onegreatcity wrote:
Peter, I won't get sucked into the tail chasing about 3D this or that. However - when I look at your last picture shot with the 200 f/1.8 - I am prepared to do very bad things to get my hands on that lens!!
Cam, but you know that your wife would do you in if you bought that lens.
onegreatcity wrote:
It would be worth it. Besides, I would blame you. Again.
My wife forced me to sell my backup 200 f/1.8 last year. Lucky Larry got it.
If I sold my last baby now, then I might as well do myself in, nothing left to live for.
Peter, thank you, the 200 preformed quite well, I really like both versions of the shot, the glistening dew on the tree branches in the 2nd shot really kick the image up
I just checked eBay and there are four 200 f1.8Ls up for sale, one at $2700, $3500 and $3900...$4700!
Jerry
I didnt try to achieve 3D, just "non-flat" look. Pardon burned out sky, CCDs have limited DR and high contrast pics are hard to make. Especially when its ancient camera (non Canon, sorry).
Snap from my friend, I just processed pic (she wanted her to be "smoothed" eh, well). Non-Canon too.. sorry. Seems tiny bit 3D to me. Or simply non-flat.
I dont call most pics 3D, just "non-flat" which is usually highly desirable and difference between photographer and compact camera snapper (I mean average point and shoot users, not ppl using Leica X2 and such).
Hope you dont mind those non-Canon pics. If you do, then Im sorry..
StillFingerz wrote:
Peter, thank you, the 200 preformed quite well, I really like both versions of the shot, the glistening dew on the tree branches in the 2nd shot really kick the image up
I just checked eBay and there are four 200 f1.8Ls up for sale, one at $2700, $3500 and $3900...$4700!
Jerry
Jerry, IMO a good 200 f/1.8 with trustworthy condition and performance description, should fetch something like $3,500 (EX) to $4,000 (LN).
PetKal wrote:
Looking good, Mescalamba.I am curious about that "Yogi" tea brand...what is it ?
Thank you, I forgot to write that your 200mm f1.8 shot is pretty incredible.. (typical me, thinking one thing, writing another, forgetting another..).
Heh, nice deduction that its tea.. Well its not brand of tea, I guess its our Czech invention, its just name for a tea drink. Original is called spice tea or masala chai. Its mixture of ginger, cinnamon, cloves, cardamom and black or white pepper. Which is added into boiling water and boiled for about 10-20 min (depends on taste), then its poured on black tea (indian assam usually) and left for 3-5 mins (as regular tea). Then simple filter it as regular tea and add sugger and milk according to taste. Its great when its cold outside. Nicely warms up.
Another hardcore variant is to boil it together with tea, which gives pretty "boosting" up beverage. And possible heart attack.
Our recipe is probably not identical to indian one..
I didnt try to achieve 3D, just "non-flat" look. Pardon burned out sky, CCDs have limited DR and high contrast pics are hard to make. Especially when its ancient camera (non Canon, sorry).
Snap from my friend, I just processed pic (she wanted her to be "smoothed" eh, well). Non-Canon too.. sorry. Seems tiny bit 3D to me. Or simply non-flat.
I dont call most pics 3D, just "non-flat" which is usually highly desirable and difference between photographer and compact camera snapper (I mean average point and shoot users, not ppl using Leica X2 and such).
Hope you dont mind those non-Canon pics. If you do, then Im sorry.....Show more →
PetKal wrote:
John I was just kidding, I knew which Rafaele you meant, and I agree with you there.
Following Jerry's request, this morning I went back to the same place with 200 f/1.8 where I shot my first OP picture, and tried to do a similar framing to what was done with 50 f/1.0 yesterday.
Lucky Larry got it.
