|
Yeah, I'd guess one of the elements got knocked out of place or something. I have a 24-70 f/2.8 mk1 and I don't get anything like that edit: This is 27mm @ f/4 an AOL chatroom fucked around with this message at 04:34 on Sep 8, 2014 |
#
¿
Sep 8, 2014 04:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 19:34 |
|
|
KinkyJohn posted:I need a new macro for detail wedding shots and occasional product photography. I'm choosing between the canon 100m L (~1100bux) and the sigma 105 mm (~750 bux). dxomark says the canon has some chromatic abberation on a FF's edges, while the sigma does not. If you're good at bouncing a speedlite, and you're not relying on natural light to grab those macro detail shots at a wedding, I'd go with the non-L 100mm Canon macro. The IS on the 100L is good if you're shooting in dim locations or using it for portraiture at a distance, and the image quality is amazing, but it's a hard price to justify.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
Abes called to try and upsell me on an import lens. After a month, I called and asked what the deal was... "Yeah, it's not here yet. You should order the US model, I'll give you a deal". Price was the same as everywhere else. Avoid those dicks.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
The 135L is magical, but it does require the right settings. At weddings, I'll have my second shooter just stroll around and snipe 135mm natural candids of the guests. Those almost always get the best reaction when turning over the gallery.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2015 11:55
|
|