| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/25/2006 03:45:07 PM · #26 |
why would anyone ever want to buy a soft focus lens?
p.s. not being sarcastic, am genuinely interested as to when this would be useful enough to warrant a separate lens.
Message edited by author 2006-05-25 15:45:35.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2006 03:48:19 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by k4ffy:
why would anyone ever want to buy a soft focus lens?
p.s. not being sarcastic, am genuinely interested as to when this would be useful enough to warrant a separate lens. |
If you work in film, and you do *lots* of portaits* (like, it's your business), it might well be worth the investment. For digital, no. |
|
|
|
05/25/2006 03:49:31 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by k4ffy:
why would anyone ever want to buy a soft focus lens? |
They worked well for 35mm portraiture as they gave a softer look to the photo. But, I always prefered to use diffusion filters rather than waste money on specialty glass.
I wouldn't buy one for digital work, mainly because I would prefer a SHARP image in post-process. It's fairly simple to mimmick the effects in photoshop, so it's not really worth the extra cash IMO.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2006 03:50:19 PM · #29 |
I don't do much shooting that you would call portrait, but I'm a big fan of the 85 f1.8. I use mine mostly for shooting indoor sports action. It's costs about one third of the price of the 135 f2 L, and, IMHO, it's focal length would make it more versatile for indoor portrait shooting on a 1.6 or 1.3 crop camera. But that advantage decreases when you're using a full frame camera like kirbic's 5D, and goes away completely if you have plenty of room in your studio.
As always, just my two cents.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2006 03:58:37 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by k4ffy:
why would anyone ever want to buy a soft focus lens?
p.s. not being sarcastic, am genuinely interested as to when this would be useful enough to warrant a separate lens. |
Back in the film days, before Photoshop, before digital cameras were anything other than a dream, soft focus was very popular in portraiture, particularly for women. Soft focus could be done in a variety of ways, putting diffusion over the lens, smearing vaseline on a filter, getting a dedicated soft focus filter etc.
The soft focus lens was simply a way to achieve the effect with a high degree of repeatability and without having discrete "steps" the way a filter on the lens or layers of diffusion would apply it.
The way the SF lens created the SF gives a particularly "creamy" SF effect. This was a more pleasing effect than other methods. It's also a pretty sharp lens with the SF effect off and is pretty affordable too. While it's not the equivalent of the 135L, it costs a LOT less. |
|
|
|
05/25/2006 03:59:55 PM · #31 |
From the description of the Canon 135 f2.8 Soft Focus at B&H (where it sells for $370) -
"Telephoto lens with a softfocus feature. It can give razor-sharp snapshots as well as softfocus shots that do not look blurry. You have a choice of two softfocus settings. Even for softfocus shots, focusing with AF is quick and accurate."
So apparently it is not a "soft focus only" lens.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2006 04:02:04 PM · #32 |
ah. thanks for all that.
cheers on the description, coolhar
|
|
|
|
05/26/2006 09:10:47 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Of the three, the 135mm/2.8 Soft Focus is probably the least well-thought-of. I'm reporting second-hand information, as I've never owned any of the three.
The lens that is always reported as highly superior is the 135mm f/2 L, it's a relative bargain in L glass, and the performance is simply outstanding, beyond any of the others mentioned here, and beyond the 100/2.8 macro as well. |
Thanks Kirbic.
"relative" is the key word, the 135L is a lot more expensive than the others--I had hoped to put my $300 rebate from the 5D to good use at B&H to pay for most of one of the other lenses, but the 135L is much better than the other lenses. Guess I'll save a bit more, and wait for the fall rebates.
Like I need another dose of "L fever" :-)(I've got it, I just can't afford to satisfy it right now. So many "Ls", so little money.) |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/02/2025 12:23:24 PM EDT.
