>>4387999
The next one.

For me, it's the new FD 50mm f/1.4, on my A-1

For a camera to take somewhere for a day, just 1-2 rolls of film, keep things light and simple....it's hard to beat

The one I have with me as long as it’s not some POS that doesn’t integrate well with the camera (ie: contactless manual lenses on mirrorless - they are fun on SLRs)

>>4387999
Cool. Similarly I've settled on my olde Z7 with the 85mm 1.8. Unlike my previous daily lens, I don't have to fuck with twist to use or zoom, it's fairly compact, sharp as shit, + nice and flat, yet decently wide for distant landscrapes without shrinking everything to the horizon, and if I want to snag a portrait it's cool for that too. It was honestly a toss-up between this one or your lens, and I only went with this one bc it was so cheap, thinking I'd try it and then spend up to get your 105. But I think they're close enough.

I'm just waiting for a new wide pancake now to make the compact Z body *just* pocketable for bike rides. I had the 26mm & almost ground the rings off it off to build my own filter for it, til I realized their entire front end idea is just so stupidly designed it's inevitable that they'll make a better mk.2, or an entirely new 20 or 24mm model.

Or maybe voitlander will do it. But jfc would someone show ze germans over at voitlander how an electronic motor works, or a fucking O-ring, ffs, it's not 1925 i mean god damn

>>4387999
Nikkor 24-120mm f4 for me. It just does everything decently. The lens creep is annoying though.
But now during winter it's so bloody dark that I tend to just stick to 50mm f1.4, and occasionally 85mm f1.8.
My favourite in terms of capability is the 70-200mm f2.8, but it's just way to heavy and unwieldy.

>>4388066
*too

I have the 24-120 S for basically everything. 40mm F2 as a body cap / env. Portrait lens. Don’t think I need anything else, but that new macro is tempting

>>4388070
I got the 50mc for slide digitizing. Is breddy but I just feel like 550 for the lens + 200 for the es-2 is like. shit I could get a plustek scanner for half that & not have another lens to worry about & find a place for. Great images though, my gods.

>>4388066
>>4388070
i have the 24-120 f/4 and feel the same way about the creep. just bought the 24-70 f/4 and love it, especially the collapsing/locking feature

Can't beat it, I wish something similar existed for full frame.

I love lens threads, but they're pretty boring when no one posts pictures with the lenses they supposedly love so much

>>4388093
Yeah, the fuckers at Nikon should really have though of adding a simple lock to the 24-120mm.
24-70mm is probably great, but I feel like I'd want it at f2.8 to justify the loss of range at the long end.

I love the Olympus 60mm f/2.8 macro lens. I shoot with it so often the FOV is intuitive to me, although it can definitely be restrictive.

Really enjoying the Tak 50 on film, but daily use on digital is a chore.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX
Camera Model	PENTAX K-7
Camera Software	K-7 Ver 1.13
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:10:20 20:07:19
Exposure Time	1/180 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1728
Image Height	1152
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

>>4388131
even worse are the people who always complain about people not posting photos while not posting photos themselves though

>>4388118
You mean a sorta shit slow 50mm lens? The chinese make a lot of those for sony

>>4388200
>sony
canon low-diffs the fuji

>>4388093
>>4388167
>>4388066
Is it a big issue? I've never had any lens creep problems with my copy.

voigtlander 50mm f2. not showing you my photos. I do not trust 4chan users.

>>4388266
>4chan users
You are one too you retard, unless you mean you are a tourist from another forum

I liked my Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro, I did sell it but it was a nice lens to use. Im on l-mount now and considering either getting a 85mm for it or selling and buying into sony and getting the 85mm gm 2 because that seems really nice

>>4387999
The 50/1.2GM or the 135GM. Both are worth every penny.

>>4388274
whyd you get the 50mm 1.2 instead of the 1.4?

>>4388269
yeah, I don't trust you. It would be nice if I could!

>>4388261
It becomes an issue with use. It's pretty much inevitable if you keep carrying it downwards.

>>4388168
That's beautiful. Looks almost like it's underwater.

My first ever lens is the XF27mm f2.8 pancake by Fujifilm.
It's still my favorite simply because of how compact yet sharp it is and because I love the 40mm fov which I find superior to 35mm and 50mm.

RF 24mm f/1.8 IS STM
Fast, common wide focal length, with excellent IS, and wonderful ergos. These primes have a clicked control ring instead of the smooth ones that most RF lenses have, since it has a dedicated focusing ring. Set that control ring to aperture or exp. compensation and you're golden. Part of me wants to trade in my EF 100mm for the RF 85mm purely because of the ergos.

