ND Filters

[Polar01]

Al if you purchase a 50mm I suggest you save some money and get the 1.8D it is the oldest model, will stop down to f/22 instead of only f/16 and you will not notice the difference and save close to $100.00 in the deal. The 35mm is a very good lens can me more useful in tight quarters.

Cheers:

Allan

Allan

[Colin Southern]

The Singh-ray will give cross-hatching, but you pretty much have to go past 8 stops before it becomes a problem (depending on focal length).

I've got two of them and would buy them again an a heartbeat. Best filters I own by a country mile.

[Manfred M]

One purchase I made which was maybe a mistake was, I bought a Nikor 35mm 1.8 and maybe I should have bought a 50MM 1.8g instead. My thinking which may have been incorrect was that a 35mm on an FX camera would look like a 50mm on DX camera given the FX crop. But that is another topic.
)

I seem to recall that you have a D7000, from another posting. On your D7000, a 35mm will give you approximately the same FoV as a 50mm on a FX. I use the f/1.8 35mm G on the D90 and the f/1.8 50mm D on the D800. In reality it should have a tiny bit narrower view as 1.5 x 35mm = 52.5mm

While you can use a 50mm lens with a DX sensor, I personally find that the focal length is a bit awkward - it's a bit too long for a walk about lens but a bit to short as a portrait lens (75mm equiv.), but that just may be my shooting style. It is a type D lens, but your D7000 has the internal focusing motor, so you could use it.

[tclune]

Manfred, 8ball said that he had the 50mm f/1.8G, not the older f/1.8D. The f/1.8G has a built-in focusing motor. Other than that, I agree with your overall assessment.

[Manfred M]

Manfred, 8ball said that he had the 50mm f/1.8G, not the older f/1.8D. The f/1.8G has a built-in focusing motor. Other than that, I agree with your overall assessment.

Tom - I think you misread his question - he said he bought the f/1.8 35mm; not the f/1.8 50mm. I think he is not quite straight regarding how the crop factor works. I was also re-enforcing Allan's comment about going for the f/1.8 50mm D, rather than the f/1.8 50mm G.

[tclune]

My bad.

[Manfred M]

I've done my share of "my bad" too.

[8ball]

So to all who answered I guess I didn't do so bad getting the 35mm 1.8G if for the misguided reason. It sounds like it's a nice walk around lens. As for the 50mm I was thinking of the 50mm 1.8 D for the reasons given. Will the 35mm do well as a portrait lense or is the 50mm a better choice What say yea all?

[Manfred M]

So to all who answered I guess I didn't do so bad getting the 35mm 1.8G if for the misguided reason. It sounds like it's a nice walk around lens. As for the 50mm I was thinking of the 50mm 1.8 D for the reasons given. Will the 35mm do well as a portrait lense or is the 50mm a better choice What say yea all?

Portraits on a full-frame camera tend to be taken with 85mm and longer (much longer) lenses. The problem with shorter lenses is that they tend to result in less flattering looks because the photographer has to be so close to the subject that distortion issues will set in; usually the nose and possibly the chin will tend to be shown to be in a less flattering light.

A 35mm lens might be fine for group shots, but I certainly would not get anything less than the 50mm on the D7000. I personally prefer slightly longer lenses. On my D800, I do a lot of portraits with the f/2 105mm DC (or 70mm with a DX format). The f/1.4 85mm lens is a very popular portrait lens for the FX format too (I don't have one of these). The f/2.8 70-200mm lens is a very popular portrait lens (I do shot this lens a lot).

[Colin Southern]

Portraits on a full-frame camera tend to be taken with 85mm and longer (much longer) lenses.

A quick comparison ...

185mm on FF ...


35mm on FF camera ...

[8ball]

Thank you Manfred for the quick reply and the lense tip. I'll check the 70-200 out.

[8ball]

Really enhanses the bokah doesn't it? Point well taken guys. Again a plehora of information on this site from excellent photographers. Colin one more question and I promise I won't leave you alone. The two long exposure photos you sent in your reply. The night airport shot and the hiway overpass shot. Care to share particulars on the st up?

[Colin Southern]

Really enhanses the bokah doesn't it? Point well taken guys. Again a plehora of information on this site from excellent photographers. Colin one more question and I promise I won't leave you alone. The two long exposure photos you sent in your reply. The night airport shot and the hiway overpass shot. Care to share particulars on the st up?

Yep - sure. I've got a brief write-up on them on the Singh-Ray blog http://singhray.blogspot.co.nz/, (just click on my name on the right hand side down a bit) and they're both written up in more detail here, but hopefully someone else can paste links -- just on my ipad at the moment and it's a bit hard to do that.

Edit:

Tired & Hungry, One by One, the Birds Returned to Roost

Enlightening Journeys

[William W]

[Using a telephoto lens rather than a Wide Angle Lens for Portraiture] . . .Really enhances the bokah doesn't it?

"Portraiture" is not always about the Bokeh.
"Portraiture" can be all about positioning the Subject and his relevance to the environment . . . and lots of other elements, too.

Here is a 16 to 35 zoom used on a 5D:


Peter-Sesselmann-Artist


WW

[Colin Southern]

"Portraiture" is not always about the Bokeh.
"Portraiture" can be all about positioning the Subject and his relevance to the environment . . . and lots of other elements, too.

Here is a 16 to 35 zoom used on a 5D:


Peter-Sesselmann-Artist


WW

Nice environmental portrait there Bill!

[William W]

Thanks, he liked it.
Sometimes it is difficult to please Artists, with their own Portrait.
But not him. He's is a very nice guy: and very easy to work with - easy to get Rapport.
The shoot was over in about 10 minutes, I got what I wanted in the first six or seven frames . . . the rest were "value for money shots" . . . but he was on to that: bright fellow, he is.

***

On your second shot, this one -

– I’d just like to point out (not to you – to the thread in general):

That the shot was pulled at F/8 using a 35mm lens – and yet the Subject and Background is still very nicely separated, the Background being adequately, Out of Focus.

Sure Colin judiciously (and creatively) used Flash to Isolate and Enhance the face of the Subject and to create a subtle Depth and Modelling – but even without Flash as Fill – the native image has good Separation and Depth.

The point I am making is – “Portraiture” is NOT just about using telephoto lenses and very large apertures.

WW

[GrahamH]

Robert Capa once said, “If your pictures aren’t good enough, you’re not close enough.” Capa wasn’t advocating the use of longer lenses; he was telling us to physically get close.
I tend to use around 35mm (~50mm FFE) for studio shots. Out of doors, whatever it takes to get the job done. Stand way back and zoom in to bring the background closer or get up close and personal so the background detail is smaller in comparison to subject. DoF effects also to be considered of course as demonstrated by Colin.

Graham

[8ball]

Thanks Colin. As I said before those two and "40minutes in heaven" are what has inspired me to go and try long exposures. The Singh-ray is definitly on my list (that's getting longer as I learn).

Cheers,

[Colin Southern]

Thanks Colin. As I said before those two and "40minutes in heaven" are what has inspired me to go and try long exposures. The Singh-ray is definitly on my list (that's getting longer as I learn).

Cheers,

No worries. 40 minutes in heaven didn't need a ND filter though.

[8ball]

I didn't think it did but it was certainly inspirational. For me a zenith if you will.

Cheers