Subject isolation actually depends on more than just f-stop value (also consider shooting distance and focal length. To me, 35mm is about right compromise between a 50-70 and 24-30mm lenses. shorter FL will give you more ambiance, but it will also reduce the blur unless the aperture is large enough. The primary difference that FL differences will bring is background compression. Sony Alpha 55 + Sigma 70mm f/2.8 (at f/4) Here is a 70mm f/4 sample (something possible with 16-70 and 18-105, but not with a 16-50 and similar lenses): This is why I like 16-70/4's versatility (most people tend to get hung up entirely on comparing sharpness than on various other aspects of a lens). You will actually get similar blur from the 16-70/4 (only at 70mm f/4) BUT, the FOV will be even narrower than you'd from 50mm lens and primarily from more compression of the background. You could get similar blur from 50mm, and more (the background will be more compressed, with narrower FOV). which will distort (stretch) the subject. You will not get this isolation from 24mm lens unless you move closer. It would be, if you want to consider isolation. I'm thinking of group shots but not limited to that, so sometimes group shots, sometimes some isolation, and I don't think distortion would be too much of an issue As such, my 35F1.8 doesn't get used that much. For close ups and upper body portraits, it is more than capable. The aperture ratio is adjustable on your camera. So a lens with a maximum aperture (as the presented ratio will be the maximum a lens can open up to and not the minimum) of f/1.8 will allow more light into the lens than a lens with f/5.6 aperture. #F1.8 SUPER BIG APERTURE FULL#If you intend to shot full body portraits or group photos, maybe. Now, ironically, the lower the ratio the wider a lens will open to. The aperture ring has the smallest aperture to the left as on later lenses.Ĥ: Auto-Takumar with automatic diaphragm (different engravings than no.Yes, you are right, but indoors for low light the FOV is too narrow in my view. This version can be recognized on its fine ribs on aperture ring and that the smallest F-stop (F16) is to the left on the ring: The lens has a dot rather than a diamond as the settings mark.ĥ: Super-Takumar with fine ribs on the aperture ring and F16 to the right (this lens)Ħ: Super-Takumar, second version. the ring turns the opposite way of later models. The aperture ring has the smallest aperture to the right, i.e. This version can be recognized on its fine ribs on aperture ring and that the smallest F-stop (F16) is to the right on the ring: 3) (this lens)ĥ: Super-Takumar, first version. The aperture ring turns the opposite way compared to all later lenses:Ĥ: Auto-Takumar with automatic diaphragm (different engravings than no. Despite the name Auto-Takumar this lens has a fully automatic diaphragm and looks like the later Super-Takumar. The aperturering has the smallest F-stop to the right, not to the left.ģ: Auto-Takumar with automatic diaphragm (this lens)Ĥ: Auto-Takumar, late second version. The physical design was also close to that of the Super-Takumar with the aperture ring next to the lens mount. This lens has an automatic diaphragm like the later Super-Takumar lenses. The aperture ring turns the opposite way compared to all later lenses: Despite the name Auto-Takumar this lens has a fully automatic diaphragm like the later Super-Takumar lenses. 3)ĥ: Super-Takumar with fine ribs on the aperture ring and F16 to the rightĦ: Super-Takumar with fine ribs on the aperture ring and F16 to the leftħ: Super-Takumar with coarse ribs on aperture ring and F16 to the leftĢ: Auto-Takumar, first version (4th photo above):Ģ: Auto-Takumar with semi-automatic diaphragm (this lens)ģ: Auto-Takumar, early second version (3rd photo above). This lens which has the Super-Takumar "look" except for the missing IR index mark was soon re-released as a Super-Takumarĥ: Super-Takumar with fine ribs on the aperture ring and reversed direction of the aperture ringĦ: Super-Takumar still with fine ribs on aperture ring, but the ring now turns the "right" way (has the F1.8 position to the right) as all later M42 lensesħ: Super-Takumar with coarse ribs on aperture ringĩ: SMC Takumar with open aperture meteringĬlick here for a collage of the lens variants.Ĥ: Auto-Takumar with automatic diaphragm (different engravings than no. The direction of the aperture ring was reversed as was the norm on early lenses. The direction of the aperture ring was reversed as was the norm on early lensesĤ: Auto-Takumar with automatic diaphragm. Here is an overview of the variants that we're aware of:Ģ: Auto-Takumar with semi-automatic diaphragmģ: Auto-Takumar with automatic diaphragm. While the optical diagram remained unchanged, tweaks to the optics (surface curvature, distance between elements) can't be precluded when Pentax switched glass type. From the 1965 version, at least one of the glass elements is made from radioactive glass which yellows over time. This fast 55mm screwmount lens existed in several versions all with the same optical diagram.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |