Jump to content

cano_maga_a

Members
  • Posts

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. <p> Well, after all, we can all give an opinon about what works for us, but I guess it´s all depending on your type of photography, and the camera you will use for travelling (Assuming you don't use both). <br> I agree that working with 28 or even 24mm is fine for most ppl with FF, and it may work well for you unless you're into landscapes and architecture in your travels, or you're travellig with the small sensor, because it won't be that "wide". Maybe using ultra wides would work well as you suggest, just make sure you can use your lenses on both cameras (I'm not sure if ultra wides designed for DX would work on Full Frame) I travelled for a while with DX format and my tokina 12-24, what a beauty to travell with !!!<br> Peace !</p> <p> Cano</p>
  2. <p> Well Down, first of all I liked your pic of the flower, and I have two questions, First of all, what are you photographing the most, just insects and flowers ? I hear ppl telling you the 50 or the 60 mm is too short, without even knowing you're up for little creatures or coins or what ?--- The second will be if you really need the 2.8 lens ? Because it costs a lot ! In case you're seriously getting into macro, and have money ok; in case you're not, I'd recommend other more versatile and cheap lens (you decide the focal) so you can even save money for a camera body upgrade later. <br> I may sound totally unconventional, but try an older <strong>Nikon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-D</strong> lt can focus nicely, it's very cheap, has great sharpness and can get to 1:2 when you need it. I know it's not a "real" macro, but you're not photographing flat subjects are you ? The convinience of that lens is that it is a very good lens that can do it all. Just try it, it may work for you.</p> <p> Cano<br> </p>
×
×
  • Create New...