Landscape
536 topics in this forum
-
- 13 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 2 replies
- 788 views
-
- 9 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 12 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 28 replies
- 2.6k views
-
- 11 replies
- 1k views
-
- 9 replies
- 974 views
-
- 16 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 11 replies
- 1k views
-
- 15 replies
- 1k views
-
- 16 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 17 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 0 replies
- 435 views
-
- 16 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 14 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 7 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 7 replies
- 868 views
-
- 13 replies
- 981 views
-
- 26 replies
- 2.4k views
-
- 16 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 15 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 3 replies
- 702 views
-
- 9 replies
- 844 views
-
- 9 replies
- 1k views
-
- 15 replies
- 1.1k views
-
Who's Online 13 Members, 0 Anonymous, 412 Guests (See full list)
-
Recent Gallery Images
-
Recent Forum Wide Posts
-
By luis triguez · Posted
This is what they tell me: Sorry, an unknown server error occurred when uploading this file. Please contact us for assistance. -
-
.thumb.jpeg.ab83b07a9b7b3c56bf8891eeac42c94f.jpeg)
By ericphelps · Posted
Here's my pic of an unknown server error.................... -
By Rick Helmke · Posted
Kind of odd, I have a manual focus version of the 2.8 micro and it’s razor sharp but I don’t care for it as a portrait lens, more of a product or micro. I also have a 105/2.5 and for some reason I like portraits better from this lens. Different items for different uses, there’s not really a better or worse. Rick H. -
-
-BaixCamp.jpg.653a032e6696d98925c388c1123058ed.jpg)
-BaixCamp.jpg.8f1b6a093aa7bf8cf265c6de6bec36b6.jpg)
.jpg.183de1b2976580628312c895c3f4a9ae.jpg)
.thumb.jpeg.ab83b07a9b7b3c56bf8891eeac42c94f.jpeg)