Kasrielle Goldmember  More info | Jan 24, 2012 13:41 | #1 I've moved to the 5Dll from my 50D, and am trying to decide which UWA to go with. I know the 17-40 will work fine for landscapes, since I'll be stopped down to f/8 or smaller. But what about shooting the milky way? Or (if I'm lucky) the Aurora Borealis? For long exposures at higher ISO will I need the extra stop to 2.8? I have stacking software... I'm just trying to decide if the extra cost of the 16-35ll is worth it... Can I get away with f/4?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jan 25, 2012 18:10 | #3 Yes, what he said. Gripped 7D, gripped, full-spectrum modfied T1i (500D), SX50HS, A2E film body, Tamzooka (150-600), Tamron 90mm/2.8 VC (ver 2), Tamron 18-270 VC, Canon FD 100 f/4.0 macro, Canon 24-105 f/4L,Canon EF 200 f/2.8LII, Canon 85 f/1.8, Tamron Adaptall 2 90mmf/2.5 Macro, Tokina 11-16, Canon EX-430 flash, Vivitar DF-383 flash, Astro-Tech AT6RC and Celestron NexStar 102 GT telescopes, various other semi-crappy manual lenses and stuff.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jan 25, 2012 19:58 | #4 Thanks - I appreciate it!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is semonsters 1468 guests, 133 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
