-=5D CLASSIC admirers, assemble! (4)

JayStar86 wrote in post #10560715
^^^^ superb shots bob and k3b!n. Im really diggin the first and last shot bob. if i may ask, what was the lighting in these shots?

and if i may provide some C&C the vignetting in third shot doesn't work IMHO... and although it works well in the first shot maybe a bit reduced amount of it will be better. just my thoughts.

Thanks JAYSTAR86!!

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #10559854
She was until she finally took the damn thing out of the box and used it...!

Muahahahahaha

Tawcan wrote in post #10560656

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/tawcan/48069946​80

Love that one...

after engagement session last saturday, i was able to spend time with my little girl.
5D+50 1.4

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

So are two family weddings a reasonable excuse to buy the 135L? I know the answer, just building a case for the spouse

more than enough reason to get the copy.=D

gonzogolf wrote in post #10563688
So are two family weddings a reasonable excuse to buy the 135L? I know the answer, just building a case for the spouse

NO

But its a dam good one for a 35L. Perfect wedding lens on a 5D

umphotography wrote in post #10563782
NO

But its a dam good one for a 35L. Perfect wedding lens on a 5D

Honestly, I have never found much use for the 35 focal length. Plus any of the work I would do in that range is covered by the 17-40 and the 24-105. I've heard great things about the 35L, but it really doesnt fit my eye.

gonzogolf wrote in post #10563688
So are two family weddings a reasonable excuse to buy the 135L? I know the answer, just building a case for the spouse

Depends what you're shooting and what you already have. 24-70, 24 or 35L, 70-200 will pretty much cover the whole day. Then you get into "creative" lenses.

gonzogolf wrote in post #10563834
Honestly, I have never found much use for the 35 focal length. Plus any of the work I would do in that range is covered by the 17-40 and the 24-105. I've heard great things about the 35L, but it really doesnt fit my eye.

Here's one at 85mm. I'm looking for opinions.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=904662

Harleypugs wrote in post #10563422
Love that one...

Thanks! I really like that one too.

Harleypugs wrote in post #10563422
Love that one...

Yeah me too.

Harleypugs wrote in post #10563422
Love that one...

yep lol.

Tawcan wrote in post #10560745
Thanks. The vignetting in the 1st shot is purely due to lighting and wide angle. I couldn't quite decide whether to vignett or not in the 3rd pic. Here's the non-vignetting version:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/tawcan/48063750​69

Check my flickr stream for lighting descriptions. The 4th one was natural light only.

awesome, I have an idea for a portrait/self portrait now

Couple more.

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

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/tawcan/48063689​91/