>>4388199
>a lens is just focal length and aperture and nothing more
>>4388118
Honestly, the Nikon 40 f2 has given me a real similar vibe.
>>4388266
I'll post some from my voigt 50 f2 in a bit, on behalf of you paranoid nophoto

>>4387999
pentax 50mm f1.7 smc a
rlly fun to use, on digital and film. My favourite lense i have owned, and one of the cheapest

>>4388199
I own a lot of 50's and nothing comes close. I'll get film-era zeiss next to test that out though, so maybe there's some idea in that.
>>4388200
lmao
>>4388294
nice. I'll get a nikon z camera some day to try it out.

>>4388319
>lmao
and yet its the true
its a soft lens with every aberration, take the name and reputation away, theres no magic. its a mass produced consumer product. viltrox, samyang, ttartisan, 7artisans, tamron! etc, any of them can fit the bill and provide all the "3d pop" or magic or other intentionally ill defined schizo label for days. pick a small lens from them and be happy because their manufacturing isnt good enough for sharp small lenses, i mean, is perfect for small primes full of character.

the days of artisanship in camera gear are long, long, long gone. being a gearfag is so trite now. gear "doesn’t matter". yes gear affects what the camera can do. but gear no longer holds that much weight in a well lived life. everything expensive is zeiss, everything cheap is leica and cooke. what were once works of art are now simple old tech that can be stamped out with as much precision as a human is capable of for pennies. you can basically trust the price point to represent the character and get on with your life.

going to voigtlander leica etc is trying to live the days when gear mattered and a mere vivitar could not provide the bla bla bla rendering of a whatever unless it was the hidden gem canon fd rokko nikkor. but them days, they gone fo a while nigguh. this is the democratic age of photography. everything is described and understood, everything is available. and its all pretty cheap. mystery and magic and the secrets of the way are totally fucking dead. thats why so few people care about others photos, photogs are still leaning on gear cults and no one is giving a fuck about zeiss pop building corner #9000000 and leica glow car #9000000 because its no longer an exclusive and uncommon trick.

Good ol Zuiko 100mm f2.8
It's small, it's not too slow, it's just plain fun

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	228 dpi
Vertical Resolution	228 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>4388294
voigt 50 apo

>>4387999
A shitty Canon 200mm I got refurbished.
It has problems like no image stabilization and pretty bad chromatic aberration once you zoom in far enough, but I still love shooting with it

>>4388357
>APO lens
>Posts B&W photos
r u havin a laff

>>4388394
Do you think there's nothing more to a lens than being APO? Do you think APO doesn't affect b+w?

>>4387999
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM is amazing for wildlife photography if you like to hike. It's light enough you can hike with it all day long and you don't need a tripod.

>>4387999
I really like the Z 35mm f1.8s - for all of its flaws. Sadly I sold it and now I'm shooting the Z 40mm f2.0 ... which I find way too narrow. I think I gonna get the 35mm again once bitcoin moons more.

I also liked the Z 50mm f1.8S - superbly sharp and clinical. I'd love to shoot a clinic-kink BDSM session with it.

Also I'm thinking about a Z 24-200mm for general landscape photography. (Trees inna fog and stuff).

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON Z 6_2
Camera Software	Capture One 23 Macintosh
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	40 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	560
Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	40.00 mm
Image Width	2012
Image Height	3024
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4388118
A 50mm f2.1? I'm sure you could step down a f1.8 lens to around f2.1 if you really wanted to.

>>4388282
>looks like underwater
that's because of olympus' terrible auto white balance

>>4388294
>>a lens is just focal length and aperture and nothing more
are fujifags approaching leica levels of "character" where their stockholm syndrom kicks in to justify overpriced shit for "having character"?

>>4388289
>I love the 40mm fov which I find superior to 35mm and 50mm.
>I get my opinions spoon fed by youtuber faggot influencers
it's ok anon, you're just an NPC

>>4388291
Do you know if the RF 35mm has a clicked control ring, too? I thought about getting into RF mount because the Nikon lenses are really too huge for my taste

>>4388357
thank you, anon. nice shots

even if theres no scientific difference or you cant see when youre pixel peeping, its about the experience it offers. a cheaper sony lens wont make you feel connected with the camera and the moment

>>4388460
oh, I see, you're gay.

>>4388275
I shoot low light concerts, and I bought it when it came out. The 1.4 hadn't been announced then.

I loved the XF 23mm f2 for its glow at close focus distance, even if it‘s nothing special otherwise. Very compact like all the Fujicrons.

Too bad I killed mine by repeatedly holding it under the tap to test the weather sealing. The fucking weather sealing held up fine but I splashed a bit of water onto the back element once when drying it off… which crept in.

