yup, how do you put a $$ on that?
Lens with big lobang :)
- Thread starter jeanie
- Start date
- Status
yup, how do you put a $$ on that?
zac08
Senior Member
Buy it off him... :bsmilie: :bsmilie:
er...u asking me a ques?i catch no bola!:bsmilie:
eh meaning when you compare lenses, how much monetary value do you place on immeasurable qualities like bokeh, colour richness, etc. if you love what the lens can do for you, then ask yourself if you're prepared to pay for it (although your dream lens may or may not actually cost a lot).
the thing is this...u wont know whether u love a lens until u bought and USED it.
just like the 70-200 vr afs.people has been sending me samples of their pics but i'm really not sure if they had been heavily PS-ED.
so how do you really judge how good it is until u've owned it?:dunno:
but i've seen the 105 DC lens pics ps-untouched.
piang eh.it's a must have for portrait lens.
and hor...WILL03's pics hor...they have been through PS too.
so, how can i say the 135mm f2 is a superb lens?unless he shows me the RAW pic untouched.
then again, i newbie i cant tell either...WAHHAHAHAHHA
me toking cockadoodledoo!:sweatsm:
szhoe
Member
Yup..There is a lot of PSing of pics from alomost all the members of this forum..! This is something I have noticed from the pics posted..
Hence, I reckon the "pics" we see are definitely NOT a good guide..!
Good for you that you have noticed it..
:think: plus give u big hole on ur pocket kekeke...anyway having an 85mm i never use it at 1.4 the lense performs at its best from f2 to f4....did anyone asked abt bokeh?sweetest:thumbsup:
szhoe
Member
Hurray glensky..:thumbsup: me too..!!
Almost never shot at widest opening though..I find it the "sweetest" at f4~f5.6..Just my preference..
d2x + 85mm 1.4 = :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:Hurray glensky..:thumbsup: me too..!!
Almost never shot at widest opening though..I find it the "sweetest" at f4~f5.6..Just my preference..
should check out the pix from the minolta 135 STF (smooth transition focus)... one of the bokeh kings... but no use to nikon users i guess...
big lobang lens = big lobang in pocket...
well, large apertures on lenses usually signal that this is a higher grade product in the manufacturer's range. so besides the size of the aperture alone, it can mean better materials, better optical performance in general, better construction. need to look at the actual pix, not just stare at the numbers and imagine.
on a good lens, the widest aperture is often reasonably sharp, even if stopping it down 2 stops gives more ideal results. yes, sometimes using a f1.4 lens wide open can give too little dof. just step it down to f2.8 and get a sharper image than if you were using a 2.8 lens wide open lor. i mean you shoot your picture based on the look you wanna get, not because hole can open big then must open big right. and when you need the 1.4, it'll be there for you...
szhoe
Member
dont be so polite,ur pix says it allOh me only + 85mmf1.8 = :thumbsup:
I believe Will03 is using the 85 f1.2 from C camp.
I have the 80-200 2.8 and i cant tell image quality diff from the 70-200 vr. And only in special circumstances i see the need for vr.
Btw 85 f1.4 and 105 f2 dc? i'd ask. Do u really need these for portraits? i use a sigma 28-70 2.8 DF lens and i get the results i need. Alot of professional fashion mag shooters shoot at 300mm and above also. Why don't buy that too? I'm not trying to wack you on the kinda money you spend. But i think you're just dwelling too much on equipment to begin with. Why not post up the photos you shot so far and see what kinda of images you are shooting so we can help you work on it instead of telling and giving you the impression that if you use a 5000 dollar lens you can produce good images?
In this age, alot of people shoot to edit. Are you shooting film in a way that wat you shoot is what you desire to get instantly? I'll give you an example. Go take a look at the fashion editorials at : www.iconique.com . Then try explaining how they get the images to look like that? If you can explain how they get it, then maybe you would understand the working thought process behind creating the image to your desired results instead of using the equipment.
I'm not trying to rain on your low period of your life as you mentioned. But every day i come into CS and i see post from you talking about nothing but what equipment to buy. If you really want to know. read up what ever has been reviewed and discussed about before and buy what ever you want and try it for yourself instead of coming in everyday and asking really alot of redundant questions. Honestly i dun mean to make this post in such a distasteful manner but i really am getting annoyed.
Hope some light will shine on you soon....
I have the 80-200 2.8 and i cant tell image quality diff from the 70-200 vr. And only in special circumstances i see the need for vr.
