<<Perhaps you missed my post "How Wide is Wide?" (repeated below the double
line)
<<and the subsequent thread?
Yes, but that has been remedied. You make a compelling extremely well
illustrated case for ultrawides.
<<<LR (Mike, get with it and load the gallery!) saith I took 480 shots with the
Tammy 17-35 @ 17 mm on 5D.
Done!!! on one system at least, 2nd system tomorrow. Took day off after all
the sad commotion and scrambling to tie up loose ends for final time. :-(
I don't know how to search by lens yet either.
<<<Finally, the cover shot for my book "Mount Desert Island and Acadia National
Park"
<http://galleries.moosemystic.net/MooseFoto/index.php?gallery=Travel/NorthEast_2009/MtDesert/Misc&image=_MG_7928n.jpg>
I remember and love that shot. Well done.
The interior shots demonstrate utility of ultrawides. I was surprised that the
defished fishies were insufficient.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Lenses/Heliar%2010-56/HWAoV.htm>
I fully realize this is just an AOV illustration but one can see how it takes
compositional skill to use these UW's well. Anything close on the sides gets
"the stretches" from volume anamorphosis --most of the time I don't like that
look.
The other thing is the lens is just a couple stops too slow for astro for my
sonnie cam at least. It is a very nice lens for what it is however.
Need to up game for UWA's, Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