I think I‘ll pay the idiot tax and get another copy.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-E4
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-E4 Ver1.00
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	35 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2022:06:02 17:13:57
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Brightness	5.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	23.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3000
Image Height	2000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4388472
I love that one as well, but have never noticed any glow. Are you sure it's not a result of you testing the weather sealing lmao

>>4388456
>bring up lens no one is talking about to be angry
>>4388460
There can be clear visual differences, no pixel peeping required. Nothing about feeling or being connected. Lenses have different optics.
>>4388500
The 23 f2 is notorious for being softer up close at a wider apertures. It's not really an issue for practical shooting though.

>>4388514

Yeah, I actually have used it for portraits quite a lot. Gives out a flattering look (if you don't go too close)

>Justifies sony's existence
[X] 3d pop
[X] Microtonal harvesting
[X] Leica color DNA
[X] Sharp but not too sharp
[X] Subtle bokeh swirl
[X] The perfect amount of vignette, not too much to obliterate, not too much to leave in
[X] Useful controls for stills and cinema
[X] Ideal FOV for triggering autists in FF
[X] Ideal FOV for larping as Gordy in S35
[X] Ideal brand name for triggering poseurs
[X] Ideal size for handling
[X] IDEAL FILTER THREAD (take note, 49mm is the standard)
[X] f2.5 triggers DR chart speds who only theorize about taking pictures

You will actually harvest too many microtones with this bad boy. It's hard to decide how much microcontrast to leave in otherwise the photos are so 3d they look like they're floating in front of the wall.

hey everyone. I bought into nikon months ago with a 50 1.8 and the 180-600. I want a new lens for fun with the black friday sales. Should I get the nikon 20mm 1.8 or the nikon 105mm 2.8? in terms of wanting the most fun what choice?

>>4388551
14-30 f4.

>>4388550
Sony is literally minolta which is literally half of 80s leica, and they stole zeiss trade secrets just for the laughs. This is to be expected.

>>4388328
not reading that essay

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi

>>4388563
>didnt read essay
Thats what 4troon users say whenever their consumerist identity is systematically gutted in front of them ja

Can you really believe this photo of sticks and dirt has anything special in it

>>4388437
It does.

>>4388559
Fascinating how much collaboration there has been between leica and other manufacturers.

Maybe it was just a fun time in my life, but I love the Sigma Art 18-35mm f/1.8. Got sand in it after this trip...

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 60D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2015:06:22 02:44:55
Exposure Time	13 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	-1/3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	18.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4388003
It really is such a great and simple lens. I love it on my A-1 as well.

>>4388003
i had this lens for two seconds and its honestly one of the GOAT's, sucks i hate all the FD mount cameras

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Nikon
Camera Model	LS-2000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2018 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2023:11:06 17:22:15
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1500
Image Height	1000

>>4388590
>after crossing a fucking desert
>I finally see the perfect shot
>too bad I stomped all over it on the way there
yes i know
we all know

>>4388638
>too bad I stomped all over it on the way there
worse, you can see they drove there

I actually really like the Lumix S 70-300mm on my S5. It has such a nice look and I like the pseudo macro it has.
Even so I'm contemplating trading it, my 20-60mm and 50mm for the 24-105mm f4. That range would be much more useful for me since I do mostly events and video documentary stuff. I'd like to keep it alongside the 24-105, but I'm a poorfag and don't know if I can justify it to myself. I'm just afraid I'd lose the C H A R A C T E R.

>>4390883
>my 20-60mm and 50mm
i got both with my s5. the 50mm is rather nice and im happy with it, but the 20-60 is kinda trash to be honest.

>>4390885
Yeah, I kind of like the 20mm wide end but other than that I find it meh at best.
I know it's a skill issue but I've never really gotten along with 50mm lenses. I also have the Lumix 35mm f1.8 that I prefer.

>>4390890
>I know it's a skill issue but I've never really gotten along with 50mm lenses. I also have the Lumix 35mm f1.8 that I prefer.
desu id trade mine for an 85mm because its more useful for the photography i do. gonna sell my s5 anyway to buy into sony

>>4390890
50mm is a meme cope lens. The reason you struggle is the same reason 50mm is not the best choice for anything in particular.
>50mm is "natural" so photographs can end up looking too much like reality
>Wider FLs such as 35mm or 24mm are more useful when wanting to grab more of the environment and surroundings if your subject
>Narrower FLs such as 85mm, 100mm, or 135mm are more useful for subject seperation
50mm simply sits in this weird middle ground where it's useful but not ideal.

Honestly, every person trying to take nice photos should get a 24/35mm and an 85/100mm prime and they'd be set forever with two fast aperture lenses that can handle 90% of photography.

