Yep. I'm looking at those and realizing that there is a percentage of "more
gooder" that I could get with a few more stops and theoretically purer
glass. Then I realize that since I'm not getting paid like a pro to get
these shots, the percentage of "more gooder" does not justify the
percentage of "more expensiver" in addition to the "I have it now, instead
of possibly next summer, maybe."
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Chuck Norcutt <
chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Unfortunately, one stop more for that 45-150/4.0-5.6 ain't in the cards
> since it was mostly already wide open. That's the price of right thinking
> to protect the wallet. Besides, the other pro thing is still vaporware.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
>
> On 8/29/2014 2:50 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
>
>> Not shabby at all. Personally, I would prefer one-stop less ISO for
>> noise control, and one-stop greater F-stop for softening the
>> distractions of the background a bit.
>>
>> But, it's still not bad for a tosser lens.
>>
>>
>> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
Paul Braun
Certified Music Junkie
"Music washes from the soul the dust of everyday life." -- Berthold Auerbach
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|