Fixed lenses only.
18-200 is fucking absurd.
Fixed lenses only.
18-200 is fucking absurd.
17-55 f/2.8 > all I have nothing but love for that lens.
If I ever get a superduper zoom it's gonna be the bigma. (50-500mm, f/4-f/6.3)
http://www4.pbase.com/liquidstone/image/39166342.jpg
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0505/05...a_50-500mm.asp
I'm not saying 200mm is absurdly long because it's pretty tame. I'm saying a 18-200mm is a retarded amount of zoom, which is 99% of the time an indication that the lens is a plastic piece of shit and probably has a pinhole for an apurture. If you're even semi serious you can do very well with a fixed 50mm (standard human view on a 35mm camera), a wide angle (15~25mm maybe), and something slightly long and wide open like a fixed 100mm @ f/1.4. The harder part is knowing when to use what.
edit: 50-500mm is also a joke because why would you ever have 400lbs of glass on the front of your camera, requiring mounting on the lens base instead of the body, only to shoot it at 50mm, adding an unnecessary 2 feet of distance between the film plane and the subject? Having the option to go no telephoto to ridiculously long doesn't do anything unless you just cannot be bothered to ever change lenses but are willing to carry around the weight of a small child on your camera strap/backpack.
I have a 28-210mm for my Pentax K1000... which I actually rarely use, usually I'm using the 28-85mm on that camera.
Sadly for my D50 I only have the crappy kit lens that the school provided with it. (28-80).
I barely even call myself an amateur, so now I'm just very confused. @.@
Copy paste I did from another forum:
Here you go.
18-55mm VR
18mm
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r...g?t=1235017569
24mm
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r...g?t=1235017568
35mm
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r...g?t=1235017568
45mm
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r...g?t=1235017567
55mm
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r...g?t=1235017567
55-200mm VR
55mm
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r...g?t=1235017567
70mm
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r...g?t=1235017566
85mm
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r...g?t=1235017565
105mm
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r...g?t=1235017565
135mm
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r...g?t=1235017564
200mm
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r...g?t=1235017564
Do keep in mind that zooms can do anything between the range. I picked those numbers because it's what's marked on the lens. You can do 120mm or 170mm or 156mm if you wanted to.
pretty crazy.
i just took pictures of my fan. it's ridiculous.
the ultimate stalking machine.
If only I had a teleconverter.
I want a reflex lens for night gazing, something like the Nikkor 500mm. It's only about $150 used.
Screw that. You want something like this for your camera.
Amazon.com: Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 APO EX DG Ultra-Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon DSLR Cameras: Electronics
now that's a REAL man's lens. 200-500mm 2.8 all the way through the zoom range! Too bad I'll prolly need a crane to pick it up.
Recent ad-type shot done a while back -
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3315/...941df822d7.jpg
that looks like a fucking cannon
edit: holy fucking shit i didn't look at the price the first time
news flash: lens length is not proportional to photograph quality.
It's a submarine.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2132/...6979ae.jpg?v=0
From Mexico City when I went on a pilgrimage to Our Lady of Guadalupe.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2098/...c2959c.jpg?v=0
From same trip
huge zoom lenses are really only good for pictures of the moon...and most of the time the optics suckkkk
With that said, the moon has already been photographed to death. :/