ianborgerhoff
Nikon 105 1.4 real world wedding day shoots...Basic JPEG nothing edited. These were images for the day of slide show. Took it through LIGHTROOM to number images.
These are Basic JPEG images unedited (I did put them in lightroom for numbering) Right out of camera to create a day of slide show at the wedding. RAW files will be processed later. I mainly shoot with a 200mm F2 VRII lens to create my buttery smooth backgrounds. Usually they are shot wide open. Saturdays wedding went from 8 am to midnight so typically lugging my 200 for lack of better words kicks my butt. I loved the output of this lens. A lot of people on youtube have been saying that the 85 1.4 or tamron are better buys or bang for the buck but come on. As a professional we charge a bride to hopefully give them the best quality. I would shoot with the Zeiss lenses if they were auto focus. So for the output I received VS the cost this is a no brainer. Almost as good an output as the 200 F2 at 1/3 the cost and 1/3 the weight. I'm also not a Nikon Homer. I love the Sigma Art 50 1.4 and use to love the Sigma 35 1.4 but have had calibration issues with it lately. Need to do some fine tuning to bring it back into my shooting bag. I will, time permitting, do a real world comparison of the 105 1.4 vs the 200 f2 viii. Thanks,
Nikon 105 1.4 real world wedding day shoots...Basic JPEG nothing edited. These were images for the day of slide show. Took it through LIGHTROOM to number images.
These are Basic JPEG images unedited (I did put them in lightroom for numbering) Right out of camera to create a day of slide show at the wedding. RAW files will be processed later. I mainly shoot with a 200mm F2 VRII lens to create my buttery smooth backgrounds. Usually they are shot wide open. Saturdays wedding went from 8 am to midnight so typically lugging my 200 for lack of better words kicks my butt. I loved the output of this lens. A lot of people on youtube have been saying that the 85 1.4 or tamron are better buys or bang for the buck but come on. As a professional we charge a bride to hopefully give them the best quality. I would shoot with the Zeiss lenses if they were auto focus. So for the output I received VS the cost this is a no brainer. Almost as good an output as the 200 F2 at 1/3 the cost and 1/3 the weight. I'm also not a Nikon Homer. I love the Sigma Art 50 1.4 and use to love the Sigma 35 1.4 but have had calibration issues with it lately. Need to do some fine tuning to bring it back into my shooting bag. I will, time permitting, do a real world comparison of the 105 1.4 vs the 200 f2 viii. Thanks,