 |
I have the 2.0 and love it, but that's all I can tell you. Enjoy either way!
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I did find one article that said this:
For what it's worth, the folks at the Lensbaby Advanced Research Facility in Portland, Oregon recommend starting with f4 or f5.6 if you want to capture images that flaunt the "spirit of the Lensbaby look".
Do people with Lensbabies agree with that assessment?
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
The 2.0 has an adjustment to keep the focus ( or sweet spot)
'locked' in place.
Apparently the original can drift .
Edit- my error, it is the 3g that locks.
See Lensbaby Sam's post.
Originally posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
gmf52 edited this topic 2 months ago.
|
|
I thought that was the 3G? Their website doesn't say anything about "locking" on the 2.0.
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
The 3G is an awesome Lensbaby lens, just go test one out at a local photo store and you'll see what I mean.
I have both the original and the 3G and I don't use the Original anymore, cause the 3G is so much easier to use.
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Hi there,
I am an employee of Lensbaby and I stumbled upon this post. Since Lensbaby is based in Portland, I thought I might as well join the group.
There are three differences between the Lensbaby 2.0 and Original Lensbaby.
The 2.0 has an f/2.0 optic vs. The Original's f/2.8 optic
The 2.0 has a magnetic aperture system which is faster and easier to use than the rubber gasket that holds the Original's apertures in place
Most important: the 2.0 has a multicoated optical glass doublet while the Original has an uncoated single optical glass element. The 2.0 has a much crisper sweet spot with no diffusion while the Original has a softer, dreamier look.
Please check out the Lensbaby 2.0 gallery [http://lensbabies.com/products/lb2/] and compare to the Original Lensbaby Gallery [http://www.lensbabies.com/products/lbo/intro] to see the difference.
The 2.0 does not have locking rods like the 3G, but these two lenses have the same optic.
I hope this helps answer your question!
Sincerely,
Sam
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
@metakephoto: I'm sure the 3G is awesome, but I can't justify the cost right now, so it's either the Original or the 2.0 for me -- and the 2.0, even though it's only $50 more, is pushing it, which was why I was trying to see if pushing it was worth it.
@LensbabySam: Yes, that helps, thanks.
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Does anyone have a link to anyone/anyplace that's done same-shot comparisons between the various Lensbabies? I'm having some difficulty, the way my brain is wired, comparing the way the Original produces versus the way the 2.0 does, and it would be helpful if someone, somewhere, took a series of comparison shots.
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
There is a webcast at the LensBabies website from a photographer (Cherie Steinberg Cotè) who talks about the original lensbaby vs the 2.0.
www.lensbabies.com/training-center/webcasts/cast/2
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Thanks, Sam, for the information!
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
I have this horrible sinking feeling that I'm going to be spending the extra $50 that I ought not to spend, in order to get the 2.0. I suppose I don't need to eat for a few days, right?
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I bought the 2.0 on craiglist a while ago for $90 and love it.
Being able to change the aperture easily is signiifcant. Beyond that, Lensbaby Sam seems to have laid it all out!
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Hi again,
Lensbabies has a no hassle 30 day return policy, so if you think you have chosen the wrong one, you can send it back and get a very fast refund or exchange.
We are working on a side by side comparison. Sorry that is not ready yet.
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
A little OT - I have the 2 and 3 - the 3 doesn't lock as well as I hoped. If you crank down one peg too much relative to the others, it slips. That makes off-center sweet spots tough, especially if you are using it on people and aiming for eyes. That said, I still love it and it makes it easier to use shallower DOF and nail the focus - I would buy the 3 if you can swing it.
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
A great photo adam. really. Sensational.
The 3g does slip sometimes, especially when pulled far off center as you have in your photo. We hope the 3g does not slip too often, and not in ways that ultimately prevent you from getting a great result. Nevertheless, it is certainly true that we should develop a lens that does not have this flaw. We will take that message to heart.
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Thank you, and no worries man. One of the best gear purchases I have ever made (I have two!). For the money especially, it is awesome.
Originally posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
adam photographic edited this topic 2 months ago.
|
 |
I've been interested in one of these for years. Problem is that I shoot Olympus and really want to test one out before I put down the cash. Anyone know of a company that has an Olympus one on hand?
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
I caved and just picked up a 2.0.
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
FWIW, I came across this after I had bought mine, heh.
www.lensbabies.com/comparison/
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Today was How The Hell Do I Work This Lensbaby day.
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
Would you like to comment?
Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).
|
pdx [portland] /
Discuss
Feed – Subscribe to pdx [portland] discussion threads
Flickr Blog |
About Flickr |
Terms of Use |
Your Privacy |
Copyright/IP Policy | Report Abuse
|
Deutsch
|
English
|
Español
|
Français
|
|
Italiano
|
Português
Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Save to Delicious