It's a pretty great trick though, and we'd love to see your incredible works of art... feel free to link them below. Also, ironic that you're posting about shallow DOF and photographer hiding behind it on this thread, dedicated (mostly) to photographers whom are shooting their 105mm E wide open, which I believe yields a shallower depth of field than the 200mm.
glowhunter wrote:
You mean that lady who shoots gloomy looking kids backlit in a field? I'm not a fan of one trick wonder photographers to be honest. These bokeh monster lens are for people who don't know composition and rely on blurring bokeh to hide poor technique IMO.
glowhunter wrote:
You mean that lady who shoots gloomy looking kids backlit in a field? I'm not a fan of one trick wonder photographers to be honest. These bokeh monster lens are for people who don't know composition and rely on blurring bokeh to hide poor technique IMO.
If you want to put down other fellow members and photographers like this, I suggest doing it somewhere else, especially that your opinion was unsolicited and uncalled for.
glowhunter wrote:
You mean that lady who shoots gloomy looking kids backlit in a field? I'm not a fan of one trick wonder photographers to be honest. These bokeh monster lens are for people who don't know composition and rely on blurring bokeh to hide poor technique IMO.
How do you know he/she is just a "one trick photographer"? Have you seen all his/her other work? A lens that makes dreamy, creamy bokeh is not mutually exclusive of other attributes of the photo and it is just one aspect of photography that can be used as a tool just like many other aspects, including good composition, subject matter and lighting etc. Why you feel the need to discount that one particular aspect is beyond me.
glowhunter wrote:
You mean that lady who shoots gloomy looking kids backlit in a field? I'm not a fan of one trick wonder photographers to be honest. These bokeh monster lens are for people who don't know composition and rely on blurring bokeh to hide poor technique IMO.
Trust me, she knows a thing or two about composition and good techniques too And she certainly knows a whole lot about light and post-processing in Photoshop as well. But the only reason I mentioned her as an example was that she frequently posts here on FM, and most of her shots these days are taken with her 200/2 and I have observed noticeable improvement in her shots with that lens.
And I am sorry, but the main reason 200/2 costs as much as it does is its f/2 aperture @ 200mm leading to that creamy bokeh. So if you don't like "blurring bokeh", and prefer to shoot your outdoor portraits, say, at f/8 or something, there are far cheaper options out there for you!
hijazist wrote:
If you want to put down other fellow members and photographers like this, I suggest doing it somewhere else, especially that your opinion was unsolicited and uncalled for.
But other posters who attack me for expressing my opinion about overkill bokeh are fine here? lol okay boss.
Keiththom wrote:
I'd like to see some comparison shots between the 105 and the 200 with the same subjects. I'd like to see how much of a difference there actually is. I have neither but I'm defiantly lusting for either or both. But the 200 is out of my price range. I've seen enough shots with the 200 to see it's magic. But I keep this in mind: Anyone who slaps down $6000 for a lens is probably a very good photographer. They could get wow shots with a kit lens.
Give me a few days, i'll try to do some comparison shots.
Blakehfreeman wrote:
It's a pretty great trick though, and we'd love to see your incredible works of art... feel free to link them below. Also, ironic that you're posting about shallow DOF and photographer hiding behind it on this thread, dedicated (mostly) to photographers whom are shooting their 105mm E wide open, which I believe yields a shallower depth of field than the 200mm.
Is a food critic suppose to cook better than the chef he reviews? Of course not. Why are you so defensive? Did I insult your mother or something? Someone mentioned her name, I said I wasn't a fan of her style and of overkill bokeh and somehow you're insulted? l don't get it.
Almost all of your posts are rude or overly critical. I'm moving on. Have fun being angry on the web. Most here are here for a positive atmosphere. Dpreview is free to join ps.
glowhunter wrote:
But other posters who attack me for expressing my opinion about overkill bokeh are fine here? lol okay boss.
"Posters who attacked you"?!! I highly suggest you read your post history and try to see for yourself the number of people you've offended in the span of less than 6 months that you've been here on the forum.
And btw, didn't you comment this on one of her threads? "amazing series. Were these taken with your 200mm f/2?", and in another thread of hers you said "absolutely beautiful!"? And you also mentioned that "love your photos! I've been a long time follower of your IG"?!
Yet you're not "a fan of her style and of overkill bokeh", and she's a "one trick wonder photographers"?
hijazist wrote:
"Posters who attacked you"?!! I highly suggest you read your post history and try to see for yourself the number of people you've offended in the span of less than 6 months that you've been here on the forum.
And btw, didn't you comment this on one of her threads? "amazing series. Were these taken with your 200mm f/2?", and in another thread of hers you said "absolutely beautiful!"?
Yet you're not "a fan of her style and of overkill bokeh"?
hijazist wrote:
"Posters who attacked you"?!! I highly suggest you read your post history and try to see for yourself the number of people you've offended in the span of less than 6 months that you've been here on the forum.
And btw, didn't you comment this on one of her threads? "amazing series. Were these taken with your 200mm f/2?", and in another thread of hers you said "absolutely beautiful!"? And you also mentioned that "love your photos! I've been a long time follower of your IG"?!
Yet you're not "a fan of her style and of overkill bokeh", and she's a "one trick wonder photographers"?
hijazist wrote:
"Posters who attacked you"?!! I highly suggest you read your post history and try to see for yourself the number of people you've offended in the span of less than 6 months that you've been here on the forum.
And btw, didn't you comment this on one of her threads? "amazing series. Were these taken with your 200mm f/2?", and in another thread of hers you said "absolutely beautiful!"? And you also mentioned that "love your photos! I've been a long time follower of your IG"?!
Yet you're not "a fan of her style and of overkill bokeh", and she's a "one trick wonder photographers"?
lol. I love how you took the time to comb through all of my posts. It makes me feel special. Yup, I WAS a fan of her work until I realized how one dimensional she is. I WAS a fan of the 200 f/2, I bought into the hype of this "magical" lens, until I realized people use bokeh as a crutch to hide poor technique. You and your meme posting cheerleaders are hilarious. They don't say a peep to me except for posting memes.
glowhunter wrote:
lol. I love how you took the time to comb through all of my posts. It makes me feel special. Yup, I WAS a fan of her work until I realized how one dimensional she is. I WAS a fan of the 200 f/2, I bought into the hype of this "magical" lens, until I realized people use bokeh as a crutch to hide poor technique. You and your meme posting cheerleaders are hilarious. They don't say a peep to me except for posting memes.
And she certainly knows a whole lot about light and post-processing in Photoshop as well. But the only reason I mentioned her as an example was that she frequently posts here on FM, and most of her shots these days are taken with her 200/2 and I have observed noticeable improvement in her shots with that lens. 
