The AF died in a 200/2.8L I owned once. I bought it new and it died a week later.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
The 6D won the EISA best advanced DSLR of the year..... A category that the D600 would have been considered in... i imagine it was selected by people who know what they are talking about!!
And here come the posts about back-focus issues in 3, 2, 1.
Many claimed 50L is soft. I like my at f1.4 to f1.6. Photo below shot with JPEG straight out from camera. Only resized to post here.
And that is justification for the 50L right there. With te 50 1.8 it's only really good around f/2.2 or above, the 50 1.4 prob around f/2 but if you actually want decent quality with nice bokeh at f/1.4 - 1.8 you're gonna need the 50L. Oh and it wont break so easily either.
Years ago, I was taught that the 100mm lens was the best portrait instrument. Now, it seems, this 1.2 seems to be accepted as the lens for faces, softening the background. Well.... which is it? 100 or 50? I am assuming a full frame configuration.... Would not my 100 f2.8 do great for portraits?
And please, no snarky replies. It is really unnecessary to be superior.
If I won a big lottery I'd put out a bounty for someone to build a lens like that if Canon didn't take it up.
Erm... Bring the 70-200 f/2 too and damn I'll buy those two preciousssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssDoable, I guess, big and heavy for sure, and a filter size of 105mm+. Similar to size/weight of 120-300mm f/2.8 or 200-400mm f/4. Betting now the price will not be less than Canon 70-200mm II if it ever materializes.
the look on this kids face made me smile...hopefully you will too.
The 50/1.2 because of it's general performance,
61: folks thinking they're funny(ier than me)
61.5 folks with funny grammar (ier than I)
61.6 wise guys that correct peoples [sic] grammar. Oh dear