On 4/10/2015 1:50 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
Unilenses usually aren't f2.8
Am I missing something, or is this a non-sequitur?
The lens mentioned is 24-135/3.5-5.6, @ 59 mm, so probably f4.5 or so. And the
shot is at f8.
What does f2.8 have to do with anything? Or are you using some backward way to
say it IS a unilens?
Without Direction Moose
On Apr 10, 2015 3:02 PM, "Chuck Norcutt" <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I didn't buy them for portraits as that's something I rarely do anymore.
The last photo I took that I'd call a formal portrait is here <
http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=16948> It's a couple of
friends from almost 2 years ago. Canon 5D but with Tamron 24-135 at 59mm.
Is that what you call a "uni-lens". Looks OK to me. :-)
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|