Isn't f/1.2 large?
Owen wrote: Isn't f/1.2 large?
mynakedsoda wrote: Owen, f/0.75 is larger. :
Owen wrote: When I said large, it was in reference to Daniel saying he liked to shoot at small apertures. Then he went and edited it as if to appear knowledgeable... CHEATER!! :P
SCS_Photo wrote: Slip of the tongue... Seamus made the mistake first.
Comments
i'm in love w/ large apetures/ bokeh
smugmug: www.StandOutphoto.smugmug.com
yeah, wasn't it something like the smaller the number, the larger the aperture?
www.ivarborst.nl & smugmug
Cannibalism...
D100, Rodenstock TV-Heligon 42mm f/0.75.
Seamus, I couldn't agree more. My 50mm 1.4 is now my normal walk around lens. Even on digital it just seems right for most of what I want to do. :
didn't even know they had one in existence.
and i thought the Canon 50mm f/1.0 was large
smugmug: www.StandOutphoto.smugmug.com
Then he went and edited it as if to appear knowledgeable... CHEATER!! :P
Seamus made the mistake first.