walker111 wrote:Nice shots! Something about the 5th picture gives me a headache!! The ground in front of the car or something. What settings are those taken on and what was the weather like?
well you can see what the weather was like. Clear and the sun was just setting. That one was taken with the 50mm at f1.8 thats why it looks like that. Everything behind the car is slightly blurred (bokeh). Thats why its giving you a bit of a headache, but its exactly what I wanted.
So you wanted to give me a headache?..............dick
Dave B wrote:Thanks for the link, but what's the difference in the 2? I see the apreture is different, but it's seems to me not by much, but the price difference doesn't say that.
there aren't many lenses that get below f3. Once you do get down that low its a big deal to go any lower. the 1.4 might also have some better glass in it.
No, the lower the aperture number the more light that is let in. Therefore you can use shorter shutter speeds in less light the smaller the f-stop number. Also this allows you to have the subject very in focus, but the background blurred which pulls your attention to the subject of your photo. look at the two examples on that wikipedia page and you'll see what I mean.
Erik95LS wrote:No, the lower the aperture number the more light that is let in. Therefore you can use shorter shutter speeds in less light the smaller the f-stop number. Also this allows you to have the subject very in focus, but the background blurred which pulls your attention to the subject of your photo. look at the two examples on that wikipedia page and you'll see what I mean.
I looked at both of those, but to me, it looks like they just zoomed in on the flower and left out the background on the second pic. I understand the need for the lens for the fact that you can shoot in a low light situation, and not have to use a longer shutter speed to capture what your shooting? Is that correct? So say I'm at home, sun is almost completely set and I want a pic of something that is not very lit up but I dont' have my tripod for some reason, I'd use this lens since I won't need the long 3-4 second shutter speed? Is that correct?
<---- starting to get confused as fuck with this stuff.
you could use it for that. Keep in mnd that the lens wasn't changed or zoomed at all for those two pictures. Only the aperture was changed on them. Now remember that this lens is 50m and only 50mm. It has no zoom whatsoever. Its a great lens though and being so cheap its easy to get just to try out. Its very very fun and if you try one you'll soon understand all this stuff I'm talking about and start to have a blast with it. This is usually alot of people's very first lens.
This isn't a great example, but you could not get this kind of effect with another lens. Not to this extent anyway.
Dave B wrote:I guess if your a photographer by profession, then you need the tools to do the job... :shrug:
you guys are going to start feeling sick ones you see how expensive good lenses are.
Cameras themselves aren't all that expensive. its the lenses that make this a pricey hobby
Yeah, already found that one out. I've got a good friend (guy who actually got me into IT) who is a camera/photography buff. He's got a Dx2. I brought my D50 with me one day, without looking he picked it up and called it spot on, D50...
Anyway, he's got more money than sense and has some kick ass shit. Probably around 10 lenses in all. All of which are "D" glass IIRC.
Dave B wrote:
Yeah, already found that one out. I've got a good friend (guy who actually got me into IT) who is a camera/photography buff. He's got a Dx2. I brought my D50 with me one day, without looking he picked it up and called it spot on, D50...
Anyway, he's got more money than sense and has some kick ass shit. Probably around 10 lenses in all. All of which are "D" glass IIRC.
And Jim, if you buy that, I'm coming up there and robbing you. I'll leave your ITR alone, but I want that camera...
L Glass is Canon only.
Glad to see you went to Canon Jim. That'll be a nice starter combo. My friend Chris has that lens. Its the cheapest of the L series iirc. its extremely nice though. They have the same lens at f2.8 for more than twice the price.
