Fast Lenses on (D)SLRs - Advantages, Disadvantages and Professional Tips
VloĆŸit
- Äas pĆidĂĄn 6. 07. 2024
- Fast lenses provide unique capabilities but also come with some drawbacks - only if you use them correctly and know some tricks you can get professional results with them.
The video will also provide necessary advice if you are in the process of buying a fast prime lens for your analog or digital SLR.
.
Video Content:
0:00 Introduction
1:09 Manual Focusing
2:01 Auto Focus
2:38 Low-Light Imaging Performance
3:20 Subject Separation and Softness
4:28 Size and Weight
5:36 Maximum Sharpness
6:48 Price
7:22 Focus Shift
9:07 Conclusion
.
Written Article: www.thomaseisl.photography/bl...
.
Instagram: / thomaseisl.photography
Website: www.thomaseisl.photography/
Facebook: / thomaseisl.photography
.
đ„ Sony ZV-1
.
#DSLR #SLR #photographytechniques #primelens #fastlens #photographyeducation #thomaseisl #thomaseislphotography
Please consider supporting the channel, buy a cup of coffee:
ko-fi.com/thomaseislphotography
Hi! Thomas. Very informative, practical & straight forward. I like it.Thank you, so much for sharing your experience and talent to us. Awesome video and meticulous in depth knowledge shared. God bless.
Thank you!
This is the best channel for pure content! I always find the subjects and concepts interesting and in line with my way of thinking. Cheers
Thank you very much for your comment, I'm truly humbled! Cheers to you, Sir
Thanks Thomas for the helpful tips. Another consideration I would share is that lenses with longer focal length than cca 90mm and sharper than cca f2 has such a shallow depth of field that make them practically useless as the depth of field in portrait composition becomes so thin that hardly anything covered on the subject's face. (E.g., even if you manage to get the iris sharp the eyelashes are already blurred, etc.) I used to have the 105/1.4, but got rid of it as it was practically useless for me as I do not like to have just a tiny fraction of the face being sharp and I could only achieve that by stopping down to at least 2.8. Then why should I have a big, bulky, heavy and expensive f1.4 lens? The Voigtlander 90/2.8 APO-Scopar is a hell a lot better, sharper, smaller and lighter for this purpose. Just a thought.
I agree regarding the DOF issue with full frame lenses and large apertures - the only situations where I appreciate f/1.4 is when shooting low light action with the D800. For portraiture, f/2 (Nikkor 105 DC) or f/2.8 (the VoigtlÀnder you've mentioned) are more than enough and can even result in more usable shots at the end of the day. I was thinking about getting the VoigtlÀnder exactly for the same reasons you've mentioned.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment, very much appreciated!
The lens I use most on my d850 and film cameras is a voigtlander 40mm f2 which renders amazing images and makes delightful prints. Love this channel looking forward to new videos!
The 40mm f2 has a really special character, I agree Farouk!
Thank you very much for sharing your experiences and your kind comment - I'm glad that you are enjoying the content!
Brilliant Thomas ! I was waiting for this since you mentioned to me on our Instagram message.
Thank you! I am glad you like it! Thanks!
Love my Voigtlander 58mm f1.4 Nokton. Tricky to nail focus at f1.4 due to the shallow depth of field, but it produces incredible images.
Agreed! It is an awesome lens, but when shooting digital I also take more shots from each scene to make sure that I get one in super crisp Focus at 1.4. Thank you for the comment!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and comments....I only have two prime lenses...35 & 50mm (Special edition)...both F1.8.....I am only a hobbyist but love using these two lenses... cheers from Australia đ
Those are two excellent lenses - and very affordable! I've used the 50mm SE extensively and was very happy with it's performance. I would use them for a pro assignment without hesitation! Last but not least they are significantly smaller than the 1.4 primes. Thanks for the comment, Robert!
Thomas, as usual you've presented an excellent analysis of fast lenses and their pros and cons. Thank you! Recently I was asked to shoot an event in a repurposed cellar, so the light was not good. I have the new Olympus OM-1 and freezing motion in low light is one of the challenges for the system. As I wanted to avoid faffing around with lens changes, I chose only one lens for the event, the Olympus 17mm f/1.2 lens. But despite my intention not to use flash, I still needed to use diffused flash to get most shots because it was a very active scene, lots of people milling about with only mood lighting and I didn't want to risk blurry shots. Fortunately, because of the 2x DoF of the M4/3 system, I could shoot wide open all evening without fear of razor-thin DoF. I don't know how different it would have been using a FF camera, but I was really glad to use the greater DoF of the system as an advantage this time, as I'm aware that sometimes it's been cited as a disadvantage.
Thank you very much for sharing that - in my experience, much like yours - more DOF was never a disadvantage. Being able to shoot lenses wide open in low light means that you are actually able to make use of the full aperture - without missing focus that often (just as you've stated). If you would have used a FF side by side, you might have found that the overall difference in the final image is not something to write home about.
Do not hesitate to use the OM-1 with higher ISO numbers, the camera can easily take that.
Thanks for the great contribution!
Thank you for your wise and structured video, for me the 35/1.4 and 85/1.4 Nikkor ais are the best in therms of image quality, size and price
Thank you very much for your exceptionally kind comment. I think that the two lenses you have mentioned are really exceptional and a great duo for every camera bag!
3:30 - "Softness & lack of sharpness wide open": Thomas, that is exactly why I love my old (almost 25 years) & fast Tokina Zooms 28-70/f2.6-2.8 ATX AF Pro II and 80-200mm f/2.8 AT-X AF Pro so much. I bought them brand new back in 1997, I think. Please don't nail me down on this but that's the year I started shooting "Jazz Baltica" and therefor I needed fast zooms to shoot on my Nikon F90x - great old days (lol). They both were considerably less expensive then than the corresponding Nikkor lenses, come with a very nice creamy look wide open, deliver beautiful bokeh and are perfect for portraiture. Stopped down just a tad both are tack sharp & contrasty for crispy images of all kind.
Weird enough the Tokina 80-200 is identified by software as "Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor ED 80-200mm f/2.8D" - a deeper dive into the EXIF data reveals that.
So I borrowed that very Nikkor lens and took a few comparism shots side by side with the Tokina, both lenses mounted on my trusty D800. And you know what? The pictures taken are almost undistinguishable concerning sharpness, fringing (wide open) and contrast. Maybe a licensing deal between Nikon and Tokina? - I don't know.
I really would love to post the comparism shots here but it seams youtube doesn't allow that? Whatever! Thanks for sharing the video, Thomas! Have a good time!
That is really interesting! I have not heard about that, but it well could be a licensing deal!
I am sorry, I think you cannot post images here. But if you like, you could send the images to my mail address (see channel description).
Thanks for your comment and I am glad that another photographer values these older lenses for the exact same reasons. It does not always have to be this "uber-sharpness" and crispness!
Thank you for your comment!
Very insightful as a discussion. My experience has been that the best value of fast lenses has been for acquiring both critical focus and for focusing in low light. In the past, these were the two primary concerns that fast lenses addressed. I like the isolation of subject that using wider apertures produces but in the aperture range of F5.6 upwards, with lenses of focal lengths f=35mm to f=100mm the separation is beautiful, the fine tuning that altering aperture between f5.6 and f2 allows, lets me control my rendering of background blur. In the past, shooting at fully open aperture was done only if absolutely necessary, most lenses tended to have compromised performance wide open. Stopping down just one stop would often improve the image quality significantly. In other words the open aperture was more of a focus-aid than a taking aperture. Lenses tended to be Planar or Ultron designs and six to eight elements would give great results without difficulties. Wide aperture lenses needing a flatter focal plane than a Planar and Ultron design need things like ultra-low dispersion glass, large elements, floating groups and other complications. Each glass/air transition causes loss of transmission. The eight to ten element f1.4 lens physically starts to look like it was made for a medium format camera, especially when you factor in focus motors and servos.
Modern lenses are designed to be used at full aperture without major aberrations. Many of the aberrations are corrected in camera digitally. The qualities of the images they make are different. The super-detailed look often lacks the micro-contrast that creates that 3D pop and plasticity of rendering. The fashion for Bokeh has bent some minds away from what the story a picture can tell, towards slavishly trying to use bokeh as a means to an end at the cost of a better image. The large aperture lens is a different tool now because of the bokeh fixation and perhaps a lot less interesting for it.
