• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Using a RF 35mm f1.8 macro as a portrait lens on R body’s good or bad?

Will Thompson

Well-known member
Is using a RF 35mm f1.8 macro as a portrait lens on R body’s a good or bad idea?

I use the macro because it works correctly with out an adapter with my ML-3/200 200 WS ring light.

Here’s an example where my 50mm was at the very edge of being not wide enough for daylight fill and needing to be closer since the flash was at the full power of 200 WS or 1/1 output.

3F0747F8-17D6-4B76-801C-29FAA84A0EE9.jpeg
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Will,

Great that you can illuminate her so well with one light! The ring essentially is a beauty dish and it works!

I never imagined one might need more than 200 Watt-Seconds.

......But on second thoughts could you have stepped back and then upped the ISO from 100 to 200 and stepped back?

Asher
 

Jerome Marot

Well-known member
You are asking a peculiar question. Why would the lens alone make a difference?

Let me analyse the picture instead. First: it is an interesting picture, or I would not be motivated to analyse it. But, second, with the parts I find puzzling: the flash light is a bit unnatural, as the viewer wonders where the light comes from. There is also the aspect of short focal length, combined with a down view, which makes the model legs look shorter than they need to be. However, third, this picture is interesting, as we see the surroundings and the fright train. The play with foreground and background with a hint of unsharpness to remind us where the actual subject is only possible with short focal and wide aperture. There is also the issue of colour and the play between pink and green is a nice touch.

So the conclusion is: that picture is interesting, which is rare enough to be noted. It would not have been possible with a longer focal or with a slower lens. Does that answer your question?
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Jérôme,

I really like your analysis and learned a lot. I am appreciative that you took the effort as it does help us relate better to this unusual picture.

....to the lighting. If a second light was added above and to the right of the camera to give added dimension, would that help your reception of the picture being worthy?

IOW, sides the even light and masking of structure constitute part of the “success of the shot to you?

Asher
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi, Will,


Oh, I get it. That refers to general illumination by daylight plus flash fill.

Doug
The limit is that the Godox 200 W/S power supply is maxed out! Of course, one could slightly underexpose and easily correct from RAW in post processing.

But Will’s picture is the pristine, out of the camera JPG and that’s an time-economical workflow!

Asher
 
Top