Below...
Regards,
Bob...
-------------------------------
"In the carboniferous epoch
we were promised perpetual peace.
They swore if we gave up our weapons
that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed they sold us,
and delivered us, bound, to our foe.
And the gods of the copybook headings said,
'Stick to the devil you know.' "
--Rudyard Kipling
From: "Conrad Samuels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Thanks to everyone who answered my enquiry about using "other
> makes" with Pentax lenses. I do appreciate all the help and advice.
>
> Further to this matter of focussing, there is something which has
> puzzled me a lot for some time now. I note on this (and other)
> discussion lists that there is often a pre-occupation with wide
> aperture lenses. To-day f1.8 and f1.4 is commonplace. When I
> started out about 40 years ago f2.8 was considered a pretty good
> lens speed and f1.4 was not even dreamed about from what I
> remember. So I have over the years been very much the sort of
> person who adhered to the "f8 and be there" idea. Even though I
> now have f1.8 lenses on my Spotmatics and (golly) even an f1.4 on
> the F3 I very seldom ever used them until fairly recently and then the
> results were pretty disappointing.
>
> How do people manage to shoot at f1.8 or even wider and still get
> their image sharp? For goodness sake, even my 105mm f2.8 has a
> depth of field at f2.8 and close up (about 2 metres) of less than 12
> cm!
If the eyes (and nose) are in focus, all else will be forgiven.
> With my 55mm lenses at f1.8 if I don't focus exactly spot-on
> perfect dead accurate the results are not acceptable.
Yup.
> I have taken
> endless head-and-shoulders portraits by available light at f1.8 or f2
> to find to my chagrin that the tip of the nose is sharp but the eyes
> JUST out of focus, or else the ears look great but pity about the rest
> of the face.
It's a hazard.
> What is wrong here? How do the available light men (and women)
> get their overall sharpness at big f-stops?
I never expect overall sharpness. Just sharpness where it's needed. This is another (of
many) reasons why my yield is only about 2 acceptable shots out of 36.
Serious lack of focus in the background can often be a blessing.
> Excepting for the fact that
> large aperture lenses make lovely bright images to focus by (I like)
> what good is their large aperture for actual shooting?
Even if you're going to shoot at f/2.8, focusing at a fast stop makes the focus more
accurate and more sure.
If your negative is going to be on the thin side, even an extra half stop makes for a
little less grain and a little more contrast - however slight.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
