ART What's your fastest peice of glass?

[MSIGuy]

For me it'd be either my 50 1.8, or my newly aquired 85 1.8. No baller 50L or 85L 1.2's for me yet...

 

[NOR*CAL]

Canon 50mm 1.4, probably my least used.

 

[alexromo]

1.7

 

[Bloke]

family of canons

f2, f1.5, f1.2

 

[Gvidon]

Its fun playing with 85...specially at halls with ISO 3200

 

[alexromo]

18-55 f3.5-5.6 =(
oh well, still fun

time for an upgrade, thats baby dick glass

 

[turbodude]

1.4

 

[xenon supra]

300 f/1.2

 

[turbodude]

300 f/1.2

WHA?!

 

[Smeghead]

f/1.2?

What the hell.

 

[Girth]

50 1.4

 

[mobbarley]

i have these glass sliding doors in my house... they are pretty fat yo.

 

[ej25power]

50/1.4

 

[1992 240SX]

50 and 85 1.8

 

[jared_IRL]

I had the 50 1.4.... sold it for the 1.8 and a sb600.

So now i have the 1.8 and a bunch of 2.8's. Nothing faster though.

Next up is the 11-16.

 

[OlafBeserka]

30mm 1.4 & 50mm 1.4

 

[wrong1]

85&50 1.8, 60 2.8 and a 17-50 2.8 that hasn't left my camera since I got it. If it counts I also have an fd mount canon 50 1.4 thats on my av-1 35mm... but I never really use those.... cant find a battery for it.

 

[Killyin]

50 1.8 but I never use it. It gets more use as a paper weight.

24-70 2.8 is the most used.

 

[ok_computer]

30/1.4

 

[tetsuo]

all i have right now is a 17-50 2.8 so its that. i sold my 50 1.4 to get an 85 1.8, but the line i had on one fell through, and i haven't found another one yet.

 

[MSIGuy]

all i have right now is a 17-50 2.8 so its that. i sold my 50 1.4 to get an 85 1.8, but the line i had on one fell through, and i haven't found another one yet.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=600368

 

[adamlewis88]

I actually "have" a 50/1.8 but I dont know the last time it was ever on a camera. Fastest I actually use is f/2

 

[Cracked]

Canon 50mm 1.4, probably my least used.

.

 

[MSIGuy]

I'm supprised nobody has come in yet with the Canon f 0.95!

 

[adamlewis88]

I'm supprised nobody has come in yet with the Canon f 0.95!

I saw one the other day. Its a lot bigger than I thought it would be. I dont know why since I know how an f-number relates to physical aperture size, but I was still surprised.