File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
I am looking for a nice lens and one that would be excellent in urban place like Atlanta.

what does /p/ think of saving up for one of the fastest lens in the telephoto range?
>> Anonymous
>I am looking for a nice lens and one that would be excellent in urban place like Atlanta.

Too fucking ambiguous. What are you going to use the lens for?
>> Anonymous
inb4 IS
>> Anonymous
I posted the canon 135mm f/2.0L USM lens picture.

I figured people would understand that I was referring to the image.
>> Anonymous
For street photography? Portraits? What?
>> Anonymous
for a "little" more money and "only" half a stop slower, you can get the 70-200 2.8

unless you really want a prime but 135mm is long as fuck and is fucking long as fuck on crop
>> Anonymous
>>198892

That is a full stop difference. Not a half stop.
>> Anonymous
>>198875
stop being such a fucking douche.

no one asked what lens you were interested in buying.

we want to know what you're going to use it for. as>>198892said, 135 on a crop body is fucking long as fuck.
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
Why are you looking at a focal length like the 135mm? Did you just hear it's a good focal length for street photography?

I'm asuming you're on crop. If you are, then grab an 85mm 1.8 it gives an effective 136mm with the crop factor, and it only costs a little over 300. (it's faster too) It's also regarded as canon's sharpest non-L prime.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>198903It's also regarded as canon's sharpest non-L prime.

*cough*

or any of the other 3 macro
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>198914
Macros focus slow and aren't as fast aperture-wise. Also, the 85mm focuses really quick.
>> Anonymous
>>198917

so?

>> It's also regarded as canon's sharpest non-L prime.

it's not
>> Anonymous
>>198914

The one in the picture is an L! :D
>> Anonymous
>>198944

oh well, replace it with the mp-e or the 100mm
>> Anonymous
Why not a 200 L 2.8?
>> Anonymous
why not a 20mm with 16x TC
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>198927
Ok...
It's also regarded as one of canon's sharpest non-L prime.

Are you happy?
>> Anonymous
>>198955

yes
>> Anonymous
Atlanta fag here

enjoy being fucking mugged by every nigger that sees the giant "CANON" on your camera and lens.
>> Anonymous
>>198986

This really is something you should take seriously. With a big lens like that on a DSLR you will attract them. I would bet this poster isn't the only person from Atlanta that would have a similar warning. Some places are safe to do street photography and others are a death trap.
>> Anonymous
>>199007


College Park, Forest Park, East Point, Bankhead Hwy, Underground, the Peachtrees, Fulton Industrial, Piedmont and Grant Parks, Stone Mountain, Greenbriar, Jonesboro, the list goes on...

You'd be okay in Virginia Highlands and most places around Emory and also on campus at Tech. The swanky parts of Kennesaw would also be acceptable.

Just be forewarned: You walk into East Point (or any of those areas) at night with an expensive looking camera and you'll be mugged.
>> washer
     File :-(, x)
i grew up in marietta and even in the suburbs up there if you're being stupid and showing that shit off you're going to get your shit swiped.

but to answer your question i need to know the range you're looking for when you shoot. what's your style? i vote don't blow too much money on anything if you don't already know what you like. save the more expensive lenses until later on when you know what you like.

picture is of the moon during an eclipse.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePanasonicCamera ModelDMC-LX2Camera SoftwareVer.1.0Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)28 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:02:20 20:33:52Exposure Time1 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length6.30 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width4224Image Height2376RenderingCustomExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalImage QualityUnknownWhite BalanceAutoFocus ModeUnknownSpot ModeUnknownImage StabilizerMode 2Macro ModeNormalShooting ModeProgramAudioNoFlash Bias0.00 EVColor EffectOffContrastStandardNoise ReductionLow
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>199018
You guys have way cooler sounding areas than we do *_*
>> Anonymous
200mm f2 VR
Get it

300mm f2 ai
Get it
>> Anonymous
>>199063


lol native american names
>> Anonymous
>>198903

Teles suck for street photography.. 50mm or less FTW
>> Anonymous
>>198986
I guess living in Minnesota has its perks.

I use a shitty Sony camera for work (south and east twin cities metro) and really haven't been approached. The nigs talk to me but I just shoot the shit with them and it's all good.

Using a 40D for personal use, but mostly in the burbs. Pretty much white as rice except for the occaional somalifag. But I still guard my shit like there's no tomorrow.
>> okto
>>199195
Epic truth. Street is all about subject intimacy and being in the situation you're photographing. 28s and 35s are the ultimate street focal lengths.
>> Anonymous
>>199532

what about on crop?
>> Anonymous
>>199532
Don't forget normals. Everyone gets caught up on the "street=wide" thing, but they forget that the original masters of it used primarily normal lenses- I know for a fact Cartier-Bresson (duh), Doisneau, and frank used mostly normals. Probably anyone before the 1950s did- if I understand correctly, wides weren't very common at the time.

>>199535
Crop factor.
>> Anonymous
>>199561
*Frank
>> okto
>>199561
True. I was thinking of Winogrand, I think he used a 35 most of the time. But, he was a lot later, and you're right, wide-angle lenses were crummy and/or slow pre-1960s.

>>199535
Full-frame focal length divided by whatever your crop factor is, so a 28mm FF FoV requires an 18mm lens on Nikon DX, 17mm on Canon wtf-ever their small sensor is called, or 14mm on 4/3rds.
>> Anonymous
>>199569
By the 1960's he had settled on a particular M39 screwmount Canon 28/2.8. I read an anecdotal account on a Photo.net thread that turned up in a search result once that in the 1970s he went back and started playing with 35s and 50s, but I know for sure most of his famous work was done with that 28mm.
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>199579
I kinda want that exact one to get a 42mm equiv on my RD-1, though the length isn't all that different from my current widest 53mm equiv. It's so compact and cheap though...
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>199579
For instance, the attached shot definitely looks like a 28 to me.
>> Anonymous
>>199580
For me at least (not on an RD-1), 42mm equivalent feels significantly different than 52.5mm equivalent, or even a flat fifty. "Different" meaning "better" here. I'd say try a 28 out and see which one you like better.

Does the RD-1 have framelines for both the 28 and 35?
>> Anonymous
>>199581

When you look at a shot like that you see how good street photography can be. Damn.
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>199582
Yep it's got both frames. And I guess the frames have a sizeable difference, but in practice I might as well use a separate finder because I cant even see all of the 35 frames with my glasses on.

Then if I'm willing to use a finder, it might as well be 21mm time.
>> Anonymous
Will this lens work in Denver?
>> Anonymous
>>199591
10/10.