James Burden wrote:
Well.......It's only been half a day but I'm leaning toward the 35......the 24 is as you know a freaky good lens but I also have the 14-24....there would be too much cash tied up in both so the 24 might go to the B&S. I also have a Fuji X100 on pre-order so that focal length would be covered again......I don't know. 35mm is just a nice all around focal length for me.
Isn't the X100 a 35mm equivalent (i.e., 23mm DX format)? Seems like the 24 1.4 would make more sense to keep if you're gonna have the X100.
Zaitz wrote:
Great shot corposant. Did you try any long exposures there?
Thanks - I have a series up on the Landscape forum that illustrates how quickly the weather/clouds were changing, so I think some LE work would have either been amazing or just strange. I plan on going back a few more times this winter with some different equipment (and a heavier jacket), so if it's in the cards, I'll show it here.
Thank you! I had been wanting to capture that warm desk lamp light and finally got around to it. Not the composition I had in mind since I don't have a 35mm but I made do.
How do you like the 24? I think that would a really fun lens to use. Very unique combo of attributes.
Nikon D300s + 135mm f/2 DC using the defocus control fully on R at f/2. Combined with a masked shot of just the sharp parts of the flower at f/3.2 with DC neutral. Lit with 2 Vivitar 285hv flashes.
How do you like the 24? I think that would a really fun lens to use. Very unique combo of attributes.
It's beautiful. I had an ideal situation to use it yesterday, and it worked out well. It remains the last thing I very much want to acquire. I'd like to get a 14/2.8, but the Sigma version is readily available and is also rather inexpensive. The 24/1.4 is out of my reach for the time being. The only other lens I'd like to acquire is a macro, probably the Tokina 100/2.8.
The 24/1.4 is many levels above either one for me, though.