Red-Ringed Tupperware Party with (ineffective) Tin Foil Hats (2)

Permagrin wrote in post #3846771
I've never heard that it was...but here's a link with a review...if it has flare trouble, you can be sure this guy will point it out (he's very harsh on non-L lenses)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …-1.8-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

Good That's an excellent site BTW. When I first bought my 350D, I had my eyes on the double zoom kit with the 18-55 and 55-200 lenses. After reading @ the-digital-picture.com about the 55-200, I decided to go with the normal kit. And I'm very happy I did

puddlepirate44 wrote in post #3846773
I've never noticed any flare on my 85, and I've taken it out on some pretty harsh lighting. It seemed to perform quite well, no matter what I did. Of course, any lens will flare if shooting in the direction of the sun or bright light, but I've not seen any propensity for lens flare with this particular copy. Great lens.

Thanks. Looking through the shots from our wedding (which was mostly shot with a 85mm without hood), I couldn't find one shot with flare in it. Still good to get the hood to protect the lens though

Zilly wrote in post #3846777
download one of the paper templates you can get and print a couple off and take me with you

Hmm, I've never really been into paper hoods, but thanks for the tip

fi20100 wrote in post #3846822
Hmm, I've never really been into paper hoods, but thanks for the tip

there not ideal but thell do the job better than non at all

Fi, if you are really worried about protecting the lens, you can pick up a UV filter for not very much $ I'm not a uv filter fan but they do protect the lens if you need them to...

Zilly wrote in post #3846825
there not ideal but thell do the job better than non at all

True... should be some black, non-reflective paper then?

yep thick as well

Permagrin wrote in post #3846830
Fi, if you are really worried about protecting the lens, you can pick up a UV filter for not very much $ I'm not a uv filter fan but they do protect the lens if you need them to...

Already have a B+W UV MRC filter on it Picked that up even before I bought the lens LOL... I also picked up a B+W Density 64X filter for it, hoping to get to experiment with that soon.

Permagrin wrote in post #3846774
oh, maybe you should wait...last time I was going to dump a "crap load" of shots, Cat told me to wait for a few days and review them again...I actually found a few I liked when I did that...

I've been waiting to do this for a couple months.

Permagrin wrote in post #3846813
just for fun, I found a couple of PIT shots I don't think you guys have seen...

being a tree pusher (not hugger)

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

and taking "quality photos"

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

I still think a blog is in order.

wu_wei0 wrote in post #3846903
I still think a blog is in order.

seconded

Permagrin wrote in post #3846813
just for fun, I found a couple of PIT shots I don't think you guys have seen...

being a tree pusher (not hugger)

and taking "quality photos"

Geez, how many of those things do you have?

LOL...being someone ALWAYS in trouble in one form or another, need you ask that?

T.D. wrote in post #3846475
Okay, no Scott Macro here...but how about a huge crop and a 100% crop? Not too shabby for the 24-105.

Very nice!

T.D. wrote in post #3846513
Puddle, we missed you today, but Scott did his best to make sure you were there in spirit.

Here I was, minding my own business shooting away at this:
When suddenly I sensed that there was an odd "presence" next to me....
The bee is now blind and you were missed.

Zilly wrote in post #3846907
seconded

Thirded!

Okay Permie, sorry for the delay (had an urgent nap there!)

Anyway, here is the original. No crop.

Time for sleep. Nighty night!

See ya Stefan.

[B]


PERMY DONT LOOK

ok guys first ever macro attempt with manual extension tubes on a f2.8 lens (28-70)

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR