f-stop value
Jul 10, 2014 11:14:56 #
pdwoods11 wrote:
Thanks much for taking the time to reply....I understand what you say....David
My pleasure! hope this was helpful.
Jul 10, 2014 11:29:16 #
wj cody
Loc: springfield illinois
pdwoods11 wrote:
Not a new topic for sure.....this question is general and is specific to the Canon 16 - 35mm L.
What is the value of a single full stop...not the math but in actual anecdotal use.
For this Canon lens, as it relates to $$; is a single f-stop worth $350.00. ?
I shoot with a 5D-mkII and have other Ls...2 macros, 3 zooms, no primes.
I would like the opinion of the hoggers before I plop down $1,200. vs $1,550. for the extra light.
Thank You,
David Woodruff
What is the value of a single full stop...not the math but in actual anecdotal use.
For this Canon lens, as it relates to $$; is a single f-stop worth $350.00. ?
I shoot with a 5D-mkII and have other Ls...2 macros, 3 zooms, no primes.
I would like the opinion of the hoggers before I plop down $1,200. vs $1,550. for the extra light.
Thank You,
David Woodruff
there is no such thing as a free lunch. in addition to the extra cost, you have to ask yourself "what am i actually going to use this lens for" and "what am i going to gain with an extra stop"?
at any given focal length, the extra stop which i call "wide open" gives very, very little depth of field. the only time this extra stop will benefit you is if you come across a situation where you absolutely must get that photo, your iso will not go high enough (i'm assuming you are using a digital imaging device, here) and there's no time to break out the tripod.
so, your next question would be "how often does this happen"? then you can appropriately decide if this is a needed objective.
if your goal is nght photography then a good used nikon nocto 50mm 1:1.2 lens is your best bet. it is corrected for night shooting and alleviates coma. but you will pay around 3k for it, and it is a strictly manual focus lens.
whatever you decide, good luck with your images!
Jul 10, 2014 14:28:58 #
Jul 10, 2014 15:45:04 #
wj cody wrote:
there is no such thing as a free lunch. in additio... (show quote)
Using a fast lens wide open for shallow depth of field is often a strong creative tool - even in landscape.
Jul 11, 2014 11:55:45 #
wj cody
Loc: springfield illinois
Gene51 wrote:
Using a fast lens wide open for shallow depth of field is often a strong creative tool - even in landscape.
we probably differ in our defination of "landscape".
Jul 11, 2014 18:52:37 #
wj cody wrote:
we probably differ in our defination of "landscape".
This is how I roll when it comes to landscape photography:
"Landscape photography shows spaces within the world, sometimes vast and unending, but other times microscopic. Photographs typically capture the presence of nature but can also focus on man-made features or disturbances of landscapes."
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landscape_photography
It's all good. And not all of it needs to be taken of stuff far away with a wide angle lens.
What is your "defination"
Jul 13, 2014 12:45:38 #
wj cody
Loc: springfield illinois
hi, and thanks for your response.
i must say that i find wikipedia lacking credibility in nearly everything posted on that site. everyone's an expert.
for me, i define landscape in the same manner as the landscape painters whose work hangs in museums. these are paintings of the land. i tend to be very specific in my work and some object selected within nature and filling the frame, constitutes a nature photograph, but not landscape.
so, there we go, as i said, perhaps we will have to agree to disagree.
all the best,
cody
i must say that i find wikipedia lacking credibility in nearly everything posted on that site. everyone's an expert.
for me, i define landscape in the same manner as the landscape painters whose work hangs in museums. these are paintings of the land. i tend to be very specific in my work and some object selected within nature and filling the frame, constitutes a nature photograph, but not landscape.
so, there we go, as i said, perhaps we will have to agree to disagree.
all the best,
cody
Jul 13, 2014 13:01:58 #
wj cody wrote:
hi, and thanks for your response. br i must say th... (show quote)
Perhaps one day your creativity will help you expand that definition and allow you to embrace a broader view - abstract, existential, contemplative as far as approaches, and not just "land" in the traditional sense, but sky, the sea, seashore, trees or a single tree, rocks, buildings, etc - to me there is a difference between a photo of the land - and what constitutes a landscape - which will often either capture a unique moment, using the photographer's skill and vision to show how they saw that moment and tell a story.
Yes it's ok to disagree. :)
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.