lol now that i know that, it just looks like it was a car meet or something as a daily driver. I mean, living in SoCal, do you have any idea how many non paint matching, missing headlight, etc. cars there are out here? Sometimes they travel in packs if you're going through the right neighborhood! (like Santa Ana or something)

eitherway, i'd drive one too. i was considering buying Mike Ma's track miata back in the day

 

actually the wing isn't useless. air still passes over it and gives it down force to keep the rear wheels in traction. Rado has a video somewhere of his tC loosing the wing and then his car loses traction cause of it.

 

FROG! HAHA

looks like Herbie the Lovebug's adopted cousin!

 

can someone please explain what the difference would be between a 50mm f/1.8D lens and shooting the 18-55mm kit lens at 50mm?

i was doing some research and many ppl suggested a the 50mm lens... is it just an aperture difference?

 

I have to say goodbye to my 50 1.8

It's okay, it'll be in Ro_Ja's hands. & I'll probably rebuy it soon.

 

The 18-55 lens makes a tube when you have it out at 50mm, so you can not got get as low of an f/stop.

For that low of a mm it is not as much of a problem as it would be using an 18-200 lens.

 

dp

 

I have the 18-55 is and the 50mm 1.8

the 18-55 at 50mm will have an f stop of 5.6
while the 50mm 1.8 will have an f stop of 1.8

the wider aperture will result with the ability to use a faster shutter speed, fast enough to stop motion. However widening the aperture will also lower your depth of field which means less of the picture will be in focus.

when taking in door shots you can not stop motion in low light conditions with 5.6. You can however with 1.8.

optically the 50 1.8 is substantially sharper than the 18-55 by a very large margin.
both of them have noisy AF and front focusing element, this is a pain in the butt for polarizer users.

so the 1.8 will give you more shallow depth of field and a far superior bokeh.

the biggest difference however is image quality. the 1.8 being a prime tops the 18 55 in terms of sharpness and balance of colors by a very very very large margin, the 1.8 also AF faster than the 18 55 lens.

you can get away using the 1.8 for serious work simply because the results yielded by the lens is similar to higher end lenses. while the pictures of the 18 55 flat out looks like a freebee kit lens.

honestly me personally I never use the 18-55 for any focal length other than 18mm for the wide angle effect. I use my other telephoto lens for my zooming needs.

 

Ahhh, I need to go to B&H sometime this week, I leave Friday . I'll be in Paris for about 7 hours, so I might have a little time to snap a few photos.

 

theyre both the same focal length, both will capture the same amount of objects in the viewfinder.

however quality of picture will be different, if you are comparing prime vs telephoto, quality of glass and depth of field will be different depending on the f stop.

 

Okay, I wasn't sure if it was actually wider or something or if it was a lens that was designed for one specific thing. I'm not entirely sure what I'm going to get, I'll definitely pick up a new bag (current one is at max capacity with camera + 3 lenses), a new flash, filters and probably one or two lenses. I'll be bringing in an extra $6,000 from this trip so I can easily justify blowing a grand on a lens lol.

 

if you're willing to spend $1k on a lens, for travel tourist type shooting may I suggest you look into the 70-200mm f4L IS USM. They go for about a grand and it's supposedly sharper than its 2.8L counter part because it has recently updated optics unlike the 2.8. The f4 version is also lighter and smaller than its 2.8 brother also. thats if you plan on doing a lot of outdoor shooting where 2.8 doesnt matter. indoor shooting with these focal lengths on a cropped sensor may be a bit much however. make sure you get familiar with these focal lengths so you know if they are for you.

some lenses I would recommend around that price point would be

70-200mm f4L IS USM roughly 1k
70-200mm f4L USM roughly (non-is) 600
70-200mm f2.8L roughly(non-is) 1k-1.1k

70-300mm f4 IS USM (non L, but has IS) this one is a slow lens because the aperture narrows as you zoom in, as opposed to L lenses that have fixed apertures regardless of focal length used. this lens sells for roughly $600.

however keep in mind that if you are using a cropped sensor make sure these focal lengths will work for you. Personally I think they are fantastic on a cropped sensor for travel photography.

 

Thanks, I'll take a look at those. I'm going to B&H before I leave, so I'll definitely be able to play around with a bunch of lenses.

Also, I probably should have mentioned...I shoot with a Nikon. Just realized those lenses are for Canon.

 

ah nevermind haha. which nikon? sorry Im not familiar with the nikon lenses.

 

i dont quite understand the whole tube thing what do these do for the camera, i know they magnify the shot but are they worth it?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc....html#features

 

They basically amplify the zoom, whether it's a 1.4x, 1.7x, or 2.0x (could be other variables). They're a cheaper way to get more zoom power basically, and with that cheaper cost, you lose quality. Plus they knock down the maximum aperture by a couple stops (depending on which one). A co-worker uses a teleconverter and he loves it.

 

[/img]

 

eos squad?

can i start the D-Boys?

For our Nikon D-series users?


i feel left out

 

I second the D-Boys :D

 

Nikonians/D-Boys/D-Squad I'm down with whatever. Nikon ftw.