My main point is that focusing is easier at 1.2 than what I`m used to with the 1.4 in low light. I too have many, many, many tales of woe with the 50 1.4 @ 1.4 and not getting all the subjects (people) in focus. One person is great, two people is time for flash and stop down, if the subjects are in the near focus range, or not in the same plane of focus, unless you like 3200 ASA and extra large grain and can afford to stop down (without flash). My brains are tired now :) Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 6:48 AM Subject: Re: 50mm 1.2
> > I used up three rolls last night with the LX and 50 1.2 at "Las Posadas" > > in a restaurant last night at Olvera Street, I think the percentage of > > low light shots in focus has gone way up. The 1.2 is a dream to > > focus, the SE-60 focus screen doesn`t hurt either, what a combo! > > Yes, a dream to focus with in low light. However, that razor-thin > depth of field that helps so much in focusing can also come back to > haunt you: > > While some photos will be simply great at f/1.2, others (where you > might want a number of differently spaced subjects to all be in > focus) can become impossible. Ordinarily, you can just stop down a > few notches, but in dim light this may result in shutter speeds that > are dangerously long. > > Also, focusing in dim light (with that paper-thin DOF) on a moving > subject (not moving perpendicular to you, but moving closer or > further away from you) can be a real challenge - the subject, even > if moving fairly slowly, will constantly be moving out of the plane > of focus all too rapidly. > > As a guest at a wedding in a church one time, I tried using a 50/1.2 > wide open to take a few sepia photos (400 CN) of the wedding > participants as they came down the aisle past me. (I had hoped to be > able to stop down somewhat, to get a larger DOF, but the church was > dimmer than I expected - <g>.) At f/1.2, focusing on the (even > slowly) moving subjects was a pain in the, er, aperture, and it was > impossible, say, to get both the bride and her father (at slightly > different planes) in focus at the same time. > > I don't relate this sad tale of woe in order to contradict Steve, > but only to point out that just having a fast lens may not be all > that is needed - <g>. (Brains may help, too, I guess - <g>.) > > Fred > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
