Learning to use the 85mm f/1.4

I got a used 85mm f/1.4 lens after seeing all the posts here, and I've been trying to learn how to use it. I'm attaching a couple of pictures, all comments welcome!

I realize its used for closer-in portraits, but I ended up taking these full-length shots with it. Would it have been better to have gone in further?

Finally, for comparison of bokeh, the last one is with a 50mm f/1.8. The background blur isn't clean, but I sort of liked the color of the sun in the trees, and the colors came out well.

Thanks,

-ravi

85mm f/1.4 D50



85mm f/1.4 D50



50mm f/1.8 D50

It is a great lens, but there is a learning curve. I got one about a month ago and wasn't happy with my first use of it. The second use was in a studio setting and turned out much better. Now I am waiting to use it outside again. You have to stay down around f2 to f2.8 to get maximum blurring of the background. That is going to require ISO 200 in most cases. For me it is the perfect focal length for close portraits.
--
JohnE
Equipment list in profile

Thanks John. Would close portraits be much closer in, say frame to head filling the frame? That would be pretty close to the subject.

These pictures were taken at f/1.8, and I thought I should see more blurring than I did.

-ravi

ravisub said:

Thanks John. Would close portraits be much closer in, say frame to
head filling the frame? That would be pretty close to the subject.

These pictures were taken at f/1.8, and I thought I should see more
blurring than I did.

-ravi

Click to expand...

I don't have samples to show you, but if you crop down to even head and shoulders, and shoot at less than 2.8, you should see plenty of bokeh. But it does depend on how far away the background is from the subject.
--
JohnE
Equipment list in profile

i liked the 3rd picture the best
good luck with the lens
--
George Puglisi
Puglisi Digital Photography
315 697-7351
[email protected]

Aaargh, that's what gets me! The 50mm/f1.8 was my first prime lens, and I was so impressed with the outcomes that I thought I'd try and use primes more. Then after seeing all the posts on the forums I was able to get hold of an 85mm/1.4, but I'm having the darndest time using it.

But thank you George. I will keep playing around and see how it goes.

-ravi

George Puglisi said:

i liked the 3rd picture the best
good luck with the lens
--
George Puglisi

Click to expand...

Send it over my way, I’ll put it to work. I can’t imagine that big of a learning curve. All you need to worry about is the posing.

ravisub said:

But thank you George. I will keep playing around and see how it goes.

-ravi

George Puglisi said:

i liked the 3rd picture the best
good luck with the lens
--
George Puglisi

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

ravisub said:

Aaargh, that's what gets me! The 50mm/f1.8 was my first prime lens,
and I was so impressed with the outcomes that I thought I'd try and
use primes more. Then after seeing all the posts on the forums I
was able to get hold of an 85mm/1.4, but I'm having the darndest
time using it.

Click to expand...

Focus placement needs to be very precise at f/1.8. Try shooting at f/2.8 until you get the hang of it. Then, make sure the distance between the camera and the background is at least twice as big as the distance between the camera and the subject. That will help the bokeh issue. Here's an example of a picture taken at f/3.2 with adequate distance to the background elements.

d200 1/1000s f/3.2 at 85.0mm iso320



If you post more samples, please make them larger so they can be analyzed. I'd suggest 800 pixels in width at a minimum.

--
Warm regards, Uncle Frank
FCAS Founder, Hummingbird Hunter, Egret Stalker
Dilettante Appassionato
Galleries at http://www.pbase.com/unclefrank

The 85/1.4D on digital is the proper length for close headshots, while wider shots tend to have a flattening telephoto effect. There IS a lot of blurring but you need to get closer to your subjects to take advantage of the 85/1.4's strengths. Wider shots ARE OK, but you need to have a good environment.

Big mistake #1: Dark background and dark hair and light clothes in natural light or with bad fill flash = BAD EXPOSURE and BAD COLOR BALANCE. You should not use too dark a background. Your pictures look underexposed, low-contrast, and have a bluish shadow cast. Further, the subject's hair starts to blend into the background if both are dark.

Big mistake #2: No catchlights in the eyes, the subjects do not have any life. A lack of catchlights can be a useful tool for making intentionally "flat" portraits, but most portraits will need them.

Big mistake #3: In the second photo, there is too much arbitrary empty space. What's the space doing? There are a few blur circles above the girl...what about them is so important?

Big mistake #4: The 50mm shot looks like it was taken wide open. Try at f/2.8 instead and move a bit closer...this will improve background blur dramatically.

Another possible mistake: All shots look somewhat soft. Focus error? Failure to USM after resize?

You look like you're on your way, so take these as constructive criticisms and nothing more.
--
Robert.
Idealism is precious.

hey Frank..

never miss an opportunity to show off that baby of yours (the 85 1.4.. of course) ...do you ?

I'm so used to seeing people pictures taken with this jewell, that this bird pic is refreshing..
great show of that superb bokeh we love so much !

as usual... spectacular..

kindest regards,
Lionel P

Thanks Uncle Frank. I think I see what you mean about the distance to the subject vs. distance to background objects. In this case the distance from the subject was large, and the background wasn't too far away.

After using a P&S for a long time, I got so used to distracting backgrounds that were in focus that even these pictures appeared to have less distracting backgrounds, but of course its nothing compard to what can be achieved, as I've seen on other postings and in the bird picture you just posted.

I shall persevere! (The ultimate duffer's code ),

Cheers,

-ravi

Robert, thank you for the comments, and I certainly am not offended in any way. I'm doing this to learn.

Xiaomage said:

Another possible mistake: All shots look somewhat soft. Focus
error? Failure to USM after resize?

Click to expand...

I did not use an USM after resize. I haven't gotten into PP yet, working on the assumption that I need to learn how to shoot first before trying to fix that in PP. These pictures were JPGs that I resized down in order to post, but I think I sized them down too much.

Xiaomage said:

Big mistake #1: Dark background and dark hair and light clothes in
natural light or with bad fill flash = BAD EXPOSURE and BAD COLOR
BALANCE. You should not use too dark a background. Your pictures
look underexposed, low-contrast, and have a bluish shadow cast.
Further, the subject's hair starts to blend into the background if
both are dark.

Click to expand...

Regarding your comment #1, what could I have done to get a better exposure under the conditions? You have read the conditions perfectly (dark bkgnd, light clothes, natural light). Should the whole picture have been lighter to get better contrast? My D50 generally tends to overexpose, especially when some areas are very bright (which was not the case here), so I've read elsewhere in this forum that one needs to dial in -0.3ev almost by default. But that would have made this picture even more underexposed.

I agree totally with comment #3, I should have cropped. The exposure problem you pointed out of course still exists.

Thanks again,

-ravi

Xiaomage said:

The 85/1.4D on digital is the proper length for close headshots,
while wider shots tend to have a flattening telephoto effect.

Click to expand...

I think it's good for more than headshots, Robert.





--
Warm regards, Uncle Frank
FCAS Founder, Hummingbird Hunter, Egret Stalker
Dilettante Appassionato
Galleries at http://www.pbase.com/unclefrank