Lazy Puppy

[kandyredcoi]

took these 2 pics today with my 5d2 and my 50/1.8

Lazy Puppy

shutter: 40
ap: 1.8
iso: 320
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/fluxmr2spyder/my%20puppies/IMG_0486.jpg

shutter: 40
ap: 1.8
iso: 250
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/fluxmr2spyder/my%20puppies/IMG_0487.jpg

please CC

thank you!!!

[joedlh]

There's a puppy in #1?

This is a great illustration of the narrow depth of field to be expected at f/1.8 with a 35mm sensor and no white balancing under tungsten light. Was this your intention?

I hereby announce that heretofore I will no longer use the term "full frame", which implies that any sensor less than 35 mm on the long side is less than, well, full.

[Flo]

White Balance is really off....and the DOF in the second is just odd?

[Sisyphus]

Apart from the WB issue, #1 tells a story and I like the photo. #2, not so much -- here, the blurry ball seems to be simply a distraction outside the focus range.

[Titus213]

I agree with Sisyphus (you know he HAD to be from Eugene:D) with the slight exception that the DOF is a bit too stark in #1. A little less would have more clearly defined the dog. Good idea and fairly well executed.

#2 looks to have had DOF manipulated in Photoshop.

[kandyredcoi]

thanx peeps, soon as i posted, i figured the WB was off, the cam was set at AWB rather then TUNGSTEN...im such a dud :(

and just to add none of the pics were photoshopped