[richard_k]

L鏡 & No L鏡分別係唔係甘大?

[ccrsc]

我有24-70及70-200 2.8L IS，
但我覺得我影既相始終唔及我一個師兄用85 1.8咁靚。
畫質可以靚過佢，但可觀性尤有不及。

[xdick]

唔可以用變焦鏡同定焦鏡來比較~

[calwkf]

"我有24-70及70-200 2.8L IS，
但我覺得我影既相始終唔及我一個師兄用85 1.8咁靚。
畫質可以靚過佢，但可觀性尤有不及。"

除左因為佢果枝係定焦外, 可觀性呢樣野, 好講個人感覺的！

[Obi-Wan]

I have just a few L lens, e.g. 17-40/f4, 70-200/f4 & f2.8, 24-105IS
centre sharp compared to non L lens, e.g. 17-85IS at f8 or f11, really no much differences except on very bright objects, but the edge L lens wins a lot!

For many people, I don't think they really care about the edge sharpness of L lens.

Anyway, if u can afford, it is better buy L lens.

BUT if u think using L lens = pro, may be u are wrong.

[Ison]

10-22 ,17-55, 等都係non L 級的L 鏡. 成像高的鏡係好多人心中的L 鏡.

[Xplore]

好多 Fans 手上既鏡都成像高架啦

[MN56]

又來？？！！頭暈！！@@

[Xplore]

呀你爸爸哥

我學識晒架啦

去吹水區度睇下仲有無人未識啦

[TONG3]

我有24-70及70-200 2.8L IS，
但我覺得我影既相始終唔及我一個師兄用85 1.8咁靚。
畫質可以靚過佢，但可觀性尤有不及。

影相技術佔六成，器材佔四成，唔係有枝靚鏡就可以影到靚相，我見唔少師兄靚機靚鏡，影D相都只係一般，所以影靚相唔係一定有錢人的專利，技術同器材都要一樣重要的。

[Obi-Wan]

ccrsc
"畫質可以靚過佢，但可觀性尤有不及。 "
可觀性 = ?

[ccrsc]

Obi-Wan兄，我意思係當大家一齊影人像，
但佢無論取景、構圖、曝光控制以至成品既感染力，
我都覺得佢比我好，佢影d相好有故事性，
試過同佢交換鏡黎影，結果都係差唔多，
証明係我技不如人。
但佢都話，有錢更係買L啦

[Obi-Wan]

ccrsc, u need to train your "camera eyes"
try try go see the following site "http://photoinf.com/"

[田木東]

Obi-Wan,

Like to see your comments very much!
I have not yet browsed through the website you recommend above but I would like to ask when you are taking landscape photos, apart from using small aperture setting, low ISO and a tripod, which point of the scene would you focus on? Any point because of focusing at infinity or applying the hyperfocal point theory? I am not familar with the latter one.

Thanks!

[rickwok]

我都覺得85/1.8比zoom鏡L靚。