Hooked on Primes

[Robin Usagani]

She looks like a super sweet girl until I see her tats. Hah!

That second shot is superb! You got a great model, her expressions are fantastic. Well done!

I work with her at my day job. She's pretty awesome! Take a look at my Flickr stream to see the rest of her photos. She's a total natural.

 

[Neiby]

She looks like a super sweet girl until I see her tats. Hah!

That second shot is superb! You got a great model, her expressions are fantastic. Well done!

I work with her at my day job. She's pretty awesome! Take a look at my Flickr stream to see the rest of her photos. She's a total natural.

Believe me, she is super sweet even with the tats!

 

[subscuck]

The Sigma 30 1.4 is worth looking into as well. It's still under $500, I believe. I've owned it for several years and it's on my camera most of the time. I started with film and a 50mm, so it gives me what I'm used to with "normal" on film. Equivalent FOV of 48mm on Canon crops.

 

[Neiby]

The Sigma 30 1.4 is worth looking into as well. It's still under $500, I believe. I've owned it for several years and it's on my camera most of the time. I started with film and a 50mm, so it gives me what I'm used to with "normal" on film. Equivalent FOV of 48mm on Canon crops.

I took a look at the Sigma 30, but some online comparisons I found seemed to show that it wasn't nearly as sharp as the Canon 35mm f/1.4. But it is MUCH less expensive, so I suppose I should still consider it.

EDIT: I just checked out this lens comparison site and those two lenses aren't as far apart as I thought. The Canon is definitely sharper, but it costs over double the Sigma lens.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=396&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

 

[D-B-J]

Beautiful Bokeh. Really.

 

[subscuck]

I took a look at the Sigma 30, but some online comparisons I found seemed to show that it wasn't nearly as sharp as the Canon 35mm f/1.4. But it is MUCH less expensive, so I suppose I should still consider it.

EDIT: I just checked out this lens comparison site and those two lenses aren't as far apart as I thought. The Canon is definitely sharper, but it costs over double the Sigma lens.

Obviously, if you plan on going FF at some point, the Sigma wouldn't be the choice to make. But if that's a far off day, and you keep your crop body as a back up, maybe see if you can rent one.

 

[Neiby]

Beautiful Bokeh. Really.

This lens makes it easy! I liked my 1.8, but after seeing so many creamy smooth pics with the 1.4, I picked up a used one in the area. At this point it doesn't come off my camera unless I'm shooting my sons football games or something like that, in which case I use my zoom. I'd love to get the 35mm and maybe a 135mm. But then I'd be super happy with a 24-70 and a 70-200 f/2.8.

 

[cgipson1]

Nice.... very pretty lady! I like the set on Flickr! Glad to see you are partial to one of my favorite lenses also (Sigma 50)! Although I won't give up my Nikon 2.8 zooms anytime soon! lol!

Edit: Hadn't noticed you were local until I saw the Hamburger Mary pic on Flickr... there seem to be several TPF'rs in the area.

 

[Derrel]

Nice shot, lovely model, but I think you should be more cognizant of the background. The highlights off the car are a buzz kill.

Huh...I was thinking the same thing...the "mechanical" highlights from the car kill the "naturalistic" look of the out of focus circles...looking for a clean background is something that comes with more experience, and with more ruined photos like this one made in otherwise good locations. I'm not sure why you left that big, open space to the left of the frame, or in the second pic why you included that ugly telephone pole with the number tag on it...I thought the photos were supposed to be about her...not empty space or telephone poles...

 

[netza]

I hear you. Love my 35mm, 50mm and 90mm too. Great shot too.

 

[Ron Evers]

Nobody else think it a shame she is cut off on the right in the second shot.

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

Nice shot. My only gripe would be that stinkin car . I had the 50 1.4 once upon a time. It was great for the price and since it was my first prime, the whole shallow DOF thing was a huge novelty. I ended up dumping it though because I didn't care for the focal length on a crop sensor. I also hated that it didn't have a true ring USM like the 85mm and 28mm has.
I have heard that the next update will most likely have a true ring USM. I now have the Tamron 60mm f/2 which I use for macro and the occasional headshot (it wasn't really meant to be a replacement for the 50mm, just worked out that way ) and am considering buying the Canon 28mm f/1.8 which seems to be a much more useful focal length on the crop sensor. Although the Tamronis a bit slow on the focus at times, its extremely sharp since its a macro, and the f/2 @60mm provides very nice subject isolation.

 

[Neiby]

Nice shot, lovely model, but I think you should be more cognizant of the background. The highlights off the car are a buzz kill.

Huh...I was thinking the same thing...the "mechanical" highlights from the car kill the "naturalistic" look of the out of focus circles...looking for a clean background is something that comes with more experience, and with more ruined photos like this one made in otherwise good locations. I'm not sure why you left that big, open space to the left of the frame, or in the second pic why you included that ugly telephone pole with the number tag on it...I thought the photos were supposed to be about her...not empty space or telephone poles...

Negative space, complementary colors, contrast. The shot with the "ugly" light pole is one of my favorites specifically because of the contrasting colors. The space is there because I wanted it there. Different strokes, I guess.

EDIT: In hindsight, the "ugly pole" picture makes more sense in the context of the entire shoot and perhaps doesn't make as much sense on its own. When seen in context with the rest of the shots from that day, it seems a bit more clear what I was going for, but I can see that if that's the only one you saw, you definitely might wonder what the heck the pole was doing there. That's something good to keep in mind for me: each picture needs to be complete and independent of the context created by the rest of the shoot unless it is always intended to be seen as part of a gallery or something like that.

 

[Neiby]

Nice shot. My only gripe would be that stinkin car . I had the 50 1.4 once upon a time. It was great for the price and since it was my first prime, the whole shallow DOF thing was a huge novelty. I ended up dumping it though because I didn't care for the focal length on a crop sensor. I also hated that it didn't have a true ring USM like the 85mm and 28mm has.
I have heard that the next update will most likely have a true ring USM. I now have the Tamron 60mm f/2 which I use for macro and the occasional headshot (it wasn't really meant to be a replacement for the 50mm, just worked out that way ) and am considering buying the Canon 28mm f/1.8 which seems to be a much more useful focal length on the crop sensor. Although the Tamronis a bit slow on the focus at times, its extremely sharp since its a macro, and the f/2 @60mm provides very nice subject isolation.

Yeah, that car is kind of annoying. I didn't see it at the time. We were walking through a park when we passed an open pathway with those trees behind it. I thought it created a nice vibe, so we quickly took that shot. I'm tempted to try to clean up the car a bit in post. I could at least knock out the brightest and most vibrant spots to limit its presence.

The focal length is kind of annoying on my 60D. I'm finding that I'd probably do better with a 35mm on that crop sensor, but the 35mm f/1.4 is very expensive!

 

[Heitz]

Neiby, great photo - so crispy! i'm assuming you used a tripod and let me ask what did you stop the lens down to? can't imagine its wide open with that sharpness. couldn't get the EXIF out...