File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
the 85mm f/1.8 is a fuckwin lens
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshPhotographerJimmyMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:08:07 23:32:28Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePartialFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length85.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1200Image Height800RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Honest So You Dont Have To Be !9UISPtwBPo
That is some buuuuutiful bokeh!

Still prefer 50 f/1.4 though :P
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
the 28mm f/1.8 is also great, it has some cro-mabs and the bokeh isn't the best, but i love it
also, fucking 4chan thumbnails rape colors

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshPhotographerJimmyMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:08:07 23:35:28Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias1/3 EVMetering ModePartialFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length28.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1200Image Height800RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>233002
i have the 50 f/1.4 as well but i didn't really get any good pics with it on this shoot

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshPhotographerJimmyMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.4Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:08:11 15:57:10Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias1/3 EVMetering ModePartialFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width800Image Height1200RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
50mm 1.8 ftw.... is there a massive difference between the 1.4 and the 1.8?
>> else !L6xabslN96
>>233003
i'd hit it...with some photoshop.
>> Anonymous
>>233009
yeah there really is, i was a little worried i would be disappointed when i bought it, since i already had the 50 1.8, but it has turned out to be amazing
great colors, great sharpness, fast
not to mention the much improved build quality, and the USM
OP here btw
>> Honest So You Dont Have To Be !9UISPtwBPo
Fair enough,

Is the 28 that nice? Ive been looking at a shorter prime or a super wide for my next lens... cant rly justify the superwide buy hey, lol

>50mm 1.8 ftw.... is there a massive difference between the 1.4 and the 1.8?

Honestly? no, but i do prefer the option of 1.4 if i need it, and at such wide apertures lens tend to be more predictable and preform better a stop or two down... so wit the 1.4 your still sharper if you use this rule.

Comes down to preference lol
>> BurtGummer !!RRMHFHglFsy
>>233012

are they both awesome for low light shots? Im going to get me a 1.8 you see and most of my photos seem to be taken inside buildings!
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233016
yeah the 28 is a very nice lens, it's useful to have a fast prime on a crop camera
i am now a tripfag for ease of identification
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233018
yeah go for it, you can't go wrong with the 50 1.8 at $80
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233020
meant to say fast normal prime
>> Anonymous
>>233007
>i didn't really get any good pics on this shoot

Fixed.
>> Anonymous
- the crop is too close on all of these.. take a few steps back and dont be afraid to turn your camera to a vertical frame.. the background dosent really add much with crops this close.

- greenish color cast in all of these.. fix it so she doesnt look weird.

- nice borkeh really keeps the attention on her ugly face.
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233031
i never tried to claim they were any good, just showing them
it wasn't really a shoot per se, more just that my girlfriend showed some interest in posing for me
>>233036
>dont be afraid to turn your camera to a vertical frame
yeah when i looked at the pic in>>233000i really wished i had done it in portrait orientation
>greenish color cast in all of these
it's called chlorophyll
the white balance looks fine to me
>nice borkeh really keeps the attention on her ugly face.
lolwut
>> Anonymous
PROTIP: use sRGB color space for web
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233048
thanks i'll remember that for next time
>> Anonymous
>>233012not to mention the much improved build quality, and the USM

not real USM, you get FTM but it's not any faster than the micro motor in the 1.8

and build quality is the same, except it has nicer plastic finish, the focus ring still sucks

the 85 and 28 are much better in build quality
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233061
it definitely feels more solid than my 1.8 and has a metal mount and focusing scale
i do agree with you that the 28 and 85 have much better build quality, the 85 feels like a tank
>> Anonymous
>>233044

i was giving you contstructive criticism.. i could have just said shitsux.. take my advice and get better or jsut leave it and continue w/ your snapshots.
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233068
i do appreciate your criticism, i was just responding to it
>> Anonymous
>>233068
Your advice is worthless, troll
>> beethy !vW/UaE6zYU
hmmm
maybe i should sell my 100mm and my 50mm and buy this one instead...
>> Anonymous
>>233224

you enjoy your snapshots too then.
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233229
can't hurt
>> beethy !vW/UaE6zYU
>>233280
can you post a close up macro shot taken with it?

