Finally bought the nifty 50mm..

[EJ_Allmota]

Just a couple random shots with my new Nikkor 50mm f1.8.. I think im in love with this thing.. All i need now is a high Nikon body so the autofocus can work.. D40 FTL.. So im stacking for that D90 :bump: ..

1
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3395/3407160453_2f2a2dcbf0_o.jpg

2
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3607/3407094155_597cf99604_o.jpg

[.blank cd]

Lovin that thing huh! Youll love it x3497 once you get a body w/ a focus motor on it!


BTW on mahogany, crop whatever it is on the top of the picture out :goodjob:

[puregroove]

one of my favorite lenses, homie::: :goodjob:

[EJ_Allmota]

Lovin that thing huh! Youll love it x3497 once you get a body w/ a focus motor on it!


BTW on mahogany, crop whatever it is on the top of the picture out :goodjob:
Damn, i got it..will fix right now..

[EJ_Allmota]

good eye homie.. FIXED

[.blank cd]

niiiiiiiiicee. I just got new gear too

[EJ_Allmota]

niiiiiiiiicee. I just got new gear too
ohh boy.. what you dun got now??

[.blank cd]

Tamron 28-75 2.8. Might get a Nikon 35-70 next week

[.blank cd]

or sell em both and get a used Nikon 28-70 2.8

[EJ_Allmota]

or sell em both and get a used Nikon 28-70 2.8
Damn i had to go searching for that lens im so used to seeing the narrower and lighter 24-70 2.8.. I know the 24-70 2.8 is a couple hundred more but dont you think it would be worth it??

[Tarzanman]

The Tamron is good. People have nothing but good things to say about it on the Canon forum. I have a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (its smaller cousin)

[EJ_Allmota]

The B&W version of the second shot, because Uproot liked it better..

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3556/3407094385_fba4c9049b_o.jpg

[.blank cd]

Damn i had to go searching for that lens im so used to seeing the narrower and lighter 24-70 2.8.. I know the 24-70 2.8 is a couple hundred more but dont you think it would be worth it??Only if I can find the gray-body lens, and ive only seen the 28-70 in gray. Maybe im not looking hard enough. Both still over a grand though, used. but OH so nice.

I like the B/W version better too BTW

[.blank cd]

The Tamron is good. People have nothing but good things to say about it on the Canon forum. I have a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (its smaller cousin)My buddy has that one on his Nikon. Both are very sharp. This is just to hold me over till I get enough dough for the 24-70 or the 28-70.

Khris, This lens is gonna open up a whole new avenue of photography for you. You'll love it its a great portrait lens

[EJ_Allmota]

My buddy has that one on his Nikon. Both are very sharp. This is just to hold me over till I get enough dough for the 24-70 or the 28-70.

Khris, This lens is gonna open up a whole new avenue of photography for you. You'll love it its a great portrait lens
thats whats up man.. Both seem like amazing lenses with some serious price tags..

Im loving it already man, took some play shots of my sister earlier today and i was very impressed with the results.. When i recover fully i will see how i do with it shooting some of them females i shoot.. I need autofocus though, i might purchase that D90 sooner than i expected..

[.blank cd]

I spy someone from IA. This was taken with the 50. Hes using canons 50 1.2 :eek:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3611/3408613402_e1bcdb076e.jpg

[uproot]

:goodjob: like i said before man, you're gonna love it

[Dirty Octopus™]

okay guys... help your brother here... :o
whats the difference between Eddie's 1.2 and you'z 1.8 50mm? :thinking:

[HatchMan]

Best effing lens ever!
Ridiculously cheap also!

[uproot]

okay guys... help your brother here... :o
whats the difference between Eddie's 1.2 and you'z 1.8 50mm? :thinking:

1.2 is a larger aperture than 1.8, allows for a shorter depth of field and a faster shutter speed, and his probably costs over $1,000 more than the 1.8 LOL

[speedminded]

I used a D700 the other day with a collection of lenses. Made me depressed picking my XTI back up lol!


okay guys... help your brother here... :o
whats the difference between Eddie's 1.2 and you'z 1.8 50mm? :thinking:The larger the aperture the more light it collects and better it captures in darker situations. If only I had a f/1.2 for bands!

[EJ_Allmota]

I used a D700 the other day with a collection of lenses. Made me depressed picking my XTI back up lol!

The larger the aperture the more light it collects and better it captures in darker situations. If only I had a f/1.2 for bands!
lol, thats funny man.. Never thought id hear you say a Nikon over Canon..

[Tarzanman]

okay guys... help your brother here... :o
whats the difference between Eddie's 1.2 and you'z 1.8 50mm? :thinking:

People have already chimed it, but I will too. I will make it really simple and avoid talking about exposure.

• Different lenses have different focal lengths. Most lenses are named for their focal lengths. An 100mm lens has a 100mm long focal length which is longer than a 35mm, etc.

• Generally, the longer the focal length the more 'zoomed in' the picture will be. (So, a 35mm lens might give you a photo of someone and people standing around them while 100mm lens might only give you a close-up their face)

• The aperture is the diameter of the circle that lets the light in. Think of a pin-hole camera... some people like to use bigger pins to make the hole bigger and let more light in. More light is sometimes necessary, like for night shots or places where they don't allow a flash.

• The f-number is a shorthand way of saying how big the aperture is compared to the focal length of the lens. It is the focal length divided by the aperture. So, an 80mm lens with a f-number of f/2 has an aperture that is 40mm in diameter. Accordingly, a low f-number (f/1.2) on a lens means a large aperture.

• Modern lenses allow you to change the aperture setting, but they all have a limit as to how big and how small you can go. The more expensive lenses let you have larger apertures (low f-numbers)

• Lenses with large apertures have to be better designed because there is more light to focus and a larger area of the lens is used to focus the light.

• Ever taken a picture that got blurred because the camera moved, or maybe someone in the picture moved? The faster the shutter speed on a camera, the less you get motion blur.

• Since lenses with large apertures (low f-numbers) let more light in, they can take better photos in low light conditions without necessarily having to rely on a flash. Photographers call this ability the 'speed' of the lens since it lets them use faster shutter speeds to avoid motion blur.

• Using a large aperture setting on a lens will give a small area of sharp focus on the subject while making things in front & behind the subject go out of focus. The area that is left in focus is called the depth-of-field (DOF).

• Using a small aperture setting on a lens keeps a large area around the subject in focus. The drawback to doing this is that more light is necessary to get a good photo.

Last... lenses with extremely large apertures are overpriced! (Some people will argue and say that the price difference is worth it). The most ridiculous example of this is the price of the Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens vs the price of the Canon 50mm f/1.2. The f/1.8 has an aperture of 27.78mm and costs $75, while the 50mm f/1.2 has an aperture of 41.67mm and costs $1,329.

Since the 50mm f/1.2 doesn't come with a magic wand that turns you into an awesome photographer, some people (myself included) don't think that the difference is worth the extra cost (unless you have a specific need which requires that particular lens).

Of course, if you're rich.... you probably have $1000's of dollars just lying around the house in your leather couch or in the back pocket of some worn-out Gucci jeans. Spend away!

[puregroove]

People have already chimed it, but I will too. I will make it really simple and avoid talking about exposure.

• Different lenses have different focal lengths. Most lenses are named for their focal lengths. An 100mm lens has a 100mm long focal length which is longer than a 35mm, etc.

• Generally, the longer the focal length the more 'zoomed in' the picture will be. (So, a 35mm lens might give you a photo of someone and people standing around them while 100mm lens might only give you a close-up their face)

• The aperture is the diameter of the circle that lets the light in. Think of a pin-hole camera... some people like to use bigger pins to make the hole bigger and let more light in. More light is sometimes necessary, like for night shots or places where they don't allow a flash.

• The f-number is a shorthand way of saying how big the aperture is compared to the focal length of the lens. It is the focal length divided by the aperture. So, an 80mm lens with a f-number of f/2 has an aperture that is 40mm in diameter. Accordingly, a low f-number (f/1.2) on a lens means a large aperture.

• Modern lenses allow you to change the aperture setting, but they all have a limit as to how big and how small you can go. The more expensive lenses let you have larger apertures (low f-numbers)

• Lenses with large apertures have to be better designed because there is more light to focus and a larger area of the lens is used to focus the light.

• Ever taken a picture that got blurred because the camera moved, or maybe someone in the picture moved? The faster the shutter speed on a camera, the less you get motion blur.

• Since lenses with large apertures (low f-numbers) let more light in, they can take better photos in low light conditions without necessarily having to rely on a flash. Photographers call this ability the 'speed' of the lens since it lets them use faster shutter speeds to avoid motion blur.

• Using a large aperture setting on a lens will give a small area of sharp focus on the subject while making things in front & behind the subject go out of focus. The area that is left in focus is called the depth-of-field (DOF).

• Using a small aperture setting on a lens keeps a large area around the subject in focus. The drawback to doing this is that more light is necessary to get a good photo.

Last... lenses with extremely large apertures are overpriced! (Some people will argue and say that the price difference is worth it). The most ridiculous example of this is the price of the Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens vs the price of the Canon 50mm f/1.2. The f/1.8 has an aperture of 27.78mm and costs $75, while the 50mm f/1.2 has an aperture of 41.67mm and costs $1,329.

Since the 50mm f/1.2 doesn't come with a magic wand that turns you into an awesome photographer, some people (myself included) don't think that the difference is worth the extra cost (unless you have a specific need which requires that particular lens).

Of course, if you're rich.... you probably have $1000's of dollars just lying around the house in your leather couch or in the back pocket of some worn-out Gucci jeans. Spend away!

great post, man... reps. :goodjob: :yes:

[james]

People have already chimed it, but I will too. I will make it really simple and avoid talking about exposure.

• Different lenses have different focal lengths. Most lenses are named for their focal lengths. An 100mm lens has a 100mm long focal length which is longer than a 35mm, etc.

• Generally, the longer the focal length the more 'zoomed in' the picture will be. (So, a 35mm lens might give you a photo of someone and people standing around them while 100mm lens might only give you a close-up their face)

• The aperture is the diameter of the circle that lets the light in. Think of a pin-hole camera... some people like to use bigger pins to make the hole bigger and let more light in. More light is sometimes necessary, like for night shots or places where they don't allow a flash.

• The f-number is a shorthand way of saying how big the aperture is compared to the focal length of the lens. It is the focal length divided by the aperture. So, an 80mm lens with a f-number of f/2 has an aperture that is 40mm in diameter. Accordingly, a low f-number (f/1.2) on a lens means a large aperture.

• Modern lenses allow you to change the aperture setting, but they all have a limit as to how big and how small you can go. The more expensive lenses let you have larger apertures (low f-numbers)

• Lenses with large apertures have to be better designed because there is more light to focus and a larger area of the lens is used to focus the light.

• Ever taken a picture that got blurred because the camera moved, or maybe someone in the picture moved? The faster the shutter speed on a camera, the less you get motion blur.

• Since lenses with large apertures (low f-numbers) let more light in, they can take better photos in low light conditions without necessarily having to rely on a flash. Photographers call this ability the 'speed' of the lens since it lets them use faster shutter speeds to avoid motion blur.

• Using a large aperture setting on a lens will give a small area of sharp focus on the subject while making things in front & behind the subject go out of focus. The area that is left in focus is called the depth-of-field (DOF).

• Using a small aperture setting on a lens keeps a large area around the subject in focus. The drawback to doing this is that more light is necessary to get a good photo.

Last... lenses with extremely large apertures are overpriced! (Some people will argue and say that the price difference is worth it). The most ridiculous example of this is the price of the Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens vs the price of the Canon 50mm f/1.2. The f/1.8 has an aperture of 27.78mm and costs $75, while the 50mm f/1.2 has an aperture of 41.67mm and costs $1,329.

Since the 50mm f/1.2 doesn't come with a magic wand that turns you into an awesome photographer, some people (myself included) don't think that the difference is worth the extra cost (unless you have a specific need which requires that particular lens).

Of course, if you're rich.... you probably have $1000's of dollars just lying around the house in your leather couch or in the back pocket of some worn-out Gucci jeans. Spend away!

i see where you are coming from, but there are obvious points from both sides of the argument... a good read: http://photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

also, lolz:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Canon_7_with_50mm_f0.95_IMG_0374.JPG/598px-Canon_7_with_50mm_f0.95_IMG_0374.JPG
lololol f/.95. can you imagine? :eek:

[Tarzanman]

What I can't imagine is:
1. Being stuck using a single ISO for 24 or 36 exposures
2. Having to mess with a manual focus ring AND an aperture ring
3. Manually adjusting the shutter speed :-O

Kids today don't know how good they have it! You needed 3 times the knowledge to be a decent photographer 20 years ago than you do today.

All it takes now is ~$500 bucks for a camera and lens, 1 hour on the internet and you will be able to take way better photos than they ever dreamed of back then... and have them all printed in less than 15 minutes at kinko's

WTF. Cameras have come a long way