File :-(, x, )
heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
My mind is currently in the process of being blown. This lens is enabling all sorts of shots that would've been impossible to me before.

More night photography to follow, I just had to share this first photo of the night... I never thought I'd be shooting by the light of a single bic.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 5DImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:07:20 14:59:14Exposure Time1/60 secExposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
Why do you always have to mention gear in your threads?
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>226924
lol

Nice shot heavyweather, is that the 35 1.4?
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
or 50 1.2?
>> Anonymous
>>226924
why do you care so god damn much, just dont read it.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>>226924
Well, because for these shots, they'd be impossible without the absurd f/1.2 aperture.
>>226926
50 1.2. I used the 35 for part of the night, but I really prefer the 50... it's slightly easier to focus because of the brighter viewfinder, and I just love the perspective.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 5DImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:07:20 15:24:37Exposure Time1/80 secExposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1250Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> M?e?e?s?e??? !iZn5BCIpug
Why do they call him heavyweather? Cus he's fat :3.
>> Anonymous
Nice, your photos are still poop tough.
Look at the bright side tough, at bleat you got yourself a new lens!
>> Anonymous
>>226934
least*
>> Anonymous
what did you use to take these shots
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
We smoked out and looked at Teen Peoples from the 90s and like, early 00's... so funny to see how much things have changed. OH BEN AFFLECK YOU HEARTTHROB, I CAN'T WAIT FOR PEARL HARBOR

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 5DImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:07:20 15:41:08Exposure Time1/125 secExposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating400Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>>226937
This feels like a troll post, but I'll bite in case it's genuine curiosity. Canon 5D with a Nikon 50mm f/1.2 Ai-S mounted via an adaptor ring from fotodiox.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>226948
no af? (not a troll)
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>>226953
Nope, just buttery smooth manual focus. It was impossible to focus without the EE-S screen though. Now it's a cinch.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
OK say it was my birthday yesterday and my grandmother has just given me 750 bucks!
my dad convinced her to because she helped my brother with car repairs.
im going to get a lens, hoping for a fast lens or atleast faster than 3.4
i have an e-510 anyone have any suggestions for good lenses? they dont HAVE to be fast but it would be nice. ive only looked in to the 25mm pancake because ive been wanting it for a while but now that i have money im not sure if i should go for it or something a bit more pricey.....

and since someone will be asking "what kind of photography work will you be doing" or something so il just say now. i do alot of panos if i do any landscape stuff, but i like doing portraits the most.

any help will be much appreciated but i dont know if il get help or just trolls.

pic unrelated
>> Anonymous
I'm newer on this board, but by god, heavyweather, you've inspired me to save up for an f/~1.5 lens. GOOD GOD those pictures are good.
>> beethy !vW/UaE6zYU
>>226922
>>226948
>>226959
fucking awesome
how much did the lens cost you?
>> Anonymous
Of course, if you had an EF 50mm F1 or F1.2, you wouldnt give it half the blowjob you give this other lens that produces shit disgusting distracting bokeh.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>>227065
Do it dude, fast lenses are hella fun.
>>227066
$400 on KEH.com. There's one for like $340 on KEH as we speak, and it's the AI version (which is the one I originally wanted) which has a slightly longer focus throw.
>>227068
The Nikkor is definitely an inferior, older optical design, but I'm rather charmed by its faults. Swirly bokeh, heavy falloff, coma, glowy edges... fuckin' bring it on, I love it. It produces images with character.

This isn't to say I wouldn't kill for the 50L, it's fabulous, but it just doesn't make economic sense for me.

Oh wait... NIKKOR > CANNON LOLOLOLOL. Is that what you wanted me to say?
>> Anonymous
Frankly, you can trust Nikon gear. The same goes for high end Canon gear. It's reliable. It's sturdy. It will take the abuse that goes with professional rigors. You can pick up a Nikon every day, and use it, just like you use a tool. Hell, you can drive nails with old Nikons. That's the quality we're talking about here.

When you make your livelihood, you don't choose the brand that offers an equivalent, even similar system, you choose the brand that is a trustworthy and time-tested tool. Thus, Nikon. There are always distinctions to be made between Nikon and Canon, but I've often heard this statement, and I believe it: Canons are the best cameras made by engineers, but Nikons are the best cameras made by photographers. It's a generalization, but that feels very true to me.
>> Anonymous
>>227065

enjoy not being able to manual focus worth a dick on your 400D or whatever. BUT AT LEAST UR SO INSPIRED XDXDXD
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>227070
I stand by it, dude. My 5D produces killer images, but the actual operation of the camera is bass-ackwards terrible. I have to overcome Canon's shoddy design decisions. Fortunately, using all manual lenses means I don't have to fuss with most of the controls.

That said, the camera really doesn't matter at the end of the day, only the images you bring home. So I deal.

The 5D's just the cheapest full-frame sensor, and the only one I can afford. I would do things I'm not proud of for a D3 or D700.
>> Anonymous
>>227069

$340 for "bargain" glass. No thanks.
>> Anonymous
>>227070
delicious pasta
>> Anonymous
>>227075
Ever bought "bargain" anything from KEH? It's better than Adorama and B&H's Excellent+ grades.

Besides, good luck finding another one of those lenses for cheaper.
>> Anonymous
You're shooting at 1600 ISO. Did you do that or is it on program or auto. It ain't the lens that lets you shoot by Bic, it's the speed
>> Anonymous
>>227075
KEH is famous for being ridiculously conservative with their ratings. One can buy "bargain" from them with no problems.

(In before, "Frankly, you can trust KEH bargain..." or whatever.)

>>227069
Are there any optical/coatings/other differences between the two?
>> Anonymous
>>227093

you're right.. lens aperture has nothing to do with shutter speed.

please step up and claim your nobel prize
>> Anonymous
>>227074

I've used both Canon and Nikon.. both control schemes have things that are better and worse than the other.

for example, having to hold down buttons and spin the dial at the same time on the nikon bodies pisses me off.. i prefer canon's push, turn, push again (or press the shutter release halfway)

also, anyone who has anything to say about canon's control scheme obviously hasnt used a 40D.
>> Anonymous
>>227069

why did you get the Ai-S instead?
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>227075
My is BGN condition as well, and like they said, it's completely flawless. It has some paint wearing, but who gives a fuck? The glass is perfect and unmarred. Everything I've bought from them has been BGN, and no complaints here.

>>227093
It's a clean, detail-rich ISO 1600, which certainly helps, but there's no way I could've gotten this even with an f/1.8. f/1.2 is otherworldly.

>>227095
Not to my knowledge. Mir says no.
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/50mmnikkor/index6.htm

I read about the focus-throw thing somewhere on flickr, I can only assume it's true.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>227099
They sold out of the AI one, and I didn't want to wait. Plus, there's nothing -wrong- with the AI-S version, and I was more likely to get a newer lens that way. But given a choice between the two, I would still go with the AI lens.
>> Anonymous
>>227100
>>227069

Apologies in advance for the immensely newfag question, but what do you mean by "focus throw" exactly?
>> Anonymous
Heavyweather - Descending the /p/ tripfag tier list one post at a time.
>> Anonymous
>>227104

are you the one with a library of quotes from various tripfags? you know, the butthurt kid with little to no life?
>> Anonymous
>>227105

>butthurt

gb2 ED
>> Butterfy !xlgRMYva6s
>>227103
One would assume that it is the travel of the focus ring and its relation as to how far the focus moves given the distance turned on the ring.

A short one would enable you to change focus distance very quickly but not have very fine control over the actual value, and so the opposite on a long throw.


Also, this is just a gearthread with photos >_>
>> Anonymous
>>227073
Fuck you, you fucking pessimist.
>> Anonymous
>>227115

dSLRs just weren't made for manual focus.. also the EE-S screen loses brightness in the viewfinder

in short, use autofocus god damn.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>>227126
Actually, it gains brightness when using lenses faster than f/2.8. The stock viewing screen doesn't get any brighter than 2.8, but this one definitely appreciably brightens all the way to f/1.2. I mean, it's bright enough to focus in pitch darkness. I think you start losing like a stop or so after f/4 or maybe f/5.6, but if you're working wide open, you definitely see an increase in brightness.

As for autofocus, would if I could. But this way, I'm getting superfast primes on the cheap, rather than paying a grand or more per L prime. Fuck that noise.
>> Anonymous
>>227140
>L prime. Fuck that noise.
>USM ring motor L prime
>noise

Your brandfaggotry seems to have no end.
>> Anonymous
>>227142

you're a dumbass honky.. he didn't mean literal noise. gb2/amurikanrocknroll/
>> Anonymous
>>227148
gb2/b/ 0/10
>> Captain Assgiblets
Too bad your photographs still suck shit.
>> Anonymous
Christ, fags. If you have nothing to contribute, don't post.
>> Anonymous
>>227065
>I'm newer on this board, but by god, heavyweather, you've inspired me to save up for an f/~1.5 lens. GOOD GOD those pictures are good.

obviously heavywanker posting as anon
>> Anonymous
>>227155
Nope.
>> Anonymous
>>227157
>Nope.

oh ok heavywanker i believe u now
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>>227161
No, he's right. Because my ego is just that fragile? C'mon dude.

Oh, and yeah, "fuck that noise" is just an expression. I'm well aware that the lenses are silent as the grave.
>> Anonymous
Heavyweather, your alter-ego here lol
To get back on topic, how much does a lens like that go for? (50 1.2) And where's the best place to get it?
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>227181
hahaha oh wow
>> Anonymous
>>227184
Kidding. I'm kidding.

But srsly, how much do those lenses go for?
>> Anonymous
>>227189

hurrrdurrr
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>227189
You'll not get me so easily, Bond!

But in case you're genuinely not trolling, sigh...
>>227069
>> Anonymous
>>227193
Oh. Right. Now I feel stupid.
>> Anonymous
lol, these photos suck shit.

Stop taking pictures, fatass :3