QUOTE(tatagal @ Nov 23 2011, 10:31 AM)
You spot it! I believe is due to WB also (though I selected AUTO WB for all), since the built-in flash is cool colour, it is not possible that the flash itself causing the colour to be warm!
Even I took photos at the beach under sunlight, if I turn on the flash, I noticed the colour will be slightly warmer but not as terrible as the test I mentioned above!
Since I am beginner here, using M mode playing with the shutter speed and aperture already keep me busy! It will be abit challenging for me to change the WB and selecting the correct ISO for every shot I take(turning off the ISO sensitivity)
Reason for the slightly "warm" WB when using flash during daytime is because the camera switches to Flash WB when using flash. Flash WB by default is 5400K. I believe the Auto WB used is usually slightly cooler when used during daytime.
QUOTE(Calvin Seak @ Nov 24 2011, 11:48 AM)
Hey guys! Anyone personally own a 14-24 f2.8 and a 16-35 f4 could comment which lens is more worth it?
I was actually leaning towards to 16-35 because I have a polarizing filter for it and many says it is as sharp as the 14-24, until i went to photozone.de and saw the MTF chart and it really changed my mind, so i was wondering which is much more worth it and the 16-35 is a tad cheaper too!
From what I can tell the things you mentioned above, your choice would be towards the 16-35mm f/4 VR. If you're just taking landscape pictures and not so much for architechture where straight lines must be straight,
QUOTE(pziv2 @ Nov 23 2011, 09:00 PM)
How does the lens fare if shooting those school performances? (Dances, silat performances, etc)
Very hard to say... Should be better than your average PnS cameras.
I take it that those performances would be held indoors? That would mean low light. For low light, you need large aperture lenses like the f/2.8. Even then, sometimes it's not enough and you need to rely on camera's high ISO. I don't know if f/5.6 on the lens is going to cut it. When you want to freeze the motion of the subject etc, you need faster shutter speed. This is where big aperture and good high ISO cameras are useful.
QUOTE(0168257061 @ Nov 24 2011, 12:50 PM)
14-24 vs 16-35
16-35 is more versatile for press,
you can put UV filter for protection.
shooting static VR will comes in handy anytime than f/2.8
If you want the extra 2mm on the other hand often,
I guess you gotta get it.
Though 16mm is crazy wide enough
If you're in the press, you would not care too much for protection. Insurance covers it.
QUOTE(Everdying @ Nov 24 2011, 12:58 PM)
16-35 is wide but lots of distortion.
btw, got consider the 17-35?
The 17-35mm f/2.8 is still a nice lens. But sharpness wise, it's still behind the 16-35mm f/4 VR while the 14-24mm f/2.8 is still king.
I think you can only get the 17-35mm f/2.8 as 2nd hand. Yes, you will need to find a good copy because there are a lot of people complaining about the AF-S motor failing. If I'm not wrong, this lens was one of the first lenses to have the AF-S motor in it (perhaps it could be the 300mm f/4 or the 28-70mm f/2.8).
Nov 21 2011, 10:08 AM, updated 14y ago
Quote
0.1429sec
0.45
6 queries
GZIP Disabled