I will buy one super-fast optic to add to my collection but, in general itâs not super-necessary. I like 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 element lenses and these are in the f4 to f2 range in the main. They are small, utilitarian, sharp, tonal and have the ability to let me build narrative and drama in images as necessary. The f1.2 lens I will buy will be a vintage lens but one known for its image making qualities allowing me to fine tune the rendering of my images to suit the story. Cameras are so good now that high ISO work is easily beyond criticism and low light and fast shutter speeds are attainable without loss of quality.
Exceptional comment!
I agree with everything you stated so eloquently and detailed - thanks for the clarity and thoughtfulness.
The "focusing aperture" issue is very interesting especially when examining lenses for vintage rangefinder cameras, which of course did not need a fast focusing aperture and often those lenses had slower apertures to begin with
It is really incredibly when you look at modern lens designs - as you've stated - the lenses are monstrous, although incredible in technical terms. The character is a different aspect - and I again agree with your remarks.
Thank you for bringing this up! An outstanding analysis.
Youâre right about rangefinder cameras. The lenses are very close to the film plane so that means smaller, more pinpoint, circular, circles of confusion at any given aperture than when the distance between the lens and the focal plane has to include space for the reflex mirror. The rangefinder lenses didnât focus closely and the main problems are parallax and encroachment of the lens into the field of view of the viewfinder. As long as the lenses were calibrated and cammed accurately, critical focus was adequately covered by depth of focus at the typical taking distances. SLRs made the photographer work harder to translate focussing into focus. Thin depth of focus and a bright ground glass made for easier critical focusing. The SLR and the view camera are relatives, with the SLR being faster and more convenient in use. I would guess that a rangefinder lens would be hard to focus if by some weird trick it could be used on an SLR. Probably hard to find the critical focus within a range of acceptably sharp depth of focus. Rangefinder photographers are very alive to whatever is in the frame and how action is unfolding as well as the context. The images produced are often more intriguing and dramatic moments in time. SLR images can be more technical and subject focused.
Agreed! I'm planning on producing a video comparing different types of viewfinders and how they can affect one's photography - I'm taking notes on what you have stated!
Great video based on long experience, again. But you have solved one of my mysteries.. modern fast lens on modern dslr.. but soft images.. I thought it was due to shallow depth of field combined with a misaligned phase detect sensor.. no it was focus shift. Thanks. Gut sein.
Hey Graham! That is great to hear - DSLRs are awesome, but you constantly have to check if everything is as it should be. So I'm glad that you were able to identify the issue!
Good Evening, Thomas, Thank you for some very interesting information, and good suggestions! Personally, almost all of my current Nikon DSLR lenses are f2.8, and I LOVE them. Nikon 14-24 f2.8G ED; Nikon 24-70 f2.8G ED; Nikon 70-200 f2.8 E FL ED; and Nikon 105 f2.8G ED. In my camera pack, I also carry a Nikon 50 f1.8G ED. Camera bodies are all Nikon: D7000, D7100, D700, (2) D750's, D4s. I have NO plans to buy a mirrorless camera, as it will offer me nothing that I don't already have, and I am totally satisfied with the images I can create with my stable of Nikon DSLR camera bodies, and lenses! I would like to add on longer telephoto lens, but that will come in time. Thank you, again, for offering your experience and talent in your videos. Much appreciated! Take care, and God Bless! - Doc Mark
Dear Mark! Thank you very much for your comment, and for sharing your equipment. I also very much appreciate your remarks regarding mirrorless - "switching" to mirrorless is really not necessary. I mean, I have mirrorless as well, and I like it. It has its place, but DSLRs are absolutely awesome and you are definitely not getting "more camera" with mirrorless.
Thank you very much for this exceptionally kind comment, I am honored, really!
Thank you Thomas...Really interesting. I have 3 fast lenses, Canon 50mm f1.2 & 85mm f1.2 & 135 f2 lenses. I wouldn't part with them for anything ! They are, for me really inspiring lenses to use. The f1.2 aperture took a bit of mastering but once so, they produce amazing results. Interestingly, I use all 3 for landscape shot fully open, as opposed to portraits.. I get terrific response from viewers who cannot quite explain what is so attractive about the image they see. I find it very enjoyable using them for landscapes and isolating subjects in a wash of colour. As I use them all on APSC sensor cameras, most aberrations at the edges are eliminated as I am only using the centre where they are the sharpest. đđ»
Wow, those are some true legendary lenses, Gerry!
I think you just inspired me to try fast lenses for landscape myself - I have just the right project idea for that. Thank you very much, also thanks for watching so many of my videos.
