and the site receives a small commission
Are you a wide boy (or girl)?
- Thread starter rob marshall
- Start date
- Messages
- 46
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
I think the world is trying to tell you something. I'd sit up and listen
I used to love super wide (on my DX Nikon anyway)
Dunstanburgh D200 by NGUSS, on Flickr
But now primarily use a lens the equivalant of 28mm which is not super wide but I think I like it better. It is plenty wide enough for me at the moment.
A rock and a hard place Dunstanburgh Velvia 50large format by NGUSS, on Flickr
I love that 8mm shot mind!
Dunstanburgh D200 by NGUSS, on Flickr
But now primarily use a lens the equivalant of 28mm which is not super wide but I think I like it better. It is plenty wide enough for me at the moment.
A rock and a hard place Dunstanburgh Velvia 50large format by NGUSS, on Flickr
I love that 8mm shot mind!
- Messages
- 1,781
- Name
- Shayne
- Edit My Images
- No
Leathertramp said:I think the world is trying to tell you something. I'd sit up and listen
I'm still try to recover from the 70-200 2.8 mrk2 I bought last month. I really would like to try one out though. The only thing is, I really would like to stay away from the ef-s lenses because I am planning to go full frame next year. Hmmm.
Les McLean
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 6,793
- Name
- Les
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I tend to shoot and think wide on my landscapes, and most seem to be taken with a 17-40 lens on a FF body.
My most popular landscapes (published) have all been taken on this combination, usually at the wide end. Three examples:
Like Ed, I used to have a 12-24mm sigma which was great fun on a FF body, you could almost see behind you, although I often struggled to 'think' 12mm.
My most popular landscapes (published) have all been taken on this combination, usually at the wide end. Three examples:
Like Ed, I used to have a 12-24mm sigma which was great fun on a FF body, you could almost see behind you, although I often struggled to 'think' 12mm.
