Just picked the new 40mm at best buy!!

Started Jun 18, 2012 | Discussions
Absolutic
Absolutic Veteran Member • Posts: 5,596
Just picked the new 40mm at best buy!!

Thanks to good folks over at POTN forum just picked up the new 40 at our best buy store a minute ago
--

 Absolutic's gear list:Absolutic's gear list
Fujifilm X100V Sony a1 OM-1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 +11 more
eyeport
eyeport Regular Member • Posts: 357
Re: Just picked the new 40mm at best buy!!

Now make sure you show us the photos!
--
Regards,

Felix Wu
Creationheart Photography
http://www.creationheart.com

Canon 5D Mark3, 16-35L II, 35L, 85L, 100L, 135L, 70-200L IS II, 580EXII x2

 eyeport's gear list:eyeport's gear list
Canon EOS-1D X Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Canon EF 35mm F1.4L USM Canon EF 85mm F1.2L II USM +6 more
Absolutic
OP Absolutic Veteran Member • Posts: 5,596
Re: Just picked the new 40mm at best buy!!

Sure. I immediately stopped by a local garden to test it and 50mm 1.8 II which I happened to have, on 5DM2. Then I came home and took few shots with 7D and the new 40mm. Then I took few videos too with both 5D and 7D. Everything is preliminary but I already have a couple of conclusions.

-- hide signature --

 Absolutic's gear list:Absolutic's gear list
Fujifilm X100V Sony a1 OM-1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 +11 more
007peter
007peter Forum Pro • Posts: 12,923
please test out the speed of Live View for me

Hey Buddy, its nice to know you still own a canon or two once in a while. Can you test the speed of Live View for Still Video? I'm very curious to know how much benefit STM have on old non-hybrid sensor

Take Care

 007peter's gear list:007peter's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF6 Panasonic 20mm F1.7 II
Absolutic
OP Absolutic Veteran Member • Posts: 5,596
Some photos first

Ok these I took with 7D..... and I did zero editing to them. My one-month-old is the obvious model. For some reason I am liking what I am seeing with 7D much more than what I am seing with 5DM2. Perhaps, it needs a better AF of 7D?

-- hide signature --

 Absolutic's gear list:Absolutic's gear list
Fujifilm X100V Sony a1 OM-1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 +11 more
Absolutic
OP Absolutic Veteran Member • Posts: 5,596
Re: please test out the speed of Live View for me

007peter wrote:

Hey Buddy, its nice to know you still own a canon or two once in a while. Can you test the speed of Live View for Still Video? I'm very curious to know how much benefit STM have on old non-hybrid sensor

Take Care

Yes, Peter, of course I was testing the video. You know I am always switching around....it is Canon time these days..... got 7D and 5DM2.....the wife is a culprit because she got me a surprise gift for a fathers day/wedding anniversary/child birth - a 70-200 F/2.8 IS II. Once you get this lens from your wife, you kind of have to be switching to Canon:)

From what I can tell, this lens was truly optimized for video. The results I am seeing are great. What do you mean the speed of Live View? I was more interested to see if they did it completely silent like m4/3/NEX latest lenses optimized for video, that the mic does not pick up the sound of AF or the sound of you working the MF.

-- hide signature --

 Absolutic's gear list:Absolutic's gear list
Fujifilm X100V Sony a1 OM-1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 +11 more
trulandphoto
trulandphoto Senior Member • Posts: 1,016
Re: Just picked the new 40mm at best buy!!

Thanks for the heads up. My local BB had a couple so I picked one up and cancelled my preorder. Kind of strange it's in local BBs before the big US mail order firms get it.

 trulandphoto's gear list:trulandphoto's gear list
Canon EOS 5DS R Canon EOS R Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM Canon EF 50mm F1.8 STM +4 more
graphikal Senior Member • Posts: 2,783
Terrible images technically, very soft

I suspect that you're using bad flash settings. Can you post settings for those shots? I've seen enough from the lens to know that you're not getting the best from it.
--

"Good artists copy; great artists steal... We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas." - Steve Jobs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

Absolutic
OP Absolutic Veteran Member • Posts: 5,596
Re: Terrible images technically, very soft

First of all, I did not use any flash in these shots. Why would I want to flash a month-old-baby?

Second of all, you think these are 'terrible images technically"?

This is that bad for you? The EXIF is intact by the way so you can read it yourself.