I'm glad to have you on the channel!
@@ThomasEisl.Photography You're welcome Thomas.... incredibly the effect shooting landscape at f1.2 / f2, for me, is quite addictive. Those lenses impart quite a different feel and effect from "normal" landscape photography lenses such as wide angle etc. They are 3 lenses I would never part with just because of their "special" attributes. Regards...Gerry
Great video, thank you.
I love the flexibility and creative opportunities that "fast" lenses offer.
If you need sharp "fast" lenses on Sony the GM's are excellent. I use the 14mm 1.8, 24mm 1.4 and the 50mm 1.2 on my a7c all are sharp and provide excellent contrast wide open.
Except for the the 50mm these lenses are light weight (for me any lens
Yes, the GM series is really great - I've heard only good things about them - and yes, I also tend to pick a fast lens when in doubt! The flexibility - as youve said - is just great!
Also, as you've said - weight tolerances are subjective, right!
Thank you very much for your donation - this means a lot, and I very much appreciate your support!
My favourite Lens for my Nikon df is the 50mm 1.8 G special edition, but I am tempted to buy the voigtlander 40 mm f/2 Ultron SL IIs because 40mm is my favourite focal length. I am starting to enjoy manual focus. Thanks for the video!
I've worked with the 50mm 1.8 Special as well, it is a wonderful lens (and beautifully designed), just like the VoigtlĂ€nder! Can't go wrong with either âșïž Thank you for the comment!
Curiously what are your thoughts on putting a split screen focuser in a dslr since it seems like you manual focus a fair bit plus have both film and digital experience. I have definitely done this as a back check of autofocus and especially for macro.
Yes, that is a great idea - it can be a bit difficult to get a split screen for some models, as most manufacturers have discontinued them, which is unfortunate.
Thanks for bringing it up!
Older AFD fast lens are more tempting for smaller size, i choose AFD 35mm over the AFS. What is your suggestion on 50-58/60mm, 85-100mm fast lens choices? :)
Thank you for asking and yes, the 35mm f/2 is an outstanding lens. It is the Nikkor Sumicron in my book at least.
In the 50 to 60mm range I would pick the VoigtlÀnder 58mm f/1.4 SL-IIS. It is a manual focus lens, but the optical rendering and product design is outstanding. it is also compatible with any Nikon SLR ever made. It is one of my most used lenses in both professional and leisure scenarios.
The 85mm to 100mm range is tricky! My pick would be the 85mm f/1.8 AF-D as it is incredible value for money and slightly creamy when shot wide open. If you are not afraid of inviting a diva to your house, consider the 105 f/2 DC, it is a portrait photographer's dream. But it demands attention to get it to work properly, especially the depth of defocus feature.
Did I meet your taste?
The only fast lens I care to have is the 50 1.8. I have 4 of them.. hard to pass them up for 5 bucks now and then. The 40 2.8 is a better pwrformer though. I never shoot wider than 2.8 on FF anyways, unless I let program take the wheel in low light. My nice zoom is just an F4 constant and I rather the extra range into 105mm. An older 90mm 2.8 macro is my portrait lens. I don't need my lenses to weigh double my DSLR.
Completely agree - it is not necessary to have a fast lens, especially if you are willing to use a flash under certain circumstances. Thanks for sharing !
Hi Thomas, if a fast lens is used on a mirrorless camera together with AF points selection, does it mean one can eliminate the focus shift problem completely?
Interestingly not - it eliminates issues stemming from focus-recompose, but focus shift is a lens characteristic, which affects all camera types, unfortunately
Interesting stuff, liking that hefty 105mm lens on your D800. I only have 2 fast lenses, my only prime lenses in fact, a Canon 50mm EF f/1.8 and a Yongnuo 35mm EF f/2.0 - they both look like tinker toys next to that thing. Every other lens I have is f/3.5 or f/4.0 maximum, but since they're all zoom lenses I suppose that's pretty common. I have yet to invest in any form of "luxury" or very high-standard prime yet, since I'm not a working professional who can easily recover the costs of gear through paid-work so it's hard to justify buying anything other than decent consumer lenses for now, as a hobbyist/enthusiast. Would be nice to have a good prime for my only full-frame DSLR though, my Canon 6D, since that type of pro-level camera is best paired with fast, high-quality lenses. But even then I'm likely to only grab such a lens going for a good price on eBay, I expect, rather than pay full price as I think lenses which cost 5 times more than a pro camera body is as ridiculous as the GPU pricing fiasco, the way they cost more than the rest of an entire PC put together is manufacturer greed. I expect price-hiking is just as common amongst lens manufacturers, changing a fortune just because they're either a "brand" company or because they consider it a "specialist" item and they think professionals have pockets lined with gold which leaves hobbyists out-priced and stuck with using lower-quality lenses made of plastic and producing chromatic aberration. Little wonder the industry is facing tough times when they shoot themselves in the foot with such antics, but it is what it is. I'd love a Canon 100mm prime for its 1:1 macro.
