« on: October 22, 2013, 04:29:04 PM »
The price went up already? That was quick!!!
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.
A P51 and a friendThe P-51 is a beauty... but boy... I LOVE the spitfire!
This are the Reenactment of the " Battle of Hillsborough" at Hillsborough, North Carolina, USA , in 2/19/2011
Yes, To learn the Historical Facts and observe the Historical Reenactment at the Sites.
Yes, All the Photos in this Post are just the Recorded Photos, Not Arts work or Beautiful Photos, Just the real Recorded Photos with minimum Post processing.
Here are the last Photos.
Yes, I Have 3 Cameras and 3 Lenses with me :
--The First Camera = Canon 5D MK II with 24-70 mm F/ 2.8 L , for Typical Photos.
---2 ND one, Canon 7D with EF 70-200 mm F/ 2.8 L IS, for all mid range distant Photos and Closed Portrait Pictures
----3 RD, = Canon 1DS MK 1 with Canon EF 85 mm. F = 1.2 L MK II for super Back ground Blur..
There are a few companies that have been making these for years.
Alright everyone, I shoot portraits and weddings and here are my current lenses which I use on my 5DM3:
24-105 (great kit lens, but I might sell it)
24-70 f2.8 MK2
(Sigma) 12-24 - some people don't like this, but I think I got a good copy
70-200 f2.8 MK2
I'm trying to find a reason to buy either the 85mm or 135mm. Which should I buy? I know I have that length covered, but they're such celebrated primes that I'd just learn to zoom with my feet more and I know my results would be good.
So, here's my question. Both are very well-loved in the photog world, especially with portrait shooters. Which should I get? Or, should I be considering another prime altogether?
Thanks in advance!
Dear Sir, Mr. beckstoy.
For the Best Wedding/ portrait Lenses, Both of Them 85 1.2 II and 135 L 2.0 are great ---and Best of the Best Too. But So many Lenses that need to consider for perfected Photos, where the space between the model and the photographer are limited, and the Photographers do not have the choice ---Yes that why the Difference Lenses are force to use for the best of that situation.
Here are my Wedding / Portrait Lenses that I use as " One man army" past 5 years, and Its works for me.
Good luck for your selection of the great Lenses.
A= Canon TS-E 24 MM. F 3.5 L MK II for my group Portrait up to 200 People. Yes, I use Horizontal Shift function.
B = EF 24-70 F/ 2.8 L for General Photos, at the Party
C= EF 135 MM F/ 2.0 L, For great Portrait in the long range.
D=EF 70-200 mm F/ 2.8 L IS USM. Shoot far away on the Balcony of the Church, When we can not go to shoot at Altar----Ha, Ha, Ha---Not try to let the FATHER/ Preacher get angry.
E= EF 100 mm F./ 2.8 L IS Macro USM. for the Great Portrait Photos with Some Great Bokeh. Plus the Detail of the Rings, Flowers and The Bride's Beautiful Shoes.
F = Sigma 50 MM F/ 1.4, For Tight Space and Very Blur Background.
G= EF 85 MM. F/ 1.2 L MK II for total Blur of busy back ground, and let the Bride& Groom as the Movie Stars. Plus this Lens is to separate Us/ The Real Pay Photographers and Uncle Bob or aunt Jane who use 41 MP. Nokia Lumia Cell Phone Camera, which can get the better Pictures than Me----Ha, Ha, Ha
NO, NO, NO, I never use any lens that wider than 24 MM. Yes, I have learn from the Hard way, I use 11-17 and 17-40 mm at F = 11 and F = 17 for Group Photos, And I lost my best beautiful Client, who stand at the far Left and Far right of the Group Photos= Yes The Super Wide Angle lens is create the subjects at the far edge of photo so distortion = Her Face form as the Beauty and The Beast = The Beast ( Not the Beauty)----Ha, Ha, Ha
If it makes cleaning a sensor easier and safer then it could be a feature. I doubt anyone would build a camera where the intent was to add a better sensor later - but then it might be the same thing as a standard CPU socket and your choice of chip. Hmm.
I usually don't like to butt into arguments but here you are the one not trying to think/look outside your shell. Looks like you have never shot super active toddlers. So I don't expect you to understand what we are talking about.
I never said anything about toddlers. You are changing the topic. You and Neuro objected my remark that the 85L can be useful for things that move. You presented the toddlers example as a counter-example. Now you are trying to involve me in a discussion how to shoot toddlers (sounds a bit creepy) which is irrelevant.