|
|
|
Keven Osborne
{K:572} 12/27/2006
|
No, it's an 18-70, which is about 27-105mm on film (35mm). For equivalent 24mm on a nikon digital sensor you'd need a focal length of 16mm. And yes, that does get expensive for a decent lens.
NB. A prime lens has a fixed focal length.
Happy holidays!
|
|
|
|
Aurobindo Saha
{K:2396} 12/27/2006
|
Well this is actually 18 mm ED DX Nikkon lens. Thanks for your input Keven
- Aurobindo
|
|
|
|
|
Keven Osborne
{K:572} 12/27/2006
|
A 24mm prime on film is wide enough and definately not (comparatively) expensive. :)
|
|
|
|
|
Aurobindo Saha
{K:2396} 12/27/2006
|
Yes its not like 18-200 VR where BD is less pronounced, but I think I made some mistake in PS work, and may be low angle of the picture creates more curved effect. Ideally one should use dedicated WA lens for these sort of pictures, but WA lens are very costly :)
Thanks for your input Keven.
- Aurobindo
|
|
|
|
|
Keven Osborne
{K:572} 12/27/2006
|
Nice light. Composition doesn't 'feel' quite right. I've unfortunately got that lens as well. Not great at the wide end is it? Jes' look at the barrel distortion!!
|
|
|
|
|
Aurobindo Saha
{K:2396} 12/27/2006
|
Thanks Debu
|
|
|
|
Debarshi Duttagupta
{K:26815} 12/27/2006
|
Wow , darun hoyeche re. Lovely colours.
|
|
0 