Having a fast 50mm and fast 35mm is perfectly fine! Again, if you ever feel like spending the money don't hesitate - if it furthers your art, it is totally justified. Being a professional does not mean being better or more entitled than an amateur. It simply means that you can be hired, while an amateur is only driven by his passion and intrinsic motivation only. I would rate being an amateur at least as high as being a professional.
Regarding the issue with high pricing - I agree. That is why most of my kit is not comprised of the latest and greatest stuff but the latest and greatest from the last decade. Like DSLRs, and AF-D Nikkor lenses. Those tools are still outstanding, but can be had for considerably less!
I don't know how the pricing for used canon gear is and if there are comparable "pro bargains" available.
@@ThomasEisl.Photography I don't think an amateur equals a professional in any hobby or career. It's nothing to do with money, gear or potential skill - but rather experience, alone. I mean, you wouldn't want an amateur surgeon operating on you, an amateur pilot flying a Boeing 747, or amateur constructors building your dream home. Equally, many couples wouldn't want a complete amateur photographing their wedding, possibly the most important day of their lives, when they can hire a pro to do a better job simply based on his portfolio which proves his experience. I'm sure there are amateurs who are capable of doing a professional-quality job, no doubt, but the only way of knowing if they can is by seeing examples of their work, knowing they have the right gear and frame of mind for such a task. If you're picking someone based on trust, maybe they're a friend or family, you're not caring if they're a pro. But if you don't know them, then their experience is all you have to go on.
I think photography is one of those interests that has a fairly steep learning curve due to requiring a lot of theoretical and technical knowledge to achieve high-level standards - the old "easy to learn, difficult to master" adage might sum up what I'm really trying to say in a few words. Anyone can point & click even the most expensive DSLR, but knowing about composition, manual focusing, lighting, etc takes much more than just pressing a shutter button and hoping for the best.
You titled your last focusing video with "Masterclass" - is that because the information presented is coming from someone who has "mastered" certain skills and wishes to teach them or because the information is aimed at people who want to advance their skills to a higher level, beyond amateur and begin "mastering" professional abilities? I suppose "amateur" is such a nuanced term that it's not always easy to define what it really means in every situation without either sounding pretentious or disrespectful of what is required to even be an amateur in certain fields... e.g. tons of amateur musicians produce extremely good music without access to a studio, producers or expensive recording equipment. Yet given time, investment and experience we know they can take themselves to a higher level and become professionals. I think photography is much the same - every avid photographer starts at a basic level and builds up their skills over years of personal development, honing their abilities and fine-tuning their setup until it becomes second nature.
Yes, you are right. There are many amateurs who put in the time and effort to reach a high level of skill! And that is admirable
Most fast lenses at f1.4 or f1.8 are not that sharp in the center, have unsharp borders and lack contrast but the Sigma 40mm, 85mm and 135mm art series are extremely sharp wide open. The Sigma 40mm f1.4 is in my opinion a lens that can not be man made because the center and borders are almost the same at f1.4. And this goes also for the Tamron 35mm f1.4 by the way. Maybe they found an alien spaceship which contained the schematics for such optics. Who knows?đ
Agreed!
And yes, some Sigma and Tamron lenses have "unholy" qualities to them. I've also had the 18-35 APSC for a while, it was also too good to be true for a zoom lens.
Thanks for the comment and sharing your lens recommendations!
@@ThomasEisl.Photography 18-35 is indeed an amazing lens granted that you callibrate the AF correctly with usb dock. Valuas needed are quite unpredictable in advance but ok. It worksđ
Yes, the calibrate your lens thing also freaked me out, I'm just very happy with the image and build quality of this lens
Jesus does not use autofocus .
Haha đ