Btw 85 f1.4 and 105 f2 dc? i'd ask. Do u really need these for portraits? i use a sigma 28-70 2.8 DF lens and i get the results i need. Alot of professional fashion mag shooters shoot at 300mm and above also. Why don't buy that too? I'm not trying to wack you on the kinda money you spend. But i think you're just dwelling too much on equipment to begin with. Why not post up the photos you shot so far and see what kinda of images you are shooting so we can help you work on it instead of telling and giving you the impression that if you use a 5000 dollar lens you can produce good images?
In this age, alot of people shoot to edit. Are you shooting film in a way that wat you shoot is what you desire to get instantly? I'll give you an example. Go take a look at the fashion editorials at : www.iconique.com . Then try explaining how they get the images to look like that? If you can explain how they get it, then maybe you would understand the working thought process behind creating the image to your desired results instead of using the equipment.
I'm not trying to rain on your low period of your life as you mentioned. But every day i come into CS and i see post from you talking about nothing but what equipment to buy. If you really want to know. read up what ever has been reviewed and discussed about before and buy what ever you want and try it for yourself instead of coming in everyday and asking really alot of redundant questions. Honestly i dun mean to make this post in such a distasteful manner but i really am getting annoyed.
Hope some light will shine on you soon....
:cry:
I believe Will03 is using the 85 f1.2 from C camp.
I have the 80-200 2.8 and i cant tell image quality diff from the 70-200 vr. And only in special circumstances i see the need for vr.
i did pm him many times.he did share some of his trade secrets with me.extremely helpful guy.one of the super rare breeds in CS.
Btw 85 f1.4 and 105 f2 dc? i'd ask. Do u really need these for portraits?
NO, then again, i dont need a d200, or 50 f.14, or 70-200 AFS VR, quantum battery, metz flash, sb800, 17-35, 17-55, 300 2.8...blah blah blah.
it's nice to have when i want it, it's nice to have as my toy for my hobby.
it all boils down to how much i'm willing to spend on my hobby.
just like cars.why buy a murcielargo at 1.18 million when a kancil can take you from A to B?
i use a sigma 28-70 2.8 DF lens and i get the results i need. Alot of professional fashion mag shooters shoot at 300mm and above also. Why don't buy that too? I'm not trying to wack you on the kinda money you spend. But i think you're just dwelling too much on equipment to begin with. Why not post up the photos you shot so far and see what kinda of images you are shooting so we can help you work on it instead of telling and giving you the impression that if you use a 5000 dollar lens you can produce good images?
i did post some travel images from my recent japan trip.as for my other trips, i havent bought my d200 yet.was using some cheapskate pns.no point postings.
and like i said, i dont go shooting every weekend, i like, then i go out and fire.i dont like, i stay at home and nua.also, there's no clause stating that i must post my images to share to become a member in CS.
In this age, alot of people shoot to edit. Are you shooting film in a way that wat you shoot is what you desire to get instantly? I'll give you an example. Go take a look at the fashion editorials at : www.iconique.com . Then try explaining how they get the images to look like that? If you can explain how they get it, then maybe you would understand the working thought process behind creating the image to your desired results instead of using the equipment.
comon, stop giving me headaches.is this a test or what?why should i explain HOW they got the images?(i havent see the website yet).it's just like posting a cooking website and you tell me what ingredients they use?harlow?give me a break dear.just because i can afford the equipments doesnt mean i have to FULLY utilise them in and out.also, they doesnt mean i have to produce wonderful images and explain how each and every professional image was shot before i can go on and buy NEW hightech equipments.
do you really think people driving ferraris and porsche have the driving skills of michael schumacher?
comon...i own a ***k+ car and my driving sucks.period.
I'm not trying to rain on your low period of your life as you mentioned. But every day i come into CS and i see post from you talking about nothing but what equipment to buy. If you really want to know. read up what ever has been reviewed
i'm lazy to go search for reviews that has been done.cannot meh?:sticktong
and discussed about before and buy what ever you want and try it for yourself instead of coming in everyday and asking really alot of redundant questions.
to you it's deemed redundant.well, i'm getting lots and tons of good advices from other members here so why stop me?
Honestly i dun mean to make this post in such a distasteful manner but i really am getting annoyed.
i'm also getting annoyed at your hypocrisy.at one time u pm me, u sounded like such a nice guy.now?tear your epidermal and show your trueself?
dear, if you dont like what i post or start, then you can always choose not to click on my thread right?the door is always open.come and go as u wish.nobody's pointing a gun at you to read my threads right?
Hope some light will shine on you soon....
yes, and thank god it did.and you have to thank your religion too because they casted light on you so i can see what kind of person you really are.
stop pissing me off early in the morning.you like, you read and give me advice, however redundant it be.to professionals, what kind of questions are not redundant?does that means newbies cant ask questions which MAY have been asked b4?that's quite ENCOURAGING ya?
until you have better advises for me, please do not intrude into my thread ya?
i still love you.dont make me change my impression again.and thanks for concern over my private life ya?
I have the 80-200 2.8 and i cant tell image quality diff from the 70-200 vr. And only in special circumstances i see the need for vr.
i did pm him many times.he did share some of his trade secrets with me.extremely helpful guy.one of the super rare breeds in CS.
Btw 85 f1.4 and 105 f2 dc? i'd ask. Do u really need these for portraits?
NO, then again, i dont need a d200, or 50 f.14, or 70-200 AFS VR, quantum battery, metz flash, sb800, 17-35, 17-55, 300 2.8...blah blah blah.
it's nice to have when i want it, it's nice to have as my toy for my hobby.
it all boils down to how much i'm willing to spend on my hobby.
just like cars.why buy a murcielargo at 1.18 million when a kancil can take you from A to B?
i use a sigma 28-70 2.8 DF lens and i get the results i need. Alot of professional fashion mag shooters shoot at 300mm and above also. Why don't buy that too? I'm not trying to wack you on the kinda money you spend. But i think you're just dwelling too much on equipment to begin with. Why not post up the photos you shot so far and see what kinda of images you are shooting so we can help you work on it instead of telling and giving you the impression that if you use a 5000 dollar lens you can produce good images?
i did post some travel images from my recent japan trip.as for my other trips, i havent bought my d200 yet.was using some cheapskate pns.no point postings.
and like i said, i dont go shooting every weekend, i like, then i go out and fire.i dont like, i stay at home and nua.also, there's no clause stating that i must post my images to share to become a member in CS.
In this age, alot of people shoot to edit. Are you shooting film in a way that wat you shoot is what you desire to get instantly? I'll give you an example. Go take a look at the fashion editorials at : www.iconique.com . Then try explaining how they get the images to look like that? If you can explain how they get it, then maybe you would understand the working thought process behind creating the image to your desired results instead of using the equipment.
comon, stop giving me headaches.is this a test or what?why should i explain HOW they got the images?(i havent see the website yet).it's just like posting a cooking website and you tell me what ingredients they use?harlow?give me a break dear.just because i can afford the equipments doesnt mean i have to FULLY utilise them in and out.also, they doesnt mean i have to produce wonderful images and explain how each and every professional image was shot before i can go on and buy NEW hightech equipments.
do you really think people driving ferraris and porsche have the driving skills of michael schumacher?
comon...i own a ***k+ car and my driving sucks.period.
I'm not trying to rain on your low period of your life as you mentioned. But every day i come into CS and i see post from you talking about nothing but what equipment to buy. If you really want to know. read up what ever has been reviewed
i'm lazy to go search for reviews that has been done.cannot meh?:sticktong
and discussed about before and buy what ever you want and try it for yourself instead of coming in everyday and asking really alot of redundant questions.
to you it's deemed redundant.well, i'm getting lots and tons of good advices from other members here so why stop me?
Honestly i dun mean to make this post in such a distasteful manner but i really am getting annoyed.
i'm also getting annoyed at your hypocrisy.at one time u pm me, u sounded like such a nice guy.now?tear your epidermal and show your trueself?
dear, if you dont like what i post or start, then you can always choose not to click on my thread right?the door is always open.come and go as u wish.nobody's pointing a gun at you to read my threads right?
Hope some light will shine on you soon....
yes, and thank god it did.and you have to thank your religion too because they casted light on you so i can see what kind of person you really are.
stop pissing me off early in the morning.you like, you read and give me advice, however redundant it be.to professionals, what kind of questions are not redundant?does that means newbies cant ask questions which MAY have been asked b4?that's quite ENCOURAGING ya?
until you have better advises for me, please do not intrude into my thread ya?
i still love you.dont make me change my impression again.and thanks for concern over my private life ya?
szhoe
Member
Thank you..Indeed it says it all..Bad photography..:bsmilie: :bsmilie:
:devil:
- Status
Similar threads