Here is the one with 5DM2 from yesterday

100% crop

graphikal wrote:

I suspect that you're using bad flash settings. Can you post settings for those shots? I've seen enough from the lens to know that you're not getting the best from it.
--

"Good artists copy; great artists steal... We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas." - Steve Jobs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

-- hide signature --

 Absolutic's gear list:Absolutic's gear list
Fujifilm X100V Sony a1 OM-1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 +11 more
graphikal Senior Member • Posts: 2,783
Re: Terrible images technically, very soft

Absolutic wrote:

First of all, I did not use any flash in these shots. Why would I want to flash a month-old-baby?

Because there's no reason not to, and you might get better shots? I don't know, it's really up to you whether you use flash; I was trying to brainstorm why the shots were so soft. Sometimes shots come out looking like this when people use Av mode with flash indoors.

Second of all, you think these are 'terrible images technically"?

Yes. They're soft and the white balance is off.

This is that bad for you? The EXIF is intact by the way so you can read it yourself.

Mmkay. Not wasting my time; division of labor suggests that you post the settings if relevant, not that every person look them up individually.

If the problem is simply focus, that's fine, though I would try to figure out whether the lens is focusing properly or not on your camera in low light. The shot of the dragonfly is much sharper. Could the difference be however you're doing noise reduction?

Timbukto Veteran Member • Posts: 4,988
who cares about technical quality here

Look at the focal distance to the baby as well as the age of the baby...I wouldn't be surprised if he's slightly further in than MFD in some of them. You can tell there isn't flash just by the eyes...I think that is something anyone experienced with flash settings would spot right away?

Who needs to shoot a flash from this distance...I'd either just open the blinds during the day. But these look like indoor shots with little ambient lighting available. Plus I'm sure he likes these pictures regardless of not being technically tack sharp...he'll have plenty of opportunity in better light to get those.

There is still a time and place for having shots with less than adequate lighting and a newborn is probably one of them.

Also IMO newborns and young children tend not to have the most detailed facial features in the first place...so technically IMO baby portraits are just fine like this...I see plenty of peach fuzz and eyelashes for it to be good enough to me.

 Timbukto's gear list:Timbukto's gear list
Canon EOS M Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
Timbukto Veteran Member • Posts: 4,988
actually speaking of MFD...

How is the MFD compared to something like the 50mms?

 Timbukto's gear list:Timbukto's gear list
Canon EOS M Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
newpentaxfan Contributing Member • Posts: 661
Re: actually speaking of MFD...

Timbukto wrote:

How is the MFD compared to something like the 50mms?

Magnification of the 40/2.8 is 0.18x. MFD is about 1 foot.

Magnification of the 50/1.2 is 0.15x . MFD is 1.5 foot.

Absolutic
OP Absolutic Veteran Member • Posts: 5,596
Re: Terrible images technically, very soft

If the problem is simply focus, that's fine, though I would try to figure out whether the lens is focusing properly or not on your camera in low light. The shot of the dragonfly is much sharper. Could the difference be however you're doing noise reduction?

With the dragonfly, I specifically did not do any noise reduction whatsoever because these were test shots (for me personally) and I shot 5DM2 in RAW.

With the baby, it could be that my shutter speed of 1/50 to 1/80 was too slow as a baby tends to move all the time, but I was already at ISO3200 in some of these shots and I did not want to push the ISO above that. I do agree with the WB comments though, the 7D shots did not get any PP including WB correction, which it needed. I shot these late at night and posted them immediately, usually I do a fair amount of PP to all my shots.

Some more daytime shots with 5DM2 and 40mm from last night at F/2.8:

 Absolutic's gear list:Absolutic's gear list
Fujifilm X100V Sony a1 OM-1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 +11 more
jitteringjr Veteran Member • Posts: 3,608
Re: Terrible images technically, very soft

Absolutic wrote:

First of all, I did not use any flash in these shots. Why would I want to flash a month-old-baby?

With flash, I would use the same consideration for the baby that I would on an adult. The flash isn't going to melt their brain or cause any damage, but lets face it, nobody likes getting hit with hard direct unmodified flash. Plus direct flash makes crappy flat light anyhow. Get a speedlight and bounce that flash off a white cieling or setup a shoot-through umbrella and fire it off camera with that speedlite. Use your wireless mode on the 7D to trigger it. When light becomes difused, it is nice and soft and wont bother even a 1 month old baby.

Absolutic wrote:

With the baby, it could be that my shutter speed of 1/50 to 1/80 was too slow as a baby tends to move all the time, but I was already at ISO3200 in some of these shots and I did not want to push the ISO above that. I do agree with the WB comments though, the 7D shots did not get any PP including WB correction, which it needed. I shot these late at night and posted them immediately, usually I do a fair amount of PP to all my shots.

