Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
maurotandoi.photo

Smoking Girl with A7r2 & 50 1.4 ZA

Recommended Posts

Well exposed ? 

Well focused ?   

Superb DoF ? 

   

I must be seeing a different picture ..... 

   

What I see is a pic of the eyelashes on one eye 

which leaps out and grabs excessive attention 

due to compromised focus on every other part 

of the face .... all accompanied by a blown out 

exposure on the hand holding the cigarette that 

is also outa focus despite being featured in the 

title of the shot.   

   

I don't wanna be hard on the author of the shot. 

For all I know he's barely begun in photo and is 

making great progress. I only wanna be hard on 

those who compliment the flaws in the image.   

     

YMMV, but if I agreed with any of you, then we'd

all be wrong. The flaws are obvious. The author's 

photo skills are presumably a work-in-progress. 

No problem there. Any problems are in the trite,

unhelpful, misguided critique of the image.  

    

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   

   

I spoze now I'm responsible for presenting some 

helpful critique. OK. Use enuf DoF to render your

subject. Forget the extra you paid for a faster lens. 

   

If you rely on zero DoF to blow away backgrounds 

you will stunt the growth of your skill. DEAL WITH 

the background. Manage it. Everything within the 

frame is your responsibility. Don't duck it, face it.   

Blowing it away at f/1.4 is just ducking it, and has 

messed up your image of the girl. It's no longer a 

girl. It's just one row of eyelashes.   

    

BTW, the mushy forms seen in the background 

of this shot appear to be an example of a rather 

manageable background. I mean that the visual 

weight and arrangement of the forms seem like it 

would be complimentary to form and outline of 

the subject. IOW you coulda shot at 3.5 or 4.5 and 

rendered the subject better while placing her on a  

very agreeable background [which at 3.5 or 4.5

would still recede and not compete]. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By Romeo Bravo Photo
      Hello All,
      Here are some shots I took a while ago, but just found...
      All shot with an a7R II and the Sony Sonnar T* 135mm f/1.8 ZA - I really miss that lens!
      Model: Audrey McDermot
      Photo by Rick Birt of www.romeobravophoto.com
       
       
       



    • By GuiR
      Hey guys!
       
      I need your knowledge, experience opinion!
       
      I am new to this forum, as I just sold everything and switched from Canon to Sony (A7III) and need advice. I have already read and watched hundreds of reviews, comparaisons and discussions on the best 35mm lens I can get for my needs and I still don’t find any satisfying answer.
       
      I had no issue to find the adequat prime lens for every focal lenght I use but the 35mm. It has been giving me headaches for weeks...
       
      Maybe some of you own some of the lenses I am hesitating on buying (I have specific questions for each of them) or maybe you’ll find some interesting advice and experiences as well in the following discussion.
       
      Anyway, we all know there is no perfect lens. You have to make compromises. The best one is the lens that suits your needs.
       
      I do street and travel photography for my personnal pleasure, and I mainly shoot concerts and music festivals professionally. I also do video for fun but want to start being more professionnal about it.
      35 mm being my favourite all-around go-to focal lenght, I really care about this choice.
       
      So here are my personnal needs, by order of importance, followed by the possible choices that I get, and their downsides.
       
       
      1/ Fast and accurate Auto Focus ( even in low light)
       
      I love vintage lenses. And I will probably end up using Zeiss and Voigtlander MF glass for my personnal stuff, as the quality is incredible. But as I shoot moving subjects in low light, MF does not give me as many keepers. I need AF for more reliability (unless those MF to AF adapters work efficiently?)
       
      2/ Fast aperture (low light, DOF, cinematic shots)
       
      Ideally f1.2 (but only 1 AF third party lens available) or f1.4.
      Maybe f1.8 or 2.
      F2.8 could already be too slow but I have not tried the low light performances of the A7III. Maybe it would be fine.
      Thoughts?
       
      3/ Smooth manual focus ring for video.
       
      I don’t need a professional cine lens. But a decently smooth focus ring for video is important.
       
      4/ Good IQ (sharpness wide open, microcontrast, bokeh...)
       
      I don’t need the sharpest lens in the history of mindkind. I prefer good rendering microcontrast and buttery smooth bokeh, but the sharper the better, obviously.
       
      BONUS (less important)
       
      5/ Weather Sealing is a plus.
       
      I shot some pretty hectic and dirty gigs with mud and rain all over the place without Weather Sealing and it was fine, so it would be a big plus, but i can deal without.
       
      6/ Size/Weight
       
      I can handle big heavy bodies and lenses, but a small and light equipment is a plus in certain situations (traveling, being invisible, shooting secretly, trying to be intimate with the si ject without intimidating them, shooting all day etc).
       
       
      7/ A bit of character ?
       
      Again, it is about the photographer, not the gear and I can give my twist to the pics in post, but if there’s some character to the lens, that’s a plus.
       
      8/ The cheaper, the better, obviously.
       
      If I can manage to get it under 1000 us Dollars new or second hand, that would be nice.
       
      9/ Build quality.
       
      Full metal is better, but I don’t mind plastic.
       
      10/ And the least important to me: design/handling/balance/look.
       
      If it is well designed and balanced with the body, and if it is pleasing to the eyes and hands, That’s perfect. But it is not an important requirement at all.
       
       
      So, here are the possible choices that we have (from what I know) and their apparent downsides:
       
       
      Sony Zeiss FE Distagon T 35mm f1.4:
       
      - Seems to fit every criteria
      - But expensive
      - And a lot of reviews say a ton of copies are abnormally soft in some parts of the frame...
       
      Rokinon/Samyang 35 mm AF f1.4:
       
      - Seems to hold up well against the Zeiss in terms of sharpness.
      - I don’t have my computer at the moment but from my low res phone screen the bokeh seems pretty equal.
      - Cheap in price and good looks/ergonomics.
      - But some report a problem with low light autofocus.
      - Some say the manual focus ring is not good and precise for good video work.
      - Strong CA? (easily fixed in post?)
       
      Sigma Art 35mm 1.4:
       
      - Amazing reviews
      - Seems to fit most criterias
      - Very sharp
      - Some people say the autofocus is bad, especially in low light, which is the most important criteria. I can handle some missed focus, but is it 5-10% or more like 20+% of missed shots?
      - Has someone tried the emount version in low light already?
      - Flat rendering? Not good in terms of microcontrast and bokeh?
       
      Sony FE 35 mm 2.8:
       
      - The size, weight, look, ergonomics seem perfect.
      - The IQ is very pleasing to me (character, bokeh, sharpness, microcontrast).
      - But 2.8 may be a bit slow? What is you experience at this aperture in low light environments with tge A7II or III?
       
       
      Tamron 35mm f1.8 VC:
       
      - This lens seems to be so perfect in theory for a price so cheap
      - Every detailed reviews says it is amazing, a steal, a no brainer
      - Build quality, macro, weather sealed
      - But it is 1.8
      - I am afraid of the ergonomics and handling with a metabones or other adapter (+price)
      - Huge CA?
      - And I don’t remember having seen any picture taken with this lens that I found beautiful (and I don’t know if it is just me, the rendering, or the photographers who used it, or I didn’t search enough, I don’t know)
       
       
      I didn’t recall another one that seemed to be in the price range and fits those criterias .
       
      For now I still hesitate between the Sony, the Sigma and the Zeiss but everyone of them has huge downsides that I don’t know if I could work with...
       
      Maybe you have some suggestions and answers for me.
       
      I am listening.
      Thank you for your time and consideration, it is very much appreciated!
    • By Ilya
      Untitled by Ilya Artemiev, on Flickr
       

      Untitled by Ilya Artemiev, on Flickr
       

      Untitled by Ilya Artemiev, on Flickr
    • By PHW
      Spotted this scene last night strolling along southern California shore.

×