not knowing shit about photography, this baffles me:
I dunno I guess that the lens, even though the same distance from the subject, can have a profound difference on face shape/expression.
I always assumed wide-angle lenses were for panoramic shots and sports.
I always assumed wide-angle lenses were for panoramic shots and sports.
haha her expressions 40mm really expressive as distortion is at it's most, i see a evil child or a lost soul there
lens sim , watch the angle of view degrees change http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/si … /index.htm
lens sim , watch the angle of view degrees change http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/si … /index.htm
50 is supposed to be where the wiiiide distortion stops ?
Last edited by Kimmmmmmmmmmmm (2013-11-10 06:42:32)
I've been looking at the EF 17-40MM F4 L USM or EF 70-200 F4 L USM.
Preferable, but not necessary. I know the IS lenses cost considerably more. Would like to keep it below $800 (can be used).
i like the 17-40. then again, i do mostly landscape. the 70-200 would be good to start with, and maybe pick up a wider lens later.bugz wrote:
I've been looking at the EF 17-40MM F4 L USM or EF 70-200 F4 L USM.
So many choices
Did you get your 70-200 used?
Did you get your 70-200 used?
Picked up a 50mm 1.8 & 70-300mm 4-5.6 IS USM. More within my budget. An L series lens will be my next upgrade after I've taken a few thousand shots with these.
i wish i was good at taking pictures. i rely on the camera too much, and even when i try to be 'artistic' with a shot, it's out of focus.
brb, posting in FWP thread . . .
brb, posting in FWP thread . . .
upload them so we can judge you based on your photography skills