Tokina AT-X SD II 100-300 f4
Thanks, typical Sony colorsLovely colors. Probably the good photographer!
Heliconian
Cota tinctoria
That’s some chunk of glass! F4 300mm is something. The AF was for A-mount? Might be interesting. MF 300mm is already a bit into the “wild MF” but i do it with the Vario.
Looking at the front and rear elements, I could see a few specks/tiny spots, but nothing around the edges. Just to be thorough, I took a cleaning tissue and ran it around the edge; it came up clean. So I dunno.
Yeah, I only saw the prominent rings when shooting wide-open; stopping down a notch or two cleared them out.
Honestly, I don't really do portraits; I'm uncomfortable photographing strangers, and my family is pretty camera-shy. ^^;; I'll have to give the low-light a try, though.
Posterization is the best way I can think of to describe it; it looks like On1 is losing the subtle shadings in areas of high saturation, crushing a batch of similar values down to a single color.
I don't think it's import-related; I'm using On1 in 'browse' mode - you navigate to any folder on your drive and just start working on any images there, with edits and metadata stored in a sidecar file. So there's no importing involved. (That's one of the workflow aspects I really like about On1; I can put my image triage folder on a cloud sync/storage service like Dropbox and edit from any machine, with the edits synced between machines via the sidecar files.)
Absolutely! I really should send a support report in.
For me, it's not the subscription price; I've spent more buying On1 and Capture One 12 than I would have paid on a LR subscription. I just really, really dislike a setup where access to my work is controlled by a subscription. (I know you can still export an edited version from the LR catalog if you let the subscription lapse, but from what I've heard you can't change or fix any of the edits, so that's not much different from exporting a TIFF and throwing the RAW file away.)
I like it at f1.4 as it is. I put auto-iso and eithe ruse it with Techa Art Pro for AF and shot ideally from 6 feet+. I use to get shots of many kids birthday parties and of parents. I also shootnit Manual. I never disappoints, people love the candid photos it makes. I just let them try it out, show the how to focus, a 5 seconds explanation. I also let kids take photos. I then share the photos with them on WhatsApp. Now, it may be the “vibe” of that lens, or the mood. It’s all super serious dark matte black, everything looks serious about it. I just like the Minolta colors wh n people and low light is around. The Carl Zeiss i have 1.8, 1.4, many others. I am not sure what this lens have, I just like the pictures and colorsLooking at the front and rear elements, I could see a few specks/tiny spots, but nothing around the edges. Just to be thorough, I took a cleaning tissue and ran it around the edge; it came up clean. So I dunno.
Another example (especially on the left/right edges of the bush in the center background, at 100%):
Pen-F, MC Rokkor-PF 58/1.4
Yeah, I only saw the prominent rings when shooting wide-open; stopping down a notch or two cleared them out.
I was mostly just amused at finding the soap-bubble look on the 58/1.4 after people praising lenses like the Trioplan for it. Heck, for artistic reasons, I'd like to see if I could duplicate the effect in the above pic (the pinpoint source surrounded by the ring) at a larger size across more of the frame. Probably gonna have to wait for another day, though...
Honestly, I don't really do portraits; I'm uncomfortable photographing strangers, and my family is pretty camera-shy. ^^;; I'll have to give the low-light a try, though.
As I said, I was disappointed the prior time I tried the lens with landscapes, and I wasn't impressed with the distance shooting I did with it this time either; it seemed to work best with subjects at short-to-medium range (around 10-15 meters, or less), and single subjects instead of a broad field. Has that been your experience?
There may be a lens clinically low distortion but not sure how much they cost. I think more than the best ever, UWA are a kind of photography in its own, very foreign to 28mm or lager focal lengths.For my A7x cameras I never got round to getting a FE 16-35 (f4 or f2.8) except for when I borrowed one for a series of video shoots, but never took any photos at the UWA end so I've always wondered what a UWA can do. A while back I asked about this Tokina 17/3.5 and the Tamron variant, but ended up holding back.
A few weeks ago a copy of this lens popped up on eBay fully boxed that was cheaper than the norm, its in a CY mount (something I prefer as I do prefer to use my CY lenses) so I'm guessing this isn't the top flavour with people normally opting for Canon FD or Pentax-K mounts.
A7iii @ f8 or f16
A light pulled down of highlights as the sun as glaring. It's not bad at all. Contrast and colours are decent. Some funkiness going on at the edges which I can put up with. There was some purple fringing towards the sides which when removed left some halo edges (see top of trees on right and top of buildings on left). There is a little distortion.
