:05 PM · #31

Originally posted by dwterry:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
It's also erroneous to consider color film as having no depth, since the different color sensitive emulsions are layered on top of one another and not spread out in one homogeneous layer. It's true that the different pixel "buckets" have a different effect on the image, but to assume that film is flat and without depth is false.

But at least, with film, there are no "vertical walls" which disrupt the entry of light onto the grain of the film. Instead, it just goes into the film at different angles.

Yes, it's different than film for sure.

k4rp

Nikon D200

05/02/2007 08:24:52 AM · #32

Reading your story here, I'd stick with the D50 some longer. You surely haven't used it to full potential yet. The 5D won't improve your photography dramatically. I think you're better off keeping the D50 a bit longer, try some different lenses and upgrade in a year, or 2, or 3, or 5. There is soooooo much to learn. And better camera's like the 5D will only become cheaper and cheaper.
Camera's don't take pictures, you do.

05/02/2007 10:15:17 AM · #33

Originally posted by k4rp:

yes, you are absolutely right Erik.
I have both now. that was my desision and I am happy with it.
I was not hoping a new cam would make me a great photographer.
I just felt i needed 5d.
I have been taking photos today with both d50 and 5d. there is a whole world between them. i love both though, for different purposes.

05/02/2007 10:22:53 AM · #34

To the original question:

When I was shooting film, my absolute favorite portrait lens was my 105 f1.8 Nikkor. Second would have been the 85mm 1.4.

Alas, both of them are long gone along with all my other film cameras.

Message edited by author 2007-05-02 10:23:28.

05/02/2007 10:29:47 AM · #35

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

thank you! yes, 85mm 1.2 is on my wishlist:) some months later...
they say it is a bit difference between 1.8 an 1.2, is it true? the prices are definitely different.

05/02/2007 11:28:18 AM · #36

Originally posted by silverfoxx:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
To the original question:

When I was shooting film, my absolute favorite portrait lens was my 105 f1.8 Nikkor. Second would have been the 85mm 1.4.

Alas, both of them are long gone along with all my other film cameras.

thank you! yes, 85mm 1.2 is on my wishlist:) some months later...
they say it is a bit difference between 1.8 an 1.2, is it true? the prices are definitely different.

The f1.2 is a whole stop brighter. I just loved the feel that lens gave to the subjects, especially shot wide open or nearly so.

Both of mine were the manual focus AI versions and of course, they were Nikkor lenses. Still, I think there are adapters that will let you shoot Nikkor AI lenses on a Canon EOS body. I think

kirbic has one.