Manual Focussing Screens

[bobbytan]

Dermot, no, I have not taken out the 28/2.8 even once since I got it from you! I know what it can do, as I had one before and have made a 24 x 36" print from a tranny and it looked amazingly sharp!

After my bad experience with the 85/1.4 I am shying away from MF lenses - at least until I get myself a decent focusing screen with a split-image or microprism center. I am MF-challenged.

Yes, I was quite surprised by the quality of the light from a white reflector. This is the first time I used a reflector, and it got my attention big time! I think I would like to get the Lasolite Tri Grip reflector, or some other brand with the hand grip.

Fill flash can be very good if you know how to do it, and 95% of photographers don't know how to use it correctly - me included. There are a lot of good articles written on the proper use of fill flash. Check this one out - and make sure you turn on the voice commentary - the button is at the top right side of the page.

http://www.photoworkshop.com/canon/speedlite/index.html

 

[bobbytan]

The Paterson Interfit Easy Grip reflector looks better than the Lastolite version ... and they are cheaper too! They sell for $35 at Adorama. Check it out, if anyone is interested:

http://www.patersonphotographic.com/lighting/Asseories%20reflectors%20MianFRM.htm

 

[thedruid]

Bobby i just picked up another 28mm how crazy am I?
I have a phototflex reflector I 've used for years, there's a grip you can buy for it that attaches to a regular light stand, as long as it's not windy you can place this close to your subject and shoot with a 300mm f2.8 if you want. I do some location work form time to time so I have a whole Dyna-Lite set up.

As to the CZ85 f1.4 from what I've read this lens is nearly impossible to focus manually on Canon Digital bodies and in not very good wide open, please no flamers here

.

Interesting too is that the 28-85mm and 35-70mm sseem to have switched up when it comes to digital use, the 28-85mm was always seen as a great film lens a bit better than the 35-70mm but seems the 35-70 outshines it on a digital platform.

I used to have the wider zoom for my RX and have a Poster in circulation that went up to 24" from it and held up OK. I'm interested to see how the 5D combo will look at 22 x 28 next to my Pentax 645N .

The image is on the left at this link
http://www.art.com/asp/display_artist-asp/_/crid--8966/Dermot_Conlan.htm

 

[bobbytan]

No, you are not crazy at all. With the 5D, using good wide primes make a lot of sense, as Canon's wides are woefully lacking (pathetic is a better word) in quality. I will start using my 28 as soon as I can find a focusing screen that works for me.

I believe I've told you that I bought the 28/2.8 for sentimental reasons, as this and the 50/1.4 are 2 of the best lenses. Of course nothing compares to the 21, but they are unbeatable in terms of value, and are head-and-shoulders above the Canon equivalent. Having said that, I love my Canon 50/2.5 macro, as that is one sharp and contrasty lens.

BTW I have a DynaLite 400 Jr with the JackRabbit battery pack. I should get a cable to allow me to connect the 580EX to the JackRabbit pack. But then again, I don't shoot weddings and rarely use my flash!

 

[djg]

CZ 85/1.4 is nicely soft wide open by design - close it one or two stops and it's tack sharp. I love that lens, and have no problems focusing in my 1DsII. No flames needed, just some images

.

Monument Valley, Utah, CZ 85/1.4

Horseshoe Bend, Page, Arizona, CZ 85/1.4

 

[thedruid]

Nice image's DJ I like the second one as it's a little different form the norm. I'm sure most of these lenses are sharp stopped down but most people buy a 1.4 to use at 1.4. But hey I don't have this lens I use it's little brother the 85 f2.8.

 

[djg]

Thanks, Dermot. It's tough to get an original image of something that's been photographed to death, even as we speak. I think the original intent of the soft 1.4 was for portraiture, where you don't necessarily want to see every little pore and follicle in unforgiving sharpness

.

The 85/2.8 is a great lens. Nice and compact too. One benefit of the 1.4 I do appreciate is it does help manual focusing on the 1DsII. I don't really get where the hard to focus comments come from. But hey, whatever works for people is the best thing for them.

 

[djg]

Bobby, I actually don't mind the hand out of focus - that way it doesn't try to compete with those eyes and lips which are the real story. Beautiful shot.

 

[bobbytan]

Thank you DJ. I know the owners of the Canon 85/1.2 will approve of the very shallow DOF!

Nice diazochrome-like image of Horseshoe Bend that you got there. For those who have not seen a picture of Horshoe Bend, here's what it looks like:

 

[djg]

Beautiful one there too! What I love about these places is how much they change as the sun changes position throughout the day east to west, and throughout the year as it gets further or closer to the horizon. I'm glad you don't go for too flat a look.

In my original processing I went for a bluer look to enhance the water and make it contrast more with the reflected golden sunlight, but after posting it I went back and re-did the white balance for a warmer look on the selected images from that morning.

I was standing not far to the right from where you were. Two feet from that ledge gets a bit fidgety, especially when you go around the front to change the lens

.