Showcase Panasonic 20mm f/1.7

[teknov]

This image is cropped and still sharp love this lens!!!

View attachment 249200

Teknov

 

[klythawk]

Ivory House, St Katharine Dock's, London.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Ivory House, St Katharine Dock's by klythawk, on Flickr

 

[Vincen77o]

Ivory House, St Katharine Dock's, London.

Fell in there once, firms Christmas bash, pissed.
I used to bunk off work and wander round there at night with my Canon, great area of London.

 

[Vidar]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Hopp! Jump! by VidarFoto, on Flickr

 

[Popelotto]

All photos were taken during the same session. I was walking back to my mother's place from my brother's place in Kokkola, Finland. I had OM-D with the Pana 20mm and a tripod with me. It was pretty cold, something like -20 Celsius!

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Here was my home by Popelotto, on Flickr

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

No Dogs by Popelotto, on Flickr

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

A Slide by Popelotto, on Flickr

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Kioski by Popelotto, on Flickr

And here's a bonus picture:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Kokkola Skyline by Popelotto, on Flickr

 

[yktay2]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[BLX]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Hopp! Jump! by VidarFoto, on Flickr

Cool shot! Great BW treatment!

 

[klythawk]

Old and New.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

The ever changing face of London.

Old and New by klythawk, on Flickr

 

[greyelm]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[teknov]

I herd that some of the sharpest images come out when you use an aperture of f5.6 is this true? Thanks! :smile:

 

[David A]

It's possible to determine at what aperture you will get the absolute sharpest results in the plane of focus, but the plane of focus is paper thin. You could end up with a skin pore on the tip of someone's nose as sharp as possible and the rest of their face out of focus simply because you chose to use a lens at the aperture which gave the sharpest results and ignored one of the other aspects of aperture, i.e. depth of field. You may well be happier with an image that isn't at maximum sharpness in the plane of focus but puts more of the face in acceptable focus due to increased depth of field. For a different image you may well want less depth of field than you get at the aperture which provides greatest sharpness.

What counts is the image, not how sharp it is. One of the greatest photographers of the 20th century, Henri Cartier Bresson, once famously told Helmut Newton, another great photographer, that "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept". If you want to photograph test charts, knowing what aperture will ensure you get the clearest and sharpest photos of those charts. If you want to get the best photographs of other things, you'll want to go for less than the absolute sharpest result most of the time. That's not to say that you don't want your images to be sharp, just that you shouldn't be focussed (pun intended) on getting the sharpest result.

Learn how to use aperture to deliver images that are sharp where you want sharpness and not sharp where you don't want sharpness. Don't bother learning what aperture delivers maximum sharpness in the plane of focus if what you're thinking of doing is setting the lens at that aperture and shooting everything that way. You may get the sharpest results that way but you won't get the best photos that way.

 

[Uncle Frank]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[G.Sal]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[teknov]

It's possible to determine at what aperture you will get the absolute sharpest results in the plane of focus, but the plane of focus is paper thin. You could end up with a skin pore on the tip of someone's nose as sharp as possible and the rest of their face out of focus simply because you chose to use a lens at the aperture which gave the sharpest results and ignored one of the other aspects of aperture, i.e. depth of field. You may well be happier with an image that isn't at maximum sharpness in the plane of focus but puts more of the face in acceptable focus due to increased depth of field. For a different image you may well want less depth of field than you get at the aperture which provides greatest sharpness.

What counts is the image, not how sharp it is. One of the greatest photographers of the 20th century, Henri Cartier Bresson, once famously told Helmut Newton, another great photographer, that "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept". If you want to photograph test charts, knowing what aperture will ensure you get the clearest and sharpest photos of those charts. If you want to get the best photographs of other things, you'll want to go for less than the absolute sharpest result most of the time. That's not to say that you don't want your images to be sharp, just that you shouldn't be focussed (pun intended) on getting the sharpest result.

Learn how to use aperture to deliver images that are sharp where you want sharpness and not sharp where you don't want sharpness. Don't bother learning what aperture delivers maximum sharpness in the plane of focus if what you're thinking of doing is setting the lens at that aperture and shooting everything that way. You may get the sharpest results that way but you won't get the best photos that way.

Thanks will do!!! Just started this hobby and i am loving it it!!!

 

[OhWellOK]

During the Week

Just started testing playing around with my new E-PL5 this past week/Pan 20. Here's some random snaps from my commute this week.

<a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332145">

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"Red Berries by Jari Bartsch (JariBartsch)) on 500px.com" border="0" style="margin: 0 0 5px 0;"></a><br/><font style="font-size: 120%;"><a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332145">Red Berries</a> by <a href="http://500px.com/JariBartsch">Jari Bartsch</a></font>

<a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332147">

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"Fuchsia Hat by Jari Bartsch (JariBartsch)) on 500px.com" border="0" style="margin: 0 0 5px 0;"></a><br/><font style="font-size: 120%;"><a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332147">Fuchsia Hat</a> by <a href="http://500px.com/JariBartsch">Jari Bartsch</a></font>

<a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332151">

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"Cross by Jari Bartsch (JariBartsch)) on 500px.com" border="0" style="margin: 0 0 5px 0;"></a><br/><font style="font-size: 120%;"><a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332151">Cross</a> by <a href="http://500px.com/JariBartsch">Jari Bartsch</a></font>

<a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332153">

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"That's Orange! by Jari Bartsch (JariBartsch)) on 500px.com" border="0" style="margin: 0 0 5px 0;"></a><br/><font style="font-size: 120%;"><a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332153">That's Orange!</a> by <a href="http://500px.com/JariBartsch">Jari Bartsch</a></font>

<a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332143">

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"Street Primary Colors by Jari Bartsch (JariBartsch)) on 500px.com" border="0" style="margin: 0 0 5px 0;"></a><br/><font style="font-size: 120%;"><a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332143">Street Primary Colors</a> by <a href="http://500px.com/JariBartsch">Jari Bartsch</a></font>

<a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332155">

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"Annies Garden by Jari Bartsch (JariBartsch)) on 500px.com" border="0" style="margin: 0 0 5px 0;"></a><br/><font style="font-size: 120%;"><a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332155">Annies Garden</a> by <a href="http://500px.com/JariBartsch">Jari Bartsch</a></font>

<a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332139">

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"Subway Platform by Jari Bartsch (JariBartsch)) on 500px.com" border="0" style="margin: 0 0 5px 0;"></a><br/><font style="font-size: 120%;"><a href="http://500px.com/photo/22332139">Subway Platform</a> by <a href="http://500px.com/JariBartsch">Jari Bartsch</a></font>

 

[elavon]

A few status from Rome

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/ehudlavon/8350326144/" title="P1090581 by Ehud Lavon, on Flickr">

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"1024" height="768" alt="P1090581"></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/ehudlavon/8350320524/" title="P1090405 by Ehud Lavon, on Flickr">

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"1024" height="768" alt="P1090405"></a>

 

[F1L1P]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Steven]

Slayer of demons

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Chuck Pike]

<img src='http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000g3ncTqRGzto/s/500/I0000g3ncTqRGzto.jpg' />

This is one that I took at the local Ren Fest in N.C. I only took my one camera and the 20mm lens. I seem to work best if I am not changing lens all of the time, and really like prime lens best.

I have a question for you. I use Photoshelter and I used to be able to embed an image that was larger than this, but something has changed. What used to work no longer does. It seems to be the same on the Photoshelter end but not here. Has anyone else an account with Photoshelter and know how to make the image come in bigger?
Images for books, magazines and calendars | photosbypike

 

[Vidar]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Wow. Brilliant shots F1L1P. Lovely colours.