Upload & Sell: Off
| p.3 #10 · What's your fantasy purchase? |
Looks like you're not favouring one over the other. Do you use the 200/2, got any sample pics?
I've never heard someone say that 600mm is optimal for portraits. Hard to interact with your subjects when they're 200 metres away, lol.
sorry it should read as i would never buy 70-200
600mm is perfect for full body portraits. It lets you pick background even if you are shooting in cluttered city, is very flattering for almost all body types (rotating 1° removes 20kg of weight, extend lengs for 10cm, reduces butt size for two steps,...) and the distance also helps for PP, because hard contrast transitions stay there (eylashes, hairs towards background, clothes) but low contrast not that much (skin blemishes). It is a little easier to PP later. Also you never hit sun in frame unless you really do everything for to have it there, same for clouds. You can pick one lonely dramatically lit cloud and make it matter.
as for disadvantages, thats what walkie talkies are for. i have one on loud modus velcroed to light stand
if they sit or stay on same place (what they should anyway because of light) you can remote your camera and sit next to them interact eye to eye. not with some 120cm black hole stuck in their face.
nuff said that since i started to use MF again, my 500 i used so often lays in the cellar and is so sad that it wont speak to anyone.
Edited on Nov 26, 2012 at 02:37 PM · View previous versions