Destin
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2010
- Messages
- 3,864
- Reaction score
- 1,383
- Location
- Western New York
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Sharing these partially because I think they're decent shots, and also to continue my mini series on what I think of the Sigma 135 ART. I was a shooting a wedding and had hoped to use it for the majority of the day on one body, but the layout of the venue didn't lend itself to a prime lens.
I still pulled it out for some of portraits though, because I knew it would perform well there. All shot on the D810. Settings listed with the shots. First time shooting a wedding in the winter, and really like the falling snow in the portraits.
I'm really, really starting to enjoy this lens for portrait work. It's becoming my go to. I'm using it to shoot portraits in the snow with a local TF model this weekend, so I'll share those as well when it happens.
@Derrel, figured you'd like to see this.
1.) iso 90, f/1.8, 1/2000. They requested this pose and I thought it was cute. Pretty heavily cropped in because of where I had to stand, so the DOF would have been even thinner if I this is how I had framed it in camera.
2.) iso 100, f/1.8, 1/200. Again, slightly cropped in so I was farther than it looks from them, otherwise the DOF would have been even thinner.
3.) iso 125, f/4, 1/400th. Virtually no crop here.
I still pulled it out for some of portraits though, because I knew it would perform well there. All shot on the D810. Settings listed with the shots. First time shooting a wedding in the winter, and really like the falling snow in the portraits.
I'm really, really starting to enjoy this lens for portrait work. It's becoming my go to. I'm using it to shoot portraits in the snow with a local TF model this weekend, so I'll share those as well when it happens.
@Derrel, figured you'd like to see this.
1.) iso 90, f/1.8, 1/2000. They requested this pose and I thought it was cute. Pretty heavily cropped in because of where I had to stand, so the DOF would have been even thinner if I this is how I had framed it in camera.
2.) iso 100, f/1.8, 1/200. Again, slightly cropped in so I was farther than it looks from them, otherwise the DOF would have been even thinner.
3.) iso 125, f/4, 1/400th. Virtually no crop here.
Last edited: