Thoughts on L lenses and the 24-70 2.8 II

[drmikeinpdx]

I'm sure some of you guys will think this sounds crazy, but for a glamour/pinup/boudoir photographer, this lens may actually be too sharp!

Here is a shot I took yesterday. It isn't quite full frame, but pretty close. The aperture is around F 5-ish, because I didn't want the shoes to be too blurry. There is daylight coming from camera left and a gold umbrella on the right.

The second shot is a crop of the eyes.

I see a lot more retouching in my future if I use this lens for closeups! LOL
It would be a fantastic lens for a photographer who only works with 19 year old supermodels and has a team of makeup artists on hand.

Fortunately, most of my photos are never enlarged beyond about 1000 pixels, so hopefully it won't be a big issue. In any case, I'm not throwing away my 50 L. Sometimes that "dreamy" look serves another purpose, you know.

 

[TeT]

I'm sure some of you guys will think this sounds crazy, but for a glamour/pinup/boudoir photographer, this lens may actually be too sharp!

Here is a shot I took yesterday. It isn't quite full frame, but pretty close. The aperture is around F 5-ish, because I didn't want the shoes to be too blurry. There is daylight coming from camera left and a gold umbrella on the right.

The second shot is a crop of the eyes.

I see a lot more retouching in my future if I use this lens for closeups! LOL
It would be a fantastic lens for a photographer who only works with 19 year old supermodels and has a team of makeup artists on hand.

Fortunately, most of my photos are never enlarged beyond about 1000 pixels, so hopefully it won't be a big issue. In any case, I'm not throwing away my 50 L. Sometimes that "dreamy" look serves another purpose, you know.

It will allow you to back off of the sharpen setting in profiles on your camera. Most portrait profiles are at +2 (?) try neutral on the sharpen which will also clip a little color noise as well....

 

[privatebydesign]

I'm sure some of you guys will think this sounds crazy, but for a glamour/pinup/boudoir photographer, this lens may actually be too sharp!

Here is a shot I took yesterday. It isn't quite full frame, but pretty close. The aperture is around F 5-ish, because I didn't want the shoes to be too blurry. There is daylight coming from camera left and a gold umbrella on the right.

The second shot is a crop of the eyes.

I see a lot more retouching in my future if I use this lens for closeups! LOL
It would be a fantastic lens for a photographer who only works with 19 year old supermodels and has a team of makeup artists on hand.

Fortunately, most of my photos are never enlarged beyond about 1000 pixels, so hopefully it won't be a big issue. In any case, I'm not throwing away my 50 L. Sometimes that "dreamy" look serves another purpose, you know.

It will allow you to back off of the sharpen setting in profiles on your camera. Most portrait profiles are at +2 (?) try neutral on the sharpen which will also clip a little color noise as well....

Or.......

Soften the light. That is the issue here, the umbrella is far too small to provide the natural softness you could easily create. You can have razor sharp detail and no pores or wrinkles but to do it you need a much bigger apparent light source.

 

[bereninga]

Or...Stick with babies! ISO 640, 1/250th, f/2.8, 50mm. Morning light, before breakfast.

This is really adorable. Great shot, YeungLinger.

 

[YuengLinger]

Or...Stick with babies! ISO 640, 1/250th, f/2.8, 50mm. Morning light, before breakfast.

This is really adorable. Great shot, YeungLinger.

Thanks! She's a born ham.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Or...Stick with babies! ISO 640, 1/250th, f/2.8, 50mm. Morning light, before breakfast.

This is really adorable. Great shot, YeungLinger.

Thanks! She's a born ham.

Very cute!

 

[drmikeinpdx]

Photographing babies sounds like a nice change of pace to me!

And I do agree that the light was harsh. The new lens is going to make me change some of my old lighting habits. Or maybe I will keep my old Tamron 28-75 in my camera bag for use with harsh lighting or with models over a certain age.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

The 24-70 II is the best all-around canon lens w/o question. The only 'L' lens I have AFMA'd is the 100L that received a +2.

 

[Deleted member 7828]

I'm obviously in the minority but the sharper, the better! You can ALWAYS soften an image but you cannot add back details...

Another minority opinion - not a fan of the "dreamy portrait look"...ultimately not realistic. Of course, I will still do minor editing like getting a nice skin tone, etc. but I never remove details. Many times I find shots come out soft-looking anyway due to the lens, lighting or some other variable.

Then again, I don't do this professionally, so...I can get away with it I guess.

 

[sleepnever]

Rented the 24-70 mkII once and fell in love. I have and currently use the crap out of my 24-70 mkI. I guess I'm lucky because it has been pretty sharp for me for a long time. Recently sent it to Canon when I noticed some oddities after a trip, and they fixed some things and now its sharper than ever. At some point I want to trade up though, even though I loathe that they changed the filter size from 77mm (all my other lenses) to 80..