« on: May 08, 2013, 10:12:24 AM »
Also .. I wasn't using the 100 f2 nor the 24 2.8 non IS.
That was with the 24-105L I think.
If you look at the-digital-picture resolution charts, you'll find out that if you're shooting at small apertures there isn't any point to using a prime lens.
I find my 100 f2 to be inappropriate to use during the day. Too easy for purple fringing to occur if the AF misses, at f2.
The 24 2.8 has beautiful softness/vignetting off centre. So it's good to focus stuff in the centre. For daytime, it's ok - but watch the flare! That lens LOVEs to flare.
yeah i chose that 24mm becuase of the image quality at the wider end (according to those charts) compared to more expensive lenses was pretty close. (plus i got a deal on ebay) i was hoping it would make a good all round travel /landscape lens. would people agree with that?
it is a coincidence you have the same set up, yes the pyramids sites were dusty and bright, i wish i hadnt turned up at 2pm but for me it was either early afternoon, or 8am (due to my schedule) shame they dont let you into the site at sunset or sunrise.
i am confuused now though, for landscape shots, where overall focus is desirable, what is a maximum aperture, people are saying oooh f10, youll get diffraction, but i thought that was a good trade off between diffraction and overall focus. would an f5.6 have been better? sharper?
interestingly the other area i visited was a wet uganda in the higlands, same problems, though slightly better results. the humidity and the overall cloudy mistiness was part of what i was trying to capture, but this gave flat pictures, others have taken good shots in these areas, so one day i must be able too!