Jump to content

Mozikillah

Member
  • Posts

    245
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Mozikillah

  1. Moz,

    Reading your signature line, it sounds as if you have been bitten by the photography bug.

    If you think your interest will survive it will always be a good investment having a collection of prime lenses.

    Apart from generally being faster , sharper and having larger apertures available they will also force you to think more about composition and your positioning.

    If your just after happy snaps its a different ballgame.

    I quite like using the 105 F2.8 Nikkor.

    Cheers

    My intrest will survive as long as i graduate from Com/Arts Advert faculty @ ABAC.. :o

  2. I'd go for the 50mm 1.8 .

    You'll probably get a lot less 'keepers' with that f4 zoom unless you shoot on brite days or use flash.

    From Dr Peter Jones MD. FRPS.

    I am a Medical Doctor and Anatomist.

    Using anything less than 100 mm, causes distortion of the physiogomy (specifically and especially

    the nose!)

    You cant be serious.. :o

  3. Used primarily for portraits..!?

    And to those who has the 50mm 1.8, is it too much trouble to manually focus, since i have a D40x??

    The other one is the 55-200mm VR, the aperture isnt spectacular, as it's f4-f5.6, but as its a telephoto, It would be able to produce considerably shallower depth of field than the 18-55 kit lens that came with my D40x..

    Which lens would be better for good, shallow depth of field for portraits..? ! :o

    Thanks,

    Simon

×
×
  • Create New...