This is exactly why you want to use flash for these shots. Yes a faster shutter speed might have helped without flash, but more importantly the position of your ambient lighting could be improved as well especially if you want to aviod flash. The key light is putting the hot spot on the top of the childs head and thus putting the face in a slight shadow about a stop down. This is working against you here. Move the child closer to the light so that it is positioned higher in relation to the child and thus is getting more on one side of the face and especially the eye you are focusing on. Or move the light source closer to the child. This will also raise the level of light on the child and gave the shot more contrast and thus percieved sharpness.

I have a ton of images just like this with my first child and not as much with my second child and this is mostly because I improved my lighting skills. Good luck with your photography and capturing these once in a lifetime moments of your new child.

 jitteringjr's gear list:jitteringjr's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM +9 more
Stevil Senior Member • Posts: 1,489
Miscalibrated lens?

It looks like the lens is focusing behind the optimum plane of focus...you might want to do a test with the camera on a tripod and pixel peep. At least half of my Canon lenses have mis-focused right out of the box and had to go back to the factory for adjustment (and yes my camera body/ AF is properly calibrated. ; )

 Stevil's gear list:Stevil's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL2 Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +2 more
Absolutic
OP Absolutic Veteran Member • Posts: 5,596
Re: Miscalibrated lens?

Stevil wrote:

It looks like the lens is focusing behind the optimum plane of focus...you might want to do a test with the camera on a tripod and pixel peep. At least half of my Canon lenses have mis-focused right out of the box and had to go back to the factory for adjustment (and yes my camera body/ AF is properly calibrated. ; )

are you talking specifically about my 7D shots, or also my 5D2 shots I posted later?

-- hide signature --

 Absolutic's gear list:Absolutic's gear list
Fujifilm X100V Sony a1 OM-1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 +11 more
Absolutic
OP Absolutic Veteran Member • Posts: 5,596
Re: Terrible images technically, very soft

jitteringjr wrote:

This is exactly why you want to use flash for these shots. Yes a faster shutter speed might have helped without flash, but more importantly the position of your ambient lighting could be improved as well especially if you want to aviod flash. The key light is putting the hot spot on the top of the childs head and thus putting the face in a slight shadow about a stop down. This is working against you here. Move the child closer to the light so that it is positioned higher in relation to the child and thus is getting more on one side of the face and especially the eye you are focusing on. Or move the light source closer to the child. This will also raise the level of light on the child and gave the shot more contrast and thus percieved sharpness.

I own several flashes and I know how to bounce flashes. In fact here is a picture of my sister in law done in the same room at approximately the hour of night with similar lighting....

However my wife, a medical professional, forbade me to use any flash even in bounce mode near the baby. her both parents are doctors, sister is a medical student, and she is a pharmacist, and I was told no flash near the baby. I am not going to argue with the mother of my child there.

 Absolutic's gear list:Absolutic's gear list
Fujifilm X100V Sony a1 OM-1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 +11 more
The Mad Kiwi Senior Member • Posts: 1,065
Re: Just picked the new 40mm at best buy!!

I was waiting to see pictures from this lens before pulling the pin. Bokeh looks pretty nice not spectacular but nice enough, that was the main thing I was worried about.

 The Mad Kiwi's gear list:The Mad Kiwi's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Sony a7 III Sony a7R IV Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm F2.8 Macro Sony Vario-Tessar T* FE 16-35mm F4 ZA OSS +9 more
Stevil Senior Member • Posts: 1,489
Re: Miscalibrated lens?

The only pictures where I could judge the focus were the baby and the dragonfly. The baby was easy, because the collar is textured and extends through the plane of focus. The dragonfly looks slightly out of focus, but it's harder to tell because there aren't any nearby objects that would tell me where the plane of focus is. I think the left (farthest) wing is more in focus, but macro photography isn't really a good way to judge AF performance anyway.

Absolutic wrote:

Stevil wrote:

It looks like the lens is focusing behind the optimum plane of focus...you might want to do a test with the camera on a tripod and pixel peep. At least half of my Canon lenses have mis-focused right out of the box and had to go back to the factory for adjustment (and yes my camera body/ AF is properly calibrated. ; )

are you talking specifically about my 7D shots, or also my 5D2 shots I posted later?

 Stevil's gear list:Stevil's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL2 Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +2 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads