Why do YOU use fast primes?

Started Aug 11, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
mg_k Senior Member • Posts: 1,503
Re: 16-200mm?

joger wrote:

You can't compare 35 mm with 200 mm and expect the same view - but what you can calculate and measure is the DOF.

The focal length should be wisely chosen to support your idea of the image. There is no better or worse - that's my point

-- hide signature --

__________________________________
isn’t it funny, a ship that leaks from the top
ISO 9000 definition of quality: 'Degree to which a set of inherent characteristic fulfills requirements'
I am the classic “Windows by Day, Mac by Night user'
“The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view.” Albert Einstein
don't feed trolls - ignore them

The reason why I said what I said was because OP believes f2.8 is 'enough', and there isn't much difference @ 200mm in his opinion which I can understand.

I was merely stating that there is indeed a huge difference at shorter focal length.  That is the shorter it is, the faster aperture is required to achieve reasonable blur, whereas even 200mm f4 gives you plenty.

 mg_k's gear list:mg_k's gear list
Sony Alpha 7R II Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Zeiss Batis 85mm F1.8 Sony RX1 Ricoh GR +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
MAC
(unknown member)
MAC
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow