Reading mode: Light Dark

Name ONE must-have lens for life! nt.

Go to last post
You seem to think I hate the lens. If that's the case you are wrong. I've sung the lens's praises before and I even used to participate in the BS "it has a certain special quality that I can't describe". The truth however is that I DO know its character pretty well, and while I do think it is pleasing in some ways, I am not as enchanted by it as I used to want to be.

Sure, it's a nice lens. The boke smoothness myth is a myth though. That's all I'm trying to "kill". Just because it has mediocre boke does not make it a bad lens, it just makes it a lens with mediocre boke. And that's what the 45mm is, at least at wide apertures.

Stopped down a bit it's just fine though (although the aperture shape can be seen in more challenging situations, ohnoes!).

I've found the old 50/1.8 AIS to be better in most ways. I have a pretty good idea of both what I'm sacrificing and what I'm gaining by making that choice.

I may pick up the ol 45/2.8 again sometime in the future precisely because it IS a good lens and is marvelously small and the focus ring is very nicely dampened. I think a good 50/1.8 AIS can get a well-dampened focus ring too but my current one isn't all that stiff. Makes pinky-focusing easier but overall not as pleasant-feeling.
 
I agree with you, Dirk....and with Tierdeen above.

But my preference is slightly for the AIS over the DC, as the latter has imho a wee bit colder and more "clinical" look.

In the end, however, both of these 105's are totally sweet.

Best wishes,

David

--
http://www.pbase.com/df9999
 
I saw this post, I saw the 45 2.8 post, I read what was said, and I just wanted to post some photos because there aren't a lot posted on the forums. I didn't get the 45 2.8 for the bokeh, and I agree, it's not necessarily the best, but I like the pictures that it takes, and for a lot of what I use it for, I don't necessarily want the best bokeh anyway. I like how the rocks and lake are pretty dominant, but not taking away from the shot...



I like the gradual fading of the bushes...



And I just like the bokeh effect in this shot...



I just thought I'd add my two cents about the lens. I like it, I'm not saying that anyone said they didn't like it, I just wanted to say that I like it.
 
My all time favorite lens. However, I use my 55mm f3.5 Micro-Nikkor (pre-AIS) almost daily, so it would be a runner-up. In third place is my 85mm f/1.8 (pre-AIS) that produces incredible results wide-open.

I've got lots of new AF lenses, too (see my profile) but my old lenses are remarkable.

Dave
 
lol. Great pics, thank you for sharing them. You should have started a new thread for them though, they would have gotten some more [deserved] attention!
Everyone's seen this pic but oh well :D

 
Thanks for the comments, Tierdaen, I know that I have seen that picture before, as have others, but I love it!! The lighting is fantastic and the composition is fantastic. I think that that picture shows the true strength of the lens, that is the contrast and the special kind of pictures that you can take with it. What camera are you using? The clarity of that picture is superb. I know that it's not just the camera, it's the your photo skills, but I still gotta know.

A couple more, I think this shot shows the type of bokeh, I like what it does to the flowers, but on the gate it's a little weird with the circles of light.



And I just have to add this one, everyone loves how her dress is flying behind her.



And d_slr, I guess that you could do the same stuff with the 35/2 and the 50/1.8 I just haven't had any experience with them, but for some reason I just love the little 45 2.8. I guess that it's a little lens that looks like it can't do much, but I've had a lot of fun with it and it forces me to do a little more with it being a manual lens and all. Ok, I'm done talking now, thanks for listening, if you are listening.
 
The pic was taken on a D70. The camera is never really the limitation when it comes to my humble photographs.

As to the philosophy in the post title..this could be another thread entirely but it would likely be ignored anyway...

