Nikon film 85 1.8 -> dSLR 50 1.8 happy?

[Josh]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hello,

I currently love the results I get from my N80 (Portra VC 400) and my
85mm 1.8 lens. I have my local lab scan my negatives to 6 megapixel
JPEG's on their Noritsu scanner along with getting the standard 4 x 6
prints. I play with the scans digitally at times and get prints made
either back at the lab, or on Mpix.com. This is how I get enlargements
and reprints.

I now almost exclusively use my 85 1.8 lens which I love. It gives the
pictures a certain "look" that I have received many complements on
(mostly pictures of my kids). I shoot at 1.8 75% of the time, both to
avoid flash and get that eyes in focus but already soft at the ears
look. I love the soft bokeh I get too. I've never had the desire to get
a zoom lens, mostly for aperture reasons.

Since I have introduced digital to the mix, the next logical step would
be to switch to a digital SLR camera. I was a little dissapointed to
learn about the smaller sensors in these cameras, along with their
multiplyer effect. But a little math led me to believe that the 50 1.8
that I already own would be a good substitute for my favorite lens. I
would wait until Nikon comes out with a reasonably priced full frame
sensor dSLR, but then I may be waiting for a long time.
Any thoughts on this?

-Josh

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Josh" <jayelwin@gmail.com> writes:

> Hello,
>
> I currently love the results I get from my N80 (Portra VC 400) and my
> 85mm 1.8 lens. I have my local lab scan my negatives to 6 megapixel
> JPEG's on their Noritsu scanner along with getting the standard 4 x 6
> prints. I play with the scans digitally at times and get prints made
> either back at the lab, or on Mpix.com. This is how I get enlargements
> and reprints.
>
> I now almost exclusively use my 85 1.8 lens which I love. It gives the
> pictures a certain "look" that I have received many complements on
> (mostly pictures of my kids). I shoot at 1.8 75% of the time, both to
> avoid flash and get that eyes in focus but already soft at the ears
> look. I love the soft bokeh I get too. I've never had the desire to get
> a zoom lens, mostly for aperture reasons.
>
> Since I have introduced digital to the mix, the next logical step would
> be to switch to a digital SLR camera. I was a little dissapointed to
> learn about the smaller sensors in these cameras, along with their
> multiplyer effect. But a little math led me to believe that the 50 1.8
> that I already own would be a good substitute for my favorite lens. I
> would wait until Nikon comes out with a reasonably priced full frame
> sensor dSLR, but then I may be waiting for a long time.
> Any thoughts on this?

For focal length, you'll be in decent shape (Nikon uses a 1.5x
multiplier, so 50mm lens gives angle-of-view a 35mm photographer
expects from 75mm; a little shorter than 85mm but not that much). The
other question is the DOF and the bokeh. You will get *more* depth of
field, which you may not like (and if you're already shooting at f1.8
you can't take the obvious step ). The bokeh will be -- however it
is with the other lens. I don't have either the 85mm or an AF 50mm,
so I can't comment on that part. The 50 may well have fewer aperture
blades.

I use my 58mm f1.2 NOCT for portraiture quite a bit in low light. The
extra aperture values give me more options, and the ability to cut DOF
way down, and the focal length works out to 87mm, which I like. But
it's a darned expensive lens to acquire now, and it's manual focus
and also doesn't meter at all on the consumer-level bodies (which
include d100, d70, and Fuji S2). I work around those things myself,
but I already had the lens and haven't had much money (the S2 blew my
photo budget for years).
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http/www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http/noguns-nomoney.com/> <http/www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http/dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http/www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http/dragaera.info/>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

You sound like a troll or someone that has no research at all.

