File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
I know it's cliché but what the hell. I love this one.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 40DCamera SoftwareQuickTime 7.5.5Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:11:27 21:56:04Exposure Time1/1600 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length66.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width3888Image Height2592RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>302663
do you not realise u are on /b/ now

stop posting your fotoz camfag
>> Anonymous
is that some 24-70 f/2.8 L
>> Anonymous
>>302663
i don't
>> Anonymous
I'm sorry, its picture of a flower, a fucking flower. I'm sick of pictures of flowers. Point your camera elsewhere, the plants have had enough. There are so many things in this world that still deserve to be photographed, a picture of a flower is a waste of time.

Show me a creative flower picture, please. not one shooped to death, but a creative picture of a flower, please.
>> Anonymous
OP here.
>>302816
Yep

>>302851
Not much photoshop, just slight adjustments in Adobe Camera RAW. White balance and a bit of contrast/saturation.
>> Anonymous
I looks alright, but it's still a flower...

To page 10 with this!
Oh wait...
>> Anonymous
why anyone would put a good lens like that on a shitty body is beyond me
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>303136
I see photojs out with expensive white L glass out on 400Ds because they know its the lens that creates the image, the body is just a lightproof box to catch it.
>> Anonymous
>>303136


...what shitty body?
>> Anonymous
>>303140

sorry, read that as 400D.

still stupid to put L lens on a 40D
>> Anonymous
>>303167


why would it ever be shitty to have glass that you can basically shoot wide open? I guess I'm just not following you here.
>> Anonymous
>>303168

lrn2read

i said good lens on a shitty body
>> Anonymous
>>303173
lrn2read
>> Anonymous
>>303176

uhh are you trolling?
see
>>303136why anyone would put a good lens like that on a shitty body is beyond me
>> Anonymous
>>303179


BECAUSE YOU CAN SHOOT IT WIDE OPEN WITH MUCH BETTER RESULTS

BODY IS IRRELIVENT
>> Anonymous
>>303180


irrelevant*
>> Anonymous
see
>>303167still stupid to put L lens on a 40D

a 17-55 is cheaper than a 24-70

gives you a much wider angle
gives you better image quality
gives you IS
is $200 cheaper

in the end
>>303167still stupid to put L lens on a 40D
>> Anonymous
>>303186


Why do you insist on ignoring my point? L glass performs better at the widest aperture. Always. On any body.

In fact, wouldn't it be a waste of money to buy the cheaper glass, especially if you plan on upgrading bodies in the future? Like they say, glass is an investment.
>> Anonymous
>>303193Why do you insist on ignoring my point? L glass performs better at the widest aperture. Always. On any body.

because you keep on ignoring mine. i already said the 24-70 is a good lens, you fucking idiot

then i said it's stupid to put it on that body for reasons in>>303186

good game, me 19595 you 0
>> Anonymous
>>303195


What good is having a wide aperture you can't use?

BODY

IS

IRRELEVANT

GOOD

GLASS

IS

GOOD

ALWAYS
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>303207

and the 17-55 is superior to the 24-70

man, it's like talking to a small rock, except the rock is smarter than you are
>> Anonymous
For a day this image got no replies.
I go out for a few hours round town to take photos, come back and surprise surprise.
It's become a gear thread.
S
A
G
E
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>303211
>and the 17-55 is superior to the 24-70
There are a variety of reasons to use the 24-70 on a crop body.

Maybe he also shoots with a full frame camera. Maybe the OP's been around a while and got the 24-70 back when EF-S wasn't around. Maybe he just plans to upgrade to full frame later and doesn't want to spend money on EF-S glass that he won't be able to use. Maybe he wants the focal length of 24-70, not the focal length of 17-55.

>man, it's like talking to a small rock, except the rock is smarter than you are
Pro tip: You are always wrong.