![]() ![]() For my still-life close-up work I always focus manually and try to get the DOF to "straddle" the item of interest. Now I understand my lack of bad experiences with front/back focusing. WWI do some wedding, event and architecture but I like wide angle photography and the lens was there. 38 lens.Īll Images © AJ Group Pty Ltd Aust 1996~20~1996 The major feature is – there is a dramatic DIFFERENCE between the AMOUNT of FLEXIBILITY when one is using a 20 vs. The alternate option of 24 50 and 135 provide: 24 38 50 80 135 and 216 all at fast aperture. Two reasons why the Sigma 20/1.8 (and now the 20/1.4) is popular with W&P Photographers is firstly the price, and secondly, for those who run a Dual Format Kit, then using a fast 20mm FL Prime Lens is seen by many as a more flexible option than using a fast 24mm Prime Lens.įor example (I use Canon) and the three fast Primes 20 50 and 135 provide equivalent FoV of: 20 32 50 80 135 and 216 all at fast aperture. #Hocus focus photography printing series(Both these were made with a 35/1.4 on a 5D Series Camera).īut as I mentioned once we get to longer Subject Distances the accuracy of the Plane of Sharp Focus becomes (much) less relevant. In all these cases accurate focus is required to nail the major (part of) an element in a frame where there is a limited DoF. ![]() Other examples would be the Ring Shot and a Detailed Cake Shot. These are two examples where a W&P Photographer typically uses a W/A Lens at a close Subject Distance and at a large aperture. I suppose certain types of photography demand absolutely precise focal plane placement but I've yet to encounter those types, it seems. I've never really understood the front/back focus issue. you might find +15 is actually better – also remember that there might be a different bets solution at differing Subject Distances – but as already implied the most deleterious effect is at the shorter SD’s.Ģ0mm is a very useful Focal Length for many Photographers – for what main purpose(s) did you buy it? Not sure what you mean ‘heretic’ but I assume the comment refers to NOT using any technical scientific procedure to make the micro-adjustment – if that assumption I correct, I donlt think that is heracy, but I do think that soem analysis of the sample photos would be useful to nail down whether (or not) ‘+10’ is the best answer – that would be quite easy to do, just select +5 and then also +15 and compare by eye the results. The newer 20/1.4 also seems to hold in good standing – probably that standing is bettered because most ‘serious’ DSLR’s have a micro adjustment to assist/correct the focus issues especially noting that the Sigma 20/1.4 is less capital outlay than comparable Canon and Nikon lenses. The 20/1.8 was (is) quite popular amongst Wedding Photographers, and also for its slight ‘macro’ ability. The (previous) Sigma 20mm F/1.8 EX DG was (is) well known for front focusing on many Canon DLSR/SLR bodies: for those without Micro Focus Adjustment, a common practice (at least amongst my cohort) was to physically adjust the camera position by eye to attain the correct plane of sharp focus, but this was really only necessary for the closer Subject Distances because there is usually an adequate DoF at ‘normal’ Portrait SD, even if used at F/1.8. Most focus finders like the Patersons and the Scoponet will only work on the centre portion of the image.Your experience concurs with other reports where the Sigma 20/1.4 Art requires micro adjustment both for Canon and Nikon bodies, whereas, (by contrast), the EF 24/1.4L MkII and the 24mm f/1.4G AF-S, do not, or require very little adjustment. If your enlarger is level and parallel and it is just for checking whether your negative carrier is holding your neg straight and the whole thing is in focus on the enlarging paper, then there's a few things: The Peak focus finder will enable you to focus on the grain at the edge of the print the Nova Hocus Focus I think also does the same thing. If you want to study it to the nth degree - Barry Thornton went into the whole thing in immense and useful detail in his book Edge Of Darkness. Setting up your enlarger for parallelism in all planes is different in a way to finding a grain focusser for checking the corners of your prints. Hi Marizu - I get the feeling you're talking about two different things here. The one that I have only realy works in the centre portion of the image. Marizu wrote:What kind of focussing aid do I need to check that my enlarger is straight for large prints? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |