Nocticron vs other portrait lenses (posts moved from Noct image thread)

[Tadgh78]

[This post and the subsequent ones were originally posted in the Nocticron showcase thread]

There are a lot of nice images on this thread. But then there are a lot of nice images on the Oly 45mm 1.8 thread as well. A much less expensive lens. The Nocticron is also a much bigger bulkier lens than the 45 1.8.

Ok the f1.2 aperture gives a thinner depth of field , but if thin dof is the goal, wouldn't it be cheaper to go full frame? An older used 12 mega pixel Canon 5D full-frame body can be had for a couple of hundred euro and a couple hundred gets a used 85mm lens. So you could get a full frame lens and body for about half the price of this lens. So if price is an issue, why pine after the Nocticron when you could get an older FF for a lot less money?

 

[mesmerized]

I'd go Fuji 56mm

 

[tkbslc]

Ok the f1.2 aperture gives a thinner depth of field , but if thin dof is the goal, wouldn't it be cheaper to go full frame? An older used 12 mega pixel Canon 5D full-frame body can be had for a couple of hundred euro and a couple hundred gets a used 85mm lens. So you could get a full frame lens and body for about half the price of this lens. So if price is an issue, why pine after the Nocticron when you could get an older FF for a lot less money?

Most of us are here because we don't want bulky SLR setups or to be using old-tech. And a 5D can't swap out to a pancake and fit in your jacket pocket when you are done with your portrait session.

I'd go Fuji 56mm

How well does that work on a GX7?

 

[mesmerized]

How well does that work on a GX7?

I'm pretty sure you know what I meant. Had no idea every single thing had to be said explicitly here. Let me say that again from the beginning: I'd get a Fuji body (that is an APS-C sensor camera) and attach a Fuji XF56mm lens to it.

 

[tkbslc]

I'm pretty sure you know what I meant. Had no idea every single thing had to be said explicitly here. Let me say that again from the beginning: I'd get a Fuji body (that is an APS-C sensor camera) and attach a Fuji XF56mm lens to it.

I knew exactly what you meant. I think you know what I meant, too. But I'll be condescending and spell it out for you, too:

We shoot m4/3 and already have m4/3 cameras and lenses. Introducing another camera or switching systems is NOT going to be a value proposition, nor would it save weight.

 

[mesmerized]

I knew exactly what you meant. I think you know what I meant, too. But I'll be condescending and spell it out for you, too: We shoot m4/3 and already have m4/3 cameras and lenses. Introducing another camera or switching systems is NOT going to be a value proposition, nor would it save weight.

We've done our share of condescending comments. Let's bury the hatchet at this point. I understand your reasoning, and what's more, I actually have a m4/3 camera, but it's hard to disagree with the facts. We are paying premium prices for lenses such as the PL42.5, while Fuji offers a glass that is arguably even better or at least on par for less money. And all of that on a bigger sensor. That is something to consider. I'm quite concerned about the future of Oly since it looks like they've reached the physical limitations of the sensor. And let's not fool ourselves, most people do want to have as much control over the DOF as possible.

 

[wjiang]

And let's not fool ourselves, most people do want to have as much control over the DOF as possible.

Within their chosen system perhaps. But not all are willing to add another system just to get more DoF control, otherwise as was previously mentioned a used FF body and 85mm f/1.8 is the easiest way about it. When you're comparing with the XF56 don't forget that the Fuji is unstabilised, whereas the Nocticron has OIS...

 

[50orsohours]

We've done our share of condescending comments. Let's bury the hatchet at this point. I understand your reasoning, and what's more, I actually have a m4/3 camera, but it's hard to disagree with the facts. We are paying premium prices for lenses such as the PL42.5, while Fuji offers a glass that is arguably even better or at least on par for less money. And all of that on a bigger sensor. That is something to consider. I'm quite concerned about the future of Oly since it looks like they've reached the physical limitations of the sensor. And let's not fool ourselves, most people do want to have as much control over the DOF as possible.

If you want shallow DOF, why are you suggesting Fuji ? Go FF or go home.

 

[mesmerized]

If you want shallow DOF, why are you suggesting Fuji ? Go FF or go home.

I don't think FF is the solution. APS-C hits the sweet spot in terms of DOF.

PS. I am home. Feels comfortable. It's just astonishing how m4/3 owners react to any bit of criticism regarding the sensor's limitations... I have E-M5mk2, but doesn't mean I'm going to cast spells on reality.

 

[SVQuant]

If you want shallow DOF, why are you suggesting Fuji ? Go FF or go home.

He is suggesting Fuji because his E-M5m2 +14-150II does not give him "mesmerizing" images like his Fuji 56mm. He is like this on all of his threads. No samples, little understanding, but loves to read the web and knows the term "depth of focus". Methinks he is just trolling for reaction.

[Edit]
I feel that this digression has little room on an image showcase thread. If people want to complain about lack of shallow Depth of Focus, there are plenty of other threads/forums to do that in. No need to clutter this one.

 

[tkbslc]

We've done our share of condescending comments. Let's bury the hatchet at this point. I understand your reasoning, and what's more, I actually have a m4/3 camera, but it's hard to disagree with the facts. We are paying premium prices for lenses such as the PL42.5, while Fuji offers a glass that is arguably even better or at least on par for less money. And all of that on a bigger sensor. That is something to consider. I'm quite concerned about the future of Oly since it looks like they've reached the physical limitations of the sensor. And let's not fool ourselves, most people do want to have as much control over the DOF as possible.

It's not cheaper nor convenient when you are already invested in m43. Think about it. Lens vs body plus lens.

Nothing to do with your incorrectly perceived fanboyism or sensitivity.

 

[mesmerized]

He is suggesting Fuji because his E-M5m2 +14-150II does not give him "mesmerizing" images like his Fuji 56mm. He is like this on all of his threads. No samples, little understanding, but loves to read the web and knows the term "depth of focus". Methinks he is just trolling for reaction.

And how many times do I have to say that it has nothing to do with the 14-150mk2 lens? For Christ's sake. If you had read my posts carefully enough, you would have noticed that I said very clearly that m4/3 is great for everything, but it lacks when it comes to portraits. That's where Fuji excels, and that's what the 56mm is great at.

 

[MAubrey]

but it lacks when it comes to portraits.

*eye roll*

 

[SVQuant]

And how many times do I have to say that it has nothing to do with the 14-150mk2 lens? For Christ's sake. If you had read my posts carefully enough, you would have noticed that I said very clearly that m4/3 is great for everything, but it lacks when it comes to portraits. That's where Fuji excels, and that's what the 56mm is great at.

As I suggested before, if you feel that your m43 images are lacking for portraits, post comparisons with your Fuji images in a new thread. To hijack a sample showcase and keep tooting the same horn is not making you any friends. You have brought in Fuji in your thread on which lens to buy, on whether to sell the 14-150 and now in this thread. I see no image samples from you and no discussion of where things are lacking.

Regarding m43 and portraits, I find that there are fantastic images in the Portrait threads. I would, for example, recommend @spatulaboy's work.

I have shot film(almost 20 years), APS-C(10+ years) and m43 (for a little under a year). Also used FF on occasion. I view my gear as tools for achieving my aims as an amateur photographer and hobbyist. I try to understand what a tool can achieve and where it may be lacking and make decisions based on that. There are always compromises be they cost, weight, IQ and/or features. Once a tool is chosen, I do not keep complaining about it based on what I read in random blogs or videos. If I feel that it is coming up short, I try to see how I can do better or if I need different gear.

 

[Tadgh78]

I don't think FF is the solution. APS-C hits the sweet spot in terms of DOF.

I think I might agree with you. There's a FF v.s M43 Dof comparison at various apertures on here with a rubber duck and a can of "Nesquick".

Full frame vs Micro Four Thirds: Quick DOF and Bokeh test

The FF shot wide open at 1.8 looks like it has plenty narrow DoF for almost all purposes. 1.8 on FF equates to 1.2 on fuji in terms of background blur and both out perform M43 at 1.2 as shown by the charts on "Howmuchblur.com".

Full frame vs Micro Four Thirds: Quick DOF and Bokeh test

Still the Fuji 56 f1.2 is a $1000 lens so not much of a saving over the Nocticron. If the Fuji lens only cost say, 500 I'd be very tempted to pick it up along with a cheap fuji body and carry it as a second system along with m43 for narrow DoF.

 

[tkbslc]

M4/3 owners know their sensor is a little smaller. So why are we even arguing this, especially in a sample thread?

 

[Tadgh78]

M4/3 owners know their sensor is a little smaller. So why are we even arguing this, especially in a sample thread?

People on this thread were rhapsodizing over the narrow DoF of the Nocticron but complaining about the price of it. So that begged the question, if DoF is so desirable (and I don't see much other reason to buy the Nocticron) why not simply pick up another system that is naturally better suited to achieving narrow DoF especially if it can do it at a lower price?

The Fuji for instance is also a mirrorless system so is fairly light to carry around, more or less matching the main benefit of M43 with the added benefit of narrow DoF.

Right now the only thing that I can see stopping me making the jump to Fuji is the fact that I am invested in M43 gear. But that's not a great reason for staying with a camera system imo.

 

[SVQuant]

People on this thread were rhapsodizing over the narrow DoF of the Nocticron but complaining about the price of it. So that begged the question, if DoF is so desirable (and I don't see much other reason to buy the Nocticron) why not simply pick up another system that is naturally better suited to achieving narrow DoF especially if it can do it at a lower price?

The Fuji for instance is also a mirrorless system so is fairly light to carry around, more or less matching the main benefit of M43 with the added benefit of narrow DoF.

Right now the only thing that I can see stopping me making the jump to Fuji is the fact that I am invested in M43 gear. But that's not a great reason for staying with a camera system imo.

May I suggest that you start a new thread with these questions. There are very reasonable answers to them, but this is a Showcase thread and maybe we can leave it for images and comments about specific images? As for the other user who brought Fuji into this thread, I suggest you read his other posts and threads and draw your own conclusions. Thanks.

 

[Tadgh78]

May I suggest that you start a new thread with these questions. There are very reasonable answers to them, but this is a Showcase thread and maybe we can leave it for images and comments about specific images? As for the other user who brought Fuji into this thread, I suggest you read his other posts and threads and draw your own conclusions. Thanks.

I have no problem opening another thread, but I must say you guys do seem to get mighty touchy at any suggestion that M43 might not be the best all-round camera system. I highly doubt that that is just because this is an image thread. I suspect if you really believed the M43 system was superior you would be quite happy to discuss DoF as a side issue on this thread.

 

[SVQuant]

I have no problem opening another thread, but I must say you guys do seem to get mighty touchy at any suggestion that M43 might not be the best all-round camera system. I highly doubt that that is just because this is an image thread. I suspect if you really believed the M43 system was superior you would be quite happy to discuss DoF as a side issue on this thread.

Not at all touchy. Please see my response above about what systems I shoot/have shot. I have shot APS-C for far longer than m43 and still do. I am simply pointing out that a Showcase thread is just that: A Showcase. You can discuss systems and DoF to your heart's content in any other thread. Also, the user who first mentioned Fuji has started multiple threads asking for advice, ignoring what is said and touting Fuji. As I suggested, please read his other threads and posts before you accuse other people of being touchy.

[Edit]
@Amin Sabet, @barry13: Could the moderators please review some of the recent posts and see if they need to be moved out of this thread? Thanks.