Lenses are not purely static in what they do. There are static elements and dynamic elements. The static elements are things like this boke rendering, contrast, light-falloff, color saturation. These things, with slight variations due to QC related sample variation (which affects sharpness far more than anything else), are intrinsic elements of the design of a lens. All 45/2.8P lenses have "look X" while all 50/1.8D lenses have "look Y" for instance. Of course, this is not so simple, as look X and look Y are extremely similar except for some subtle features. It is not like there is an obvious rendering signature that makes an image "obviously" a 45/2.8p image or "obviously" a 50/1.8d image, outside of perhaps the boke circle/polygon thing. If I take a snap on the street and post it with one lens or the other, even the most diehard fans of one lens or the other will not know for sure which lens took the photo. However, even with that caveat, it IS true that renderings differ between lenses in subtle ways.

The dynamic elements are those dictated largely by subjectivity, and subjectivity has its sources too. For instance, one reason for the 45p's popularity is due to its place as an "underdog" lens. Everyone and their brother has the 50/1.8 or 50/1.4, so naturally the less-common but good alternative is attractive to certain audiences. The desire to have a "unique" look aided by "unique" hardware is strong.

That's obviously not the whole story though, as I did validate the fact that there is a difference in rendering between different lenses. Certain subtleties catch one's eyes in practice. Even if they can't differentiate someone else's 45/2.8 and 50/1.8 pics, they can certainly remember their own given the relationship of remembered scene to captured image.

Some lenses cooperate with certain people more; they are more compatible with a person's shooting style and sense of aesthetics, and thus lend themselves well to being "mastered" by that person. Sometimes it's just a matter of encountering the right scenes when a certain lens is on the camera, sometimes it's a more complex matter revolving around "inspiration" or creativity.

I have found the 50mm f/1.8 lenses to be my favorite normals because they cooperate with me more than any other normal. I worked hard to learn both the 50/1.8D and the 45/2.8P and while for various reasons I wanted to like the 45mm more (size, focus ring, uniqueness, color saturation), those subtle imaging differences that I was very aware of did not really make me think of the 45 as superior...merely different.

There were things the 45mm did better than my 50mm, and things my 50mm did better than the 45mm. I weighed my priorities and then looked over my images. I found the 50mm just seems to work better with me. I don't think it'd work better for everyone else, but I can see that the 50/1.8 (now AIS) is in better harmony with me and my shooting style than the 45mm was.

This applies to a lot of lens juxtapositions...there are the static elements that relate to how a lens transmits light, and then there are the dynamic elements which dictate how the lens "meshes" with its users.

I have tried to demonstrate the way lenses produce images, because that doesn't change much. If a lens is misunderstood and promoted for the wrong reasons, it can/will result in disappointment (as it did with me).

Then again, maybe some folks want/need their ignorance and prefer to spread misinformation about the static elements of a lens. In my opinion though, it undermines endeavors to learn what is happening in photographs and what lenses really do.

 
Since I shoot mostly indoor sports, yes, this one has opened up possibilities only imaginable before.

Hmmm . . . in some of my venues, I could even use a D2X at ISO 800 . . . but then, I couldn't shoot uncropped at 8 fps. Darn - end of dream!

For most folks, though, the expense of this specialized lens isn't justifiable, so I'm putting in a vote for something I don't even have: 85/1.4D.
 
Most men can't stay with one woman for an entire weekend. LOL

(I have in 23 years)

One lens could be a Nikkor 50mm 1:1.4 AF-D
--



With respect and dignity I welcome your interaction
Gary
 
Tierdaen said:
The pic was taken on a D70. The camera is never really the
limitation when it comes to my humble photographs.

As to the philosophy in the post title..this could be another
thread entirely but it would likely be ignored anyway...
Click to expand...
I don't know. I usually enjoy your posts.
Tierdaen said:
Lenses are not purely static in what they do. There are static
elements and dynamic elements. The static elements are things like
this boke rendering, contrast, light-falloff, color saturation.
These things, with slight variations due to QC related sample
variation (which affects sharpness far more than anything else),
are intrinsic elements of the design of a lens. All 45/2.8P lenses
have "look X" while all 50/1.8D lenses have "look Y" for instance.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more.
Tierdaen said:
Of course, this is not so simple, as look X and look Y are
extremely similar except for some subtle features. It is not like
there is an obvious rendering signature that makes an image
"obviously" a 45/2.8p image or "obviously" a 50/1.8d image, outside
of perhaps the boke circle/polygon thing. If I take a snap on the
street and post it with one lens or the other, even the most
diehard fans of one lens or the other will not know for sure which
lens took the photo. However, even with that caveat, it IS true
that renderings differ between lenses in subtle ways.
Click to expand...
True. The only way I believe you can consistently spot these differences is by use. Even then it's near impossible to do consistently.
Tierdaen said:
The dynamic elements are those dictated largely by subjectivity,
and subjectivity has its sources too. For instance, one reason for
the 45p's popularity is due to its place as an "underdog" lens.
Everyone and their brother has the 50/1.8 or 50/1.4, so naturally
the less-common but good alternative is attractive to certain
audiences. The desire to have a "unique" look aided by "unique"
hardware is strong.
Click to expand...
To be honest it's that unique look (not better) that makes me reach for my 45mm 2.8P so much. Often I know the "better" image (very subjective) will be the one I take using my 50mm 1.4D (or 60mm 2.8D depending on the subject) but as I often shoot to please myself only (thankfully!) I can go for that unique look instead and just use the 45mm.
Tierdaen said:
That's obviously not the whole story though, as I did validate the
fact that there is a difference in rendering between different
lenses. Certain subtleties catch one's eyes in practice. Even if
they can't differentiate someone else's 45/2.8 and 50/1.8 pics,
they can certainly remember their own given the relationship of
remembered scene to captured image.

Some lenses cooperate with certain people more; they are more
compatible with a person's shooting style and sense of aesthetics,
and thus lend themselves well to being "mastered" by that person.
Sometimes it's just a matter of encountering the right scenes when
a certain lens is on the camera, sometimes it's a more complex
matter revolving around "inspiration" or creativity.
Click to expand...
Agree. I don't see anything so far controversial or that I can't agree with in what you've wrote. I'm often shocked even at folks reaction to your honest opinion of a lens you've demonstrated use and knowledge of.
Tierdaen said:
I have found the 50mm f/1.8 lenses to be my favorite normals
because they cooperate with me more than any other normal. I
worked hard to learn both the 50/1.8D and the 45/2.8P and while for
various reasons I wanted to like the 45mm more (size, focus ring,
uniqueness, color saturation), those subtle imaging differences
that I was very aware of did not really make me think of the 45 as
superior...merely different.
Click to expand...
I'd go as far as saying my 50mm 1.8D was superior (by most standards). My 50mm 1.4D also. I still prefer my 45mm 2.8P for most things. For all the reasons you've given above. That's my honest opinion of it. It may not make sense to everyone but that's just how it is.
Tierdaen said:
There were things the 45mm did better than my 50mm, and things my
50mm did better than the 45mm. I weighed my priorities and then
looked over my images. I found the 50mm just seems to work better
with me. I don't think it'd work better for everyone else, but I
can see that the 50/1.8 (now AIS) is in better harmony with me and
my shooting style than the 45mm was.

This applies to a lot of lens juxtapositions...there are the static
elements that relate to how a lens transmits light, and then there
are the dynamic elements which dictate how the lens "meshes" with
its users.

I have tried to demonstrate the way lenses produce images, because
that doesn't change much. If a lens is misunderstood and promoted
for the wrong reasons, it can/will result in disappointment (as it
did with me).
Click to expand...
I was dissapointed as well initially by my 45mm 2.8P. Eventually I did find that unique aspect of it that made me keep it. Keep in mind that it is my favorite lens right now but it is also a lens I came close to selling. Like you I'm amazed that people call the bokeh of it great.
Tierdaen said:
Then again, maybe some folks want/need their ignorance and prefer
to spread misinformation about the static elements of a lens. In
my opinion though, it undermines endeavors to learn what is
happening in photographs and what lenses really do.

Click to expand...
Agreed.
--

Fit for release from a mental institution but banned from the 3-0-0-D forum since 6-2005.
 
It's fast enough for everything I generally do and I find the focal length even more to my liking on digital than film.
--

Fit for release from a mental institution but banned from the 3-0-0-D forum since 6-2005.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top