>>4390890
I do 50 for verticals and 35 for horizontal

>>4390916
What about if you're shooting group portraits at an event, maybe inside a busy club or bar

Surely 50-55mm is a better choice than 85-120 etc

Carl Zeiss Jena Vario-Sonnar 4/80-200mm

sold all my modern gear when i discovered vintage lenses. stuff is build like a tank and still weights a fraction of modern stuff. never carried my zeiss milvus 1,4/85mm but a jupiter 2/85mm weights almost nothing

>>4392554
That looks fucking awful though

>>4392597
some people call it character

>>4392601
You can stop posting now, you just hit bottom.

/ic/ here

>>4388328
>viltrox, samyang, ttartisan, 7artisans, tamron! etc, any of them can fit the bill

I just bought a ZV-E10 to take videos of myself drawing and painting and I kinda want to pick up one of these MF lenses (probably a 50) because I'm guessing it will be sharper and brighter than my kit lens. Any recommendations? I just want something that's real sharp.

The only thing I'm worried about is that since the ZV-E10 doesn't have a viewfinder, it automatically detects when you're focusing and does a digital zoom on the image so you can see how your focus is affecting it. I'm guessing with these 100% non digital lenses it wouldn't do that, right?

no tengo dinero

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	ZV-E10
Camera Software	ZV-E10 v2.01
Photographer	0
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.5
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	36 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2024:12:20 12:27:03
Exposure Time	1/13 sec
F-Number	f/9.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	5.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Other
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4393602
Nope and stabilization gets gimped without contacts, you need voigtlander/zeiss mfs for that

Get a cheap autofocus lens instead, ie: samyang 35mm, ttartisan 75mm. Their weakness is sharpness and flare which isnt a big deal for indoor video.

>>4393604
>stabilization
I don't care about this, my shooting is all on a tripod.

>>4393604
>weakness is sharpness
right, that's exactly the opposite of what I wanted.
God I wish I the zve10 had a viewfinder.

>>4392601
That looks awful, too.
Please learn how to operate your camera.

>>4393609
When a photographer tells you a lens isnt sharp they’re working at 4x the resolution of 4k video and expect to be able to crop half the image out when using a prime just in case (or if they like 2:1)

A softer lens looks fine for filming. If its oversampled 4k especially.

>>4393656
>crop half the image out when using a prime just in case

but that's why I want it to be sharp

>>4393776
the ttartisan 75mm f2 is pretty sharp desu

use a long lens and set the camera up further away, it makes it more cinematic

>>4388168
Canon 70-200 F2.8 II

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 6D Mark II
Image-Specific Properties:
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	1000
Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	182.00 mm
White Balance	Auto

>>4388319
Still have my 60th 55mm f1.2

>>4388381
200m f1.8 I what I have no IS but seldom bothers me

>>4392554
Had this lens, too soft for my taste

>>4393871
It gets a bit annoying when I zoom all the way in without a tripod and have to rely on whether or not my hands are shaky today. But I'm having fun with it

D4 and 70-200 2.8 VRII combo, shit makes my dick hard

Honorable mention to my Tamron 15-30 2.8 VC when the scene warrants it.

>>4390883
I really like the 70-300 too and I wouldn't be able to live without the reach
I also shoot at shit light often so I would need a prime as well, or at least an f/2.8

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DC-S5M2
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.2.1 (Android)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	300 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2024:03:25 16:31:26
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/7.1
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/7.1
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	300.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB

modern? Sigma 24-70 2.8(mk1). been a good all-rounder for me.
vintage? Super Takumar 50mm f1.4(I need to get the mold on the inner elements one of these days)

>>4387999
I like the Tamron 28-200mm Di III RXD.
I don't take it off unless unless I shoot very low light. It's super sharp and the hype is justified.
Pic related is a crop

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7RM2
Camera Software	ILCE-7RM2 v4.01
Photographer	alexander voss
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	200 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2024:10:12 11:29:10
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/9.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	6.5 EV
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	200.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	5168
Image Height	3448
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	Low
Sharpness	Hard

>>4390918
> having friends or acquaintances
> dignifying an institution with a 50% failure rate
> drinking
> visiting dens of degeneracy

There are no reasons to ever do group photography, hence no reasons to ever shoot 50mm.

>>4393602
>I'm guessing it will be sharper and brighter
It might be sharper or brighter but probably not both at once. Sure if you get a f/1.4 or something and open it up it will be brighter, but it'll be soft and out of focus.

I'll bet the softness you're complaining about is from NR due to high ISO. Even soft lenses are plenty sharp for video. The solution is video lights, not a new lens.