"Josh" <jayelwin@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1106101066.746965.84330@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Hello,
>
> I currently love the results I get from my N80 (Portra VC 400) and my
> 85mm 1.8 lens. I have my local lab scan my negatives to 6 megapixel
> JPEG's on their Noritsu scanner along with getting the standard 4 x 6
> prints. I play with the scans digitally at times and get prints made
> either back at the lab, or on Mpix.com. This is how I get enlargements
> and reprints.
>
> I now almost exclusively use my 85 1.8 lens which I love. It gives the
> pictures a certain "look" that I have received many complements on
> (mostly pictures of my kids). I shoot at 1.8 75% of the time, both to
> avoid flash and get that eyes in focus but already soft at the ears
> look. I love the soft bokeh I get too. I've never had the desire to get
> a zoom lens, mostly for aperture reasons.
>
> Since I have introduced digital to the mix, the next logical step would
> be to switch to a digital SLR camera. I was a little dissapointed to
> learn about the smaller sensors in these cameras, along with their
> multiplyer effect. But a little math led me to believe that the 50 1.8
> that I already own would be a good substitute for my favorite lens. I
> would wait until Nikon comes out with a reasonably priced full frame
> sensor dSLR, but then I may be waiting for a long time.
> Any thoughts on this?
>
> -Josh
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Josh wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I currently love the results I get from my N80 (Portra VC 400) and my
> 85mm 1.8 lens. I have my local lab scan my negatives to 6 megapixel
> JPEG's on their Noritsu scanner along with getting the standard 4 x 6
> prints. I play with the scans digitally at times and get prints made
> either back at the lab, or on Mpix.com. This is how I get enlargements
> and reprints.
>
> I now almost exclusively use my 85 1.8 lens which I love. It gives the
> pictures a certain "look" that I have received many complements on
> (mostly pictures of my kids). I shoot at 1.8 75% of the time, both to
> avoid flash and get that eyes in focus but already soft at the ears
> look. I love the soft bokeh I get too. I've never had the desire to
> get a zoom lens, mostly for aperture reasons.
>
> Since I have introduced digital to the mix, the next logical step
> would be to switch to a digital SLR camera. I was a little
> dissapointed to learn about the smaller sensors in these cameras,
> along with their multiplyer effect. But a little math led me to
> believe that the 50 1.8 that I already own would be a good substitute
> for my favorite lens. I would wait until Nikon comes out with a
> reasonably priced full frame sensor dSLR, but then I may be waiting
> for a long time.
> Any thoughts on this?
>
> -Josh

Ignore Pete, he must be having a bad day.

I think you are right on. That 50 mm 1.8 will give you a little more
DOF than the 85 (with both wide open) but not that much. A 1.4 50 mm would
be a little closer, but I doubt if you will need that.

I agree with you about the sensor size. If I had an extra eight
thousand sitting around I would have got that full size Canon, well maybe
not, there are a few issues with it, that the newer model Canons have done
better. (Note this is not a Canon vs Nikon thing, I have owned both and both
are great, I just happen to have a stock of Canon lenses now.)

--
Joseph Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Josh" <jayelwin@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1106101066.746965.84330@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Since I have introduced digital to the mix, the next logical step would
> be to switch to a digital SLR camera. I was a little dissapointed to
> learn about the smaller sensors in these cameras, along with their
> multiplyer effect. But a little math led me to believe that the 50 1.8
> that I already own would be a good substitute for my favorite lens.


Go ahead an get yourself a D70 and don't look back! The 50 f/1.8 will give
you a similar view to your 85 on film, but I bet you'll still love to use
your 85 on the digital body. I just ordered that lens myself (wanted the 85
f/1.4 but couldn't really afford it) and look forward to making some candid
portraits.

Check out the "Nikon D70" and "Nikon SLR Lenses" forums on the Digital
Photography Review website. You'll find lots of folks using the Nikon
digital SLRs that love the 85mm f/1.8 Nikkor (and the 50mm f/1.8).

Good shooting,
Bob Scott

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I, too, have an 85 1.8 that I love. Like you, it's my favorite lens, and it
perfect for portraits. I just ordered a D70, and here's the way I look at
it:

You are only going to use the center of the image due to the size of the
image sensor (1.5 magnification factor). So, your 85 will be a 127mm lens,
which still makes for a good portrait lens, and the wide aperture will still
give you plenty of control over depth of field and good images in low light
situations.

I haven't received my digital camera yet, and my 85 is currently being
converted to use with the D70, so I have no "evidence" to back up my theory,
but I think I'm right on this one.

I also know that the 50mm 1.8 and 1.4 are very popular among digital slr
users. It will be interesting to see the difference in the 85 and the Nikon
zoom that comes with the D70.

I would expect to see a full size CCD in about 2007 (that's what I hear) and
probably only on their higher end models. This is why a lot of people are
saying not to buy the lenses that are only made for the digital cameras.
They don't cover the full 35mm frame size.


"Josh" <jayelwin@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1106101066.746965.84330@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Hello,
>
> I currently love the results I get from my N80 (Portra VC 400) and my
> 85mm 1.8 lens. I have my local lab scan my negatives to 6 megapixel
> JPEG's on their Noritsu scanner along with getting the standard 4 x 6
> prints. I play with the scans digitally at times and get prints made
> either back at the lab, or on Mpix.com. This is how I get enlargements
> and reprints.
>
> I now almost exclusively use my 85 1.8 lens which I love. It gives the
> pictures a certain "look" that I have received many complements on
> (mostly pictures of my kids). I shoot at 1.8 75% of the time, both to
> avoid flash and get that eyes in focus but already soft at the ears
> look. I love the soft bokeh I get too. I've never had the desire to get
> a zoom lens, mostly for aperture reasons.
>
> Since I have introduced digital to the mix, the next logical step would
> be to switch to a digital SLR camera. I was a little dissapointed to
> learn about the smaller sensors in these cameras, along with their
> multiplyer effect. But a little math led me to believe that the 50 1.8
> that I already own would be a good substitute for my favorite lens. I
> would wait until Nikon comes out with a reasonably priced full frame
> sensor dSLR, but then I may be waiting for a long time.
> Any thoughts on this?
>
> -Josh
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Sheldon" <sheldon@XXXXXXXXsopris.net> wrote in message
news:s-adnZ4DsvckP23cRVn-vg@comcast.com...
> I, too, have an 85 1.8 that I love. Like you, it's my favorite lens, and
> it perfect for portraits. I just ordered a D70, and here's the way I look
> at it:
>
> I haven't received my digital camera yet, and my 85 is currently being
> converted to use with the D70....

What do you mean "converted" ?

My 85 1.8 just works on my D70 !



>so I have no "evidence" to back up my theory, but I think I'm right on this
>one.
>
> I also know that the 50mm 1.8 and 1.4 are very popular among digital slr
> users. It will be interesting to see the difference in the 85 and the
> Nikon zoom that comes with the D70.
>
> I would expect to see a full size CCD in about 2007 (that's what I hear)
> and probably only on their higher end models. This is why a lot of people
> are saying not to buy the lenses that are only made for the digital
> cameras. They don't cover the full 35mm frame size.
>
>
> "Josh" <jayelwin@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1106101066.746965.84330@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> Hello,
>>
>> I currently love the results I get from my N80 (Portra VC 400) and my
>> 85mm 1.8 lens. I have my local lab scan my negatives to 6 megapixel
>> JPEG's on their Noritsu scanner along with getting the standard 4 x 6
>> prints. I play with the scans digitally at times and get prints made
>> either back at the lab, or on Mpix.com. This is how I get enlargements
>> and reprints.
>>
>> I now almost exclusively use my 85 1.8 lens which I love. It gives the
>> pictures a certain "look" that I have received many complements on
>> (mostly pictures of my kids). I shoot at 1.8 75% of the time, both to
>> avoid flash and get that eyes in focus but already soft at the ears
>> look. I love the soft bokeh I get too. I've never had the desire to get
>> a zoom lens, mostly for aperture reasons.
>>
>> Since I have introduced digital to the mix, the next logical step would
>> be to switch to a digital SLR camera. I was a little dissapointed to
>> learn about the smaller sensors in these cameras, along with their
>> multiplyer effect. But a little math led me to believe that the 50 1.8
>> that I already own would be a good substitute for my favorite lens. I
>> would wait until Nikon comes out with a reasonably priced full frame
>> sensor dSLR, but then I may be waiting for a long time.
>> Any thoughts on this?
>>
>> -Josh
>>
>
>

 

[Josh]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Very excited that the new iPhoto on the mac handles raw, plus the raw
plugins for Photoshop. That will make things easier. I'm thinking of
making the switch to digital in the next three or four months or so.
Thanks.

-Josh

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Kibo informs me that "Josh" <jayelwin@gmail.com> stated that:

>I now almost exclusively use my 85 1.8 lens which I love. It gives the
>pictures a certain "look" that I have received many complements on
>(mostly pictures of my kids). I shoot at 1.8 75% of the time, both to
>avoid flash and get that eyes in focus but already soft at the ears
>look. I love the soft bokeh I get too. I've never had the desire to get
>a zoom lens, mostly for aperture reasons.

You & me both. I mostly shoot 50mm/F1.8 on a 10D for similar reasons.

>Since I have introduced digital to the mix, the next logical step would
>be to switch to a digital SLR camera. I was a little dissapointed to
>learn about the smaller sensors in these cameras, along with their
>multiplyer effect. But a little math led me to believe that the 50 1.8
>that I already own would be a good substitute for my favorite lens.

Yes, it should give you a very similar result to an 85mm on a full-frame
body.

> I
>would wait until Nikon comes out with a reasonably priced full frame
>sensor dSLR, but then I may be waiting for a long time.
>Any thoughts on this?

Go ahead with the 50mm on the D70. I think you'll be very happy with
that combination.

One tip: You won't really get the full value from a DSLR unless you
shoot RAW, rather than JPEGs. Like running your own darkroom, it's a lot
more work, but I promise you that the results are worth it.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Kibo informs me that "Pete D" <no@email.com> stated that:

>You sound like a troll or someone that has no research at all.

His question was polite, perfectly sensible & not at all trollish. It
sounds to me like /you're/ the one who's the troll or idiot.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

<usenet@imagenoir.com> wrote in message
newsg59v0has0drq85fp8rj4e3j8m6s2dmr4h@4ax.com...

> Yes, it should give you a very similar result to an 85mm on a full-frame
> body.

Not quite. On a dSLR, a 50mm f/1.8 wide open will give you somewhat more
depth of field than an 85mm f/1.8 wide open on a full-frame body. If you
want a closer approximation to the same depth of field, you will need a 50mm
f/1.4 or even f/1.2.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Andrew Koenig" <ark@acm.org> wrote:
> <usenet@imagenoir.com> wrote in message
>
> > Yes, it should give you a very similar result to an 85mm on a full-frame
> > body.
>
> Not quite. On a dSLR, a 50mm f/1.8 wide open will give you somewhat more
> depth of field than an 85mm f/1.8 wide open on a full-frame body. If you
> want a closer approximation to the same depth of field, you will need a
50mm
> f/1.4 or even f/1.2.

But that extra DOF is a _good_ thing. Background blur is still more than
adequate*, and you get 1.5x more of your subject sharp. DOF in 35mm at 6
feet is +/- 0.07 (0.15 total) feet with the 85 at f/2.0, so getting 0.2 feet
with the 50mm isn't a whole lot of difference. (Note that that assumes a
0.025mm CoC in 35mm, which is really much too large in this age of digital
at actual pixels on the screen and 4000 and 5400 dpi scans.)

Also, an f/1.4 50mm costs about the same as an f/1.8 85mm, so most of us
have the room to open up relative to 35mm.

*: in some recent shots with a 150/3.5 lens on 645, I found that I liked the
background blur better stopped down than opened up.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Josh <jayelwin@gmail.com> wrote:

>But a little math led me to believe that the 50 1.8
>that I already own would be a good substitute for my favorite lens. I
>would wait until Nikon comes out with a reasonably priced full frame
>sensor dSLR, but then I may be waiting for a long time.
>Any thoughts on this?

I've done >75% of my getting-to-know-it shooting with my D70 using
the 50mm 1.8. I like shooting natural light, or with a -3EV fill
using the built-in flash, and so the big aperature is very useful.
I wanted dSLR to get back a shallow DOF, but find that at close
range the 1.8 is even shallower than I want, but I'm getting used
to it. In low light the lens/camera does hunt the focus a lot,
but I do find it's a good FOV. I also used to do most of my
shooting with the shallower end of a 70-200 tele. That said,
when I put the 18-70 back on, I end up wondering whether AF is
still switched on (silent!)

--
Ken Tough