Comments: 33
palleas [2008-09-09 09:53:54 +0000 UTC]
love the eyes, love the framing, love the dof. It's ture that the un-even make up below the eyes is weird, but what struck me more was the mouth. Somehow it's weird, but I don't know why...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
palleas In reply to walker1812 [2008-09-09 10:09:07 +0000 UTC]
well, maybe, but I like to think I'm not that childish ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
DiomedesZX [2008-09-08 19:14:39 +0000 UTC]
50 mm, 2.0? Really? Hmmm.... Gorgeous shot.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
walker1812 In reply to DiomedesZX [2008-09-08 22:12:30 +0000 UTC]
thanks... it's a f/1.4 prime 50mm one of my favorite lenses.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
palleas In reply to walker1812 [2008-09-09 09:51:59 +0000 UTC]
one of my next purchase!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
walker1812 In reply to palleas [2008-09-09 09:54:23 +0000 UTC]
I recommend it...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
palleas In reply to walker1812 [2008-09-09 09:54:44 +0000 UTC]
well, you don't have to convince me, just my bank account ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
walker1812 In reply to palleas [2008-09-09 09:56:28 +0000 UTC]
hmm, well it is pricey... you could get the f/1.6 or the f/1.8 but well that f/1.4 is great... the glass is so sharp... try them out.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
palleas In reply to walker1812 [2008-09-09 10:07:58 +0000 UTC]
It's actually not that expensive for a good lens. Well I'm talking about the sony lens. The only thing I'm worried about is its optical resolution...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
walker1812 In reply to palleas [2008-09-09 10:09:27 +0000 UTC]
ok, explain 'optical resolution' to me again? I can define the two words separately but together my mind isn't working... but then it is really early here. lol
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
palleas In reply to walker1812 [2008-09-09 10:20:22 +0000 UTC]
well, the actual resolving power of the lens, idependantly on the sensor you put behind. It's usually defined in angle : what angle has got to be in between to objects for the lens to be able to make two seperates images of these objects. What I actually would love to have is a MTF curve, but I can't find it, yet. Found one for a 50mm F1.4 canon and another for the sigma lens, but not for the sony lens :/
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
walker1812 In reply to palleas [2008-09-09 11:41:39 +0000 UTC]
i think i need to go learn more... damn... i just take pictures. lol.... but i do like my f/1.4
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
palleas In reply to walker1812 [2008-09-09 11:47:17 +0000 UTC]
I don't think you need to learn more. The point is just, for example : on the kit lens I have, when I watch the picture at 100% size, at pixel level, it's blurred a bit, and that's probably due to the resolution of the lens. I just want lenses that are better than the sensor ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
palleas In reply to walker1812 [2008-09-09 13:12:54 +0000 UTC]
hey! you're the one who got me envious ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
walker1812 In reply to palleas [2008-09-10 02:02:12 +0000 UTC]
You are cruel lol
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
palleas In reply to walker1812 [2008-09-10 08:39:36 +0000 UTC]
I know I know ^^
but well, YOU have the lens, so who's taunting who indeed ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
walker1812 In reply to palleas [2008-09-10 08:41:04 +0000 UTC]
well, next time we hang out I'll lend it to you...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
palleas In reply to walker1812 [2008-09-09 13:32:21 +0000 UTC]
well it's good, for the resolution will not be so very good at 1.4 ^^
I reckon the best resolution you'll get will be around f/4
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
walker1812 In reply to palleas [2008-09-10 02:02:25 +0000 UTC]
I'll try it...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
mleitner [2008-09-07 14:27:05 +0000 UTC]
I really like this one. The makeup under her eyes is uneven, but that's the MUA's fault. Awesome shot. Really.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
walker1812 In reply to mleitner [2008-09-07 15:09:27 +0000 UTC]
not my favorite MUA but the one that was given to me... she does pretty good hair though
👍: 0 ⏩: 1