i use my 50mm f/1.8 for portraits.. and my 100mm f/2.8 for close up macro stuff.
if the 85mm can do both pretty well i wouldn't have to keep switching.
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233288
it's not a macro lens, silly
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233288
although it is AMAZING for portraits
>> beethy !vW/UaE6zYU
     File :-(, x)
>>233295
so is the nifty fifty i think..
pic related.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 400D DIGITALCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsPhotographerunknownPhotographerunknownImage-Specific Properties:Image Width2580Image Height3880Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8Compression SchemeUncompressedPixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2007:08:28 22:31:58Exposure Time1/40 secF-Numberf/1.8Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/1.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePartialFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width648Image Height950RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233299
eh i still find it a little short, the 85mm on a crop is nearly equivalent to 135mm which is a classic portrait length
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233302
just did the math, it's equivalent to 136mm exactly
>> Anonymous
>>233302
>>233305
did you really need to use two posts to type 1.6/1.7/1.5 into a calculator?
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233334
yes.
>> Anonymous
>>2333341.7

what system is 1.7x
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
>>233356
sigma iirc
>> Anonymous
I've always heard 85-90mm (on 135, of course) as the "classic portrait length." Though against that, there's the 77mm Pentax designed to be The Perfect Portrait Lens (and it's not a digital lens) the 80 Summilux-R is IIUC meant primarily as a portrait lens and then there's the 105/2.5 Nikkor.

I personally favor that 85-90 range myself usually if I'm not using a normal, but there's times shorter or longer works better and they're all perfectly serviceable.
>> Your Friendly Dentist
     File :-(, x)
>>233000
Teeth cleaning and whitening.
That`ll be 500 bucks U.S.
P.S. Tell her I`m in love with her.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwarePaint Shop Pro Photo 12.01Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution96 dpiVertical Resolution96 dpiImage Created2008:08:14 01:15:29Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width1920Image Height1145
>> beethy !vW/UaE6zYU
>>233537
don't touch photoshop again
well, until you know how to use it
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
god damn.. here is how you fix this image

1) color correction on whole image.. removed green and brought back skin tones

2) color correction on teeth.. personal preference.. made them look more natural

3) brought down distracting highlights in sunglasses

didnt do any more b/c not really necessary.. already has enough saturation, contrast, and sharpness and isnt a commercial model shoot so retouching should be avoided

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsPhotographerJimmyMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:08:12 09:14:21Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePartialFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length85.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1200Image Height800RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>233299
so I heard that eyes should be in focus, not nose?
>> Your Friendly Dentist
     File :-(, x)
>>233571
No no no.....no. This is how you do it. Got rid of the glasses, flower, background tree. Gave her a Californian natural tan. This is how you do it. I also whitened her teeth more and brightened her eyes.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiCamera SoftwarePaint Shop Pro Photo 12.01PhotographerJimmyMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:08:14 05:32:25Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePartialFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length85.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1200Image Height800RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> else !L6xabslN96
>>233577
oh anon, you're so crazy.
>> Anonymous
Wow, it sure is dog-ugly in here!
>> Anonymous
>>233706
girl is cute, go back to your silicon porn stars
>> Anonymous
>>233775
Girl is ugly. Take a walk outside!
>> Anonymous
>>233781
so post better girls,.... wait they will run when see you with a camera
>> beethy !vW/UaE6zYU
>>233706
>>233784
Around this time.. /p/ is HUEG underage b&
>> Anonymous
>>233785

so post better b&.... wait they will HUEG when time you with around
>> beethy !vW/UaE6zYU
>>233793
i lol'd
hahahahahahah
>> Anonymous
nice horse. what do u feed it to get its teeth so white?
>> hekrob !NpuBFNCrvo
oh god what happened to my thread
i hate you /p/
>>233537
wtf did you do to her teeth
>>233573
eh i think it looked better before, the skin tone looks a little unnatural now and there's a lot less contrast, and the sunglasses thing also looks weird
>>233577
LOL WUT