The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Best studio portrait lens for Phamiya?

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I have the chance to get a 75-150 nice and cheap, new. I may just go for it!

Thanks!
Tim,

Just so you are aware, there is an old all-manual 75-150 zoom, so if it is really cheap, beware that it may not be the AF-D version...
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Actually I have been thinking of going with a older 210mm Mamiya lens just because it maybe a little softer shooting. The issue is the 150mm is so sharp it picks up way more than we want with portraits and air brushing becomes a nightmare. Now i like the longer lenses with portraits but that is me . It does make it tougher to shoot though and backing off to the 110mm Hassy will make that DOF a little easier on focusing. Depends on what you like and your style as well.
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
I also find the 150 3.5 almost too sharp, which makes me think maybe i should just try to stop it down to until my flash heads tun out of power - the diffraction might soften things up a bit? And help with DOF and therefore MF...
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Tim not sure you want to play around with the diffraction stuff but I am not sure about this either. It maybe have a bad effect, certainly maybe worth a test.

Certainly F16 on the longer glass has not been a issue after that I never tried
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
On diffraction, I think you'll need f32 before you really start to see it smooth features, and then I suspect you won't like the effect all that much -- diffraction is not the same as diffusion, clumpier kind of. Hard to explain, but it generally isn't pleasant..
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Thanks Chaps, I'll go to F16 and see what happens...

Meanwhile I'm looking into the Molas. Lordy is the cost of this stuff all racking up! Maybe I should just go back to ambient light!
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
The Mola is a very nice light Tim with like three options to use a single dish. Alone, with Grid and than softie or not with grid. I do a lot of Mola , softie and grid. Reason why is i still get some directional light without to much spill with the grid and softie together . Now of course i lose about 2 stops that way also. Seriously I find a 1200 watt primary or main head to be a good balance between aperture and ISO . Most cases F11 at ISO 100 with some distance between subject and head but obviously you can move that in or out as needed and frankly ISO 200 is never a issue with your P45+ or my P30+ . So you do have some elbow room on ISO as well. I would say though a 600 watt is minimum on a main with MF anything less than you will get is some trouble with getting the light too close to subject. As much as folks say you need a load of light for MF , I find that is only partially true. In reality about a stop or two more than 35mm unless you are doing something that needs a ton of DOF than I find helicon focus a great cheat to gain DOF without more light added.

As you may have noticed whatever gets the solution done even cheating than you just need to figure out the back end solutions. Photography is problem solving
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
I have the white demi mola and the grid.
It is probably the nicest dish I have ever used.
so... I am thinking about a silver one and maybe also a euro.
You are right, it feeds the gear purchasing cycle.
As for power, I find that 1100 WS is about all I usually need. I am tempted to get one 2400 WS pack, but that would be a studio only option unless I went for some sort of generator setup.
Ambient light is pretty useful, but I usually end up somewhere around f/4 in MF. the DOF can work for or against you depending on the shot, but it works pretty well especially when as a tripod is used.
I am pathetic in MF hand-held at anything under 1/125, so in that territory I haul out the dslr with IS and hand-hold down to about 1/20.
-bob
 
D

ddk

Guest
Tim, you can get the rapid falloff from a variety of modifiers, any good rental place can you help you with selecting a few of them to try out. Smaller soft boxes and umbrellas will give you the fast fall out too, then feather the edges in post to taste.

I went through Winters' site and imo while good its nothing special or exceptional, plenty of others out there doing exactly the same and better. The bulk of the effects, both lighting and otherwise are courtesy of Photoshop and not photographic genius; many of Graham's work posted here is head and shoulders above anything that I saw on that site. If this is what you're after take a good PS workshop, then buy one of the better plug-in suites and you're on your way to creating digital magic ala Mr. Winters.
 
D

ddk

Guest
This little girl tested every day of my 35 years of experience. She may have won the battle but ultimately you can win the war if you just have the patience...
Guy, these images are delicious and wonderful, worth every effort you put into taking them! :thumbup:
 
Last edited:

etrump

Well-known member
Thanks on the lenses Jack - I am inclined towards either a 75-150 because it would also be useful out of the studio.

Tim
I'm surprised you mention the 75-150mm for portraiture, I am demoing one right now and it is simply worthless wide open. f/6.3 and above it is comparable to the 150mm.

Is yours clear and sharp wide open? My testing confirmed my dealers comments so I assumed they were all this way.

100% P65+ crops at f/4.5-f/22. Standard C1 sharpening.
 

etrump

Well-known member
Gotta be AF Carsten: you can't MF, even with studio lights to allow smaller apertures, reliably enough in my experience, unless you make your subject so static that they look static. I use 2 Bowens Gemini 500W lights and will probably add a third so I could get a 750 as the key light and use tighter apertures but in practice I'm aware of diffraction issues/

Ideal lens would be an older lens that has AF, some character, is available second hand and is longer than 80mm and up to 150mm...
You should check out the older 120mm AF macro. I love mine for portraits, it is very sharp but still pleasant looking when lit properly. Price is not bad either, especially if you luck out and get a good used one.

Ed
 

Dale Allyn

New member
I'm surprised you mention the 75-150mm for portraiture, I am demoing one right now and it is simply worthless wide open. f/6.3 and above it is comparable to the 150mm.

Is yours clear and sharp wide open? My testing confirmed my dealers comments so I assumed they were all this way.

100% P65+ crops at f/4.5-f/22. Standard C1 sharpening.
Thanks for this post, Ed. Very informative. Looks like f/6.3 through f/11 are great, with f/16 acceptable in some cases. I was expecting a bit more from this lens. At least now when I get around to evaluating one I'll have this as a point of comparison.

p.s. Can we assume MLU, solid support, etc. on all shots including f/16?
 

etrump

Well-known member
p.s. Can we assume MLU, solid support, etc. on all shots including f/16?
I wouldn't discount f/16 based on these tests. Even though I used MLU and rigid tripod the shutter speed at f/16 is 1/25. These are all at full zoom as well, the sign was probably 50-60 yards with the fence 75 yards.

The real issue is how bad f/4.5 is which would be used a lot for fashion portraits especially considering how sharp the 150 D prime is at f/2.8.
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
I'm surprised you mention the 75-150mm for portraiture, I am demoing one right now and it is simply worthless wide open. f/6.3 and above it is comparable to the 150mm.

Is yours clear and sharp wide open? My testing confirmed my dealers comments so I assumed they were all this way.

100% P65+ crops at f/4.5-f/22. Standard C1 sharpening.
Thanks for posting that Ed.... I should clarify that I don't have the lens, am just thinking of getting one. And whilst the luxury of shooting wide open would be a bonus, by the time I have enough DOF over 100mm zoom to get a nose and eyes in focus, I'll have to be at at least F9-11!
 
Top