Canon 50/1.2 in very low light

[merciful]

A couple of people have asked in other threads to see some low-light results with the 50/1.2; so here's one, anyway.

1/8 second at f1.2, Tri-X at ISO 3200

[back alley]

it was a dark & stormy night...;)

kind of sinister looking-friend of yours?

but seriously folks, good shot good catch, i like the repeating pattern (2nd face) as part of the background.

joe

[merciful]

Thanks. Fellow I met one evening in a Montréal brewpub. Good blues guitar player.

[back alley]

Good blues guitar player.

ah, hence the hat!

jr

[peter_n]

I like it - nice OOF too! :)

[HelenB]

1/8 and f/1.2 with EI 3200 isn't so much 'low light' as 'near darkness'. This is good work!

Just out of interest, what did you develop the Tri-X in?

[merciful]

Thanks, Helen.

I've gone worlds beyond this: Tri-X to 25600 and beyond. This was developed in HC-110 B.

[Todd.Hanz]

Merciful.
I have been looking at this lens, I have heard it is "overly soft" wide open, this one looks good. Whats your take on it, any more sample shots?

Todd

[Brian Sweeney]

After listening to comments that the 50mm F0.95 was worse than shooting through the bottom of a coke bottle I bought one just to find out for myself. The reports of its softness were greatly exaggerated. I suspect the same is true of the 50mm f1.2; it is the same formula as my lens.

I read horrible reviews on the Summarit; I picked up one, had it CLA'd, and get great results from it. I prefer the reviews of the lenses written closer to their time of introduction. Less "Bias".

[jdos2]

What Brian said.

Legendary lenses have nay sayers that seem to grow as time goes on, the negative voices accumulate to permanently tar reputations far above their worth.

In truth, the fast lenses of the past are a bit soft wide open, and sharp when stopped down. Just like we expect them to be.

I can't think of any legendary lenses that are "bad" (but I STILL don't like the bokeh of the high speed Tessar wide open!)

[merciful]

Whats your take on it, any more sample shots?

I love the lens. It is soft wide open, as I want it to be, and stopped down to 5.6 it's sharp. It's plenty rare if I go past 5.6 on any lens.

1.2, Tri-X at 100:

http://www.merciful.ns.ca/pics/rain1.jpg

5.6, Tri-X at 100:

http://www.merciful.ns.ca/pics/amere1.jpg

I can't seem to make images come up in my replies, only in initial posts. Any help would be great!

[rover]

Originally posted by merciful


I can't seem to make images come up in my replies, only in initial posts. Any help would be great!

Towards the bottom of the reply page there is a "Browse..." button on the Attach file line. I just click that and select the file from my hard drive and upload directly to RFF. You do not need to have the photo hosted by another site.

[merciful]

Oh, thanks, Rover. I've just been typing in the screen below the thread, not clicking "reply...".

Hold on.

[merciful]

1.2, Tri-X at 100:

[merciful]

5.6, Tri-X at 100:

[rover]

You're in!!!

Nice shots too. I like the mood of the second one, it kinda looks like the guy is tired and doesn't want to get back on that bike to ride home.

[taffer]

Nice shots indeed ! In fact it was your avatar description that made me 'explore' that low values zone of the aperture ring...

Now I seldom look back ! :-)

PS: And night bar shooting is SO fun :D