"don't get a 35mm or 50mm lens if you have a D7000" - michaels
yes, i do own a 35mm f1.8, so perhaps this makes me a tad biased, but i'm pretty certain a majority of DSLR owners out there have at least one of these lenses. and don't get me wrong, i am a fan of michaels. what i'm not a fan of is bullshit advice. pardon my french.
you can't judge a prime lens by its focal length. i'd like to see you try to find some justifiable reason to do so. okay, sure - perhaps it isn't worthwhile for some individuals to purchase a 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm lens, but that's not to say the difference in focal lengths is non-existent. certain focal lengths are used achieve different shots and perspectives. shooting with a 35mm lens, isn't going to help you achieve the best portrait shots; neither is shooting with an 85mm lens for street photography. the metrics are there for a reason. your disregard and lack of acknowledgement for its significance makes you an ignorant photographer, and that's coming from me ... a self-proclaimed mediocre photographer.
i'd also like to query your reasoning behind advising against the 35mm or 50mm for the D7000, specifically. how else would you suggest the photographer shoot street or portrait photography? and how exactly does the body change the metrics of a prime lens' focal length ? regardless of the body, the 35mm lens will always be the same distance between the lens and image sensor ... unless there is some miraculous change that occurs between the body switch. highly doubtful. so please, explain yourself ... or don't - i think i've heard enough from you.
2 comments:
I don't understand why ANYONE would outright suggest not to get a 35 or 50mm just because one owns a d7000 @@ I dont know the context of that statement, but on the face of it.. how ignorant. Maybe he'll start suggesting to take portraits with a fisheye? XD
I was never going near Michaels again ANYWAY, but this is bullshit. So wait, what DO they suggest?
Thanks for using my picture
Post a Comment