One of my earliest attempts at serious portrait photography

Very primative setup compared to today! A Vivitar 283 bounced into a square Reflectasol umbrella using a hand-made mount and a Nikkormat FT3 with 105mm f/2.5 AIS Nikkor. The "background" was a piece of hand spray-painted posterboard. Tri-X film exposed at ASA 400. If I recall correctly, this was a paying gig I did for a real estate agency. Not too bad I guess, for someone who didn't know what he was doing! I did portraits of their whole staff. This was somewhere around 1983 or 84. How time flies!

That's a darn good portrait for your first paid gig! Even the pose is formally correct in every way for a lady. You even have the smaller eye being the far eye for correct perspective. Tri-X is such great film, so versatile. So is that 105 2.5 the same one you still use today? Would be cool to see a portrait with that lens taken more recently for comparison....and then make it b&w just for fun.

crycocyon said:

That's a darn good portrait for your first paid gig! Even the pose is formally correct in every way for a lady. You even have the smaller eye being the far eye for correct perspective. Tri-X is such great film, so versatile. So is that 105 2.5 the same one you still use today? Would be cool to see a portrait with that lens taken more recently for comparison....and then make it b&w just for fun.

Click to expand...

Thanks, even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and again! And I did it without a flashmeter either. I had figured out what the GN for that flash was using that Reflectasol years before and just calculated distance from the subject based on ASA and f/. I use the 105mm f/1.8 AIS now, have for several years. I did not really gain anything with the f/1.8 over the f/2.5 except speed. It is a good bit heavier and uses 62mm filters instead of the standard 52mm. Resolution wise I have never been able to see a difference and all the reviews I have read bear that out. Depending on who was doing the reviewing, some have said that the f/1.8 was actually a little sharper than the legendary f/2.5 .

Wow I didn't know the 1.8 was that good because the 105 is certainly no slouch. Would love to test shoot with a 105 1.8 someday. How does the bokeh compare between the two apart from the 1.8 obviously being softer.

crycocyon said:

Wow I didn't know the 1.8 was that good because the 105 is certainly no slouch. Would love to test shoot with a 105 1.8 someday. How does the bokeh compare between the two apart from the 1.8 obviously being softer.

Click to expand...

The f/1.8 might be a tad smoother, but it comes down to splitting hairs. Both have excellent bokeh. I think the 85mm f/1.8 AIS I have has the smoothest bokeh of any lens I own. It is smooth as butter.

Another one from around that time. Still pretty primitive, but I added a hair light this time........

This is an awesome great effort for the first shot!

STM said:

The f/1.8 might be a tad smoother, but it comes down to splitting hairs. Both have excellent bokeh. I think the 85mm f/1.8 AIS I have has the smoothest bokeh of any lens I own. It is smooth as butter.

Click to expand...

Do you mean the 85/1.4 AIS?

I enjoy looking at your portrait threads Scott just great stuff!