I think you solved the problem of needing faster lenses when you suggested a
higher speed film. We already have comparably faster that a 1.0 lens. The
pros were shooting Kodachrome 25 with a 1.4 lens and we can shoot 1.4 with a
Kodachrome 64 that has better(?) grain. So we don't have just one lens that
is faster, the faster and finer grained films have given us a complete set
of faster lenses.
Gregg
From: Jay Maynard
> On Sun, Jun 25, 2000 at 10:45:58AM -0400, George wrote:
> > I know Canon did a long time ago.
> > I just don't see a need for a 50/ 1.0
> > Maybe it's my style and subjects that don't need it.
> > I haven't wanted anything faster than a 1.8 or 1.4. Have you?
>
> I like to do people shots in existing light, especially for things like
> parties. (I think a flash is too disruptive at times like that; I want to
> get what's happening, not what people want the camera to see.) There have
> been times that having another half-stop over the 55/1.2 wouldn't hurt.
> (Then again, my dad and I had a discussion after his 40th anniversary
party,
> which I shot like that; next time, he'll get Portra 400 instead of
> 160...even so, the pictures had a nice, intimate quality from being a bit
> underexposed, in tungsten light.)
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|