17-55 F2.8 on the crop works well for group shots, I use it as a spare lens when Im taking group shots.
Check out wedding photographer Peterborough a few group shots.
17-55 F2.8 on the crop works well for group shots, I use it as a spare lens when Im taking group shots.
Check out wedding photographer Peterborough a few group shots.
@neuroanatomist I assume the effect is predictable? If you're hand holding the camera I'd think you could simply move your body as you focus and recompose by the inch or inches necessary (I'd make myself a chart with target distance and f/#). Obviously this wouldn't work if you're shooting pictures of an object 100' away since I suspect the focal shift grows with target distance.
Of course, if you're not shooting at f/1.2 why not swap in the 50mm f/1.4? True, it's more equipment but if it's for a wedding you likely brought your gear in with a pack mule anyways.
Yes, it should be 'predictable' for a given aperture and subject distance (within the limits of AF system precision). I suspect it's less of a problem at longer sunject distances, since the DoF gets much deeper.Originally Posted by ChadS
Why not the 50/1.4? Between f/1.4 and f/2, the 50L has better IQ, and doesn't have the halation of the 50/1.4 wide open. Color, contrast, and flare resistance are better with the 50L. The circular aperture and lens design of the 50L yield better bokeh.
Yes, I do agree that aside from the focus shift (see I pay attention sometimes and learn, for awhile at least) issue, the 50 1.2L is a better lens, but, for me, having to second guess and compensate for that focus shift, which in effect, causes a focus error, is enough of a problem that I consider it a flaw. That they can do an 85mm and 35mm that doesn't have this behavior, suggests that it wasn't inevitable, and to me, implies either lazy or short-sighted design. To be fair, yes, if you're shooting father away, the difference is diminished, as the depth of field, in an absolute sense, is deeper anyway. However, I like getting close sometimes, so it's not acceptable for me. I do miss the quality of the bokeh, but not enough to repurchase the lens giving the focus shift fault. Just not interested in having something that defective to deal with. I've gotten great shots I liked using this lens, and have also lost some because of the focus shift. But, I have to concede, the other advantages you point out are real, and for some people, worth the hassle.
I do use the 50 1.2 for weddings and have used it for groups. Have had no problems with the 'focusing issues'. But, and I believe someone else has brought it up, I prefer now to use my 24-105. It allows me to make in camera cropping quicker than picking up my tripod and moving. Now yes, some will say why use a tripod? I do because if I keep my camera static I can Photoshop in/out the bad expression between two images. Less hassle and each group has the 'best' expression.
Owner of Deevers Photography. If you have some time, visit my website at deeversphoto.com.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote