If you could do it all over again...

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by McQueen278, Apr 5, 2009.

  1. McQueen278

    McQueen278 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    388
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, MI.
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Weight, speed and sharpness. I just don't need the zoom or the extra 65mm in length. I thought I needed it and I was used to working with a 70-200mm zoom so i got it. I love it. It is just more than I need in some ways. I'd rather have the richer colors, speed advantage and weight/size of the 135L + 85L. It would also be nice to have a telephoto that didn't attract so much attention. Dang white paint...


     
  2. FrankLamont

    FrankLamont TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2009
    Messages:
    556
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Oh, right. :)

    I was panicking, after just deciding to get the 70-200mm over the 135mm for my upcoming wedding shoot. :p
     
  3. Sw1tchFX

    Sw1tchFX TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    May 3, 2006
    Messages:
    7,500
    Likes Received:
    478
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I have Profoto 600R compacts at my disposal pretty much whenever I want, and I would never want to take those on location unless I really needed the power.I would say 95% of the time i'm shooting with my speedlights, Nikon's CLS system and my SB-600's work great. PW transmitters/recievers/trancievers are not worth almost $900 to outfit a body and 3 flashes to me when I could buy 4 more SB-600's and run off my pop up flash, no way.

    So the answer to If I would want to use high FP outside the Nikon system or would essentially want to spend hundreds of dollars on tools I don't need, probably not. Battery packs aren't anywhere near as portable, and I can't adjust vivitars from the camera position.


    For the most part, agreed. I already have an 80-200, which is what I use for the real formal head-and shoulders stuff, but for availible light, f/2.8 often still isn't fast enough, and regardless of the camera, why shoot at ISO 3200 when you can shoot at ISO 800, and get smoother bokeh at the same time. For a 50mm, a full body, head to toe, you're so far back anyway, it would look fine, you wouldn't notice distortion like you would if you were trying to do a head and shoulders shot. If it's a full body, or even a waist level-up shot just looking at the photo without another point of reference, say from a 200mm lens, it would look fine. 50mm is the same perspective (roughly) as the human eye.

    the 50mm is also small, fast, sharp, and light. the 85mm f/1.4, although might make more sense, for strictly portraits, is neither small, light, or subtle, not to mention costs over $1000.


    I think it would be about the size of Canon's 24mm f/1.4L. A 24mm f/1.4 would have shallower DOF, sharper at f/2.8 compared to the 14-24, less distortion, it would be a smaller lens, so more discreet, and in availible light, again what I said earlier, why shoot at something like ISO12800 when you can shoot at ISO 3200? or instead of 1600, 400? with brighter lenses, AF works more reliably and accurately in low light. if you're shooting at 400, there is virtually no noise at all on the D3/700, 1600 is where it starts looking crispy.



    These are all valid questions jerry, and I understand where you're coming from with them, but for my purposes, the 50mm and SB-600 would make more sense with limited funds and I would get more use out of them.
     
  4. bdavison

    bdavison TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2009
    Messages:
    161
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit


    Would have started with Nikon instead of Fuji
     

Share This Page