<span style="font-size: medium;"]These three portraits of my cousin were shot in LA Disneyland and La Jolla Beach. Nice places and we love them all.





[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.24.70.Forum+Use/IMG_5F00_2050.JPG[/img]


(LA Disneyland. 50D + 16-35/2.8L II @ 18mm, f/5.6, 1/400s, ISO100)





[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.24.70.Forum+Use/IMG_5F00_2244.JPG[/img]


(LA Disneyland. 50D + 16-35/2.8L II @ 18mm, f/2.8, 1/13s, ISO800)





[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.24.70.Forum+Use/IMG_5F00_2335.JPG[/img]


(La Jolla Beach. 50D + 16-35/2.8L II @ 16mm, f/11, 1/200s, ISO100)





<span style="font-size: medium;"]I found I use these diagonal composition quite often now especially with my 1.6x croped 50D. Because when the lens is not wide enough, the diagonal of the square image has the largest angle of view. By taking advantage of that, I found that my photo can actually contain a lot more stuff than it used to do. Especially for architecture photography, a skyscraper that can't be taken on a normal vertical photo may be captured in full with diagonal compositions.


<span style="font-size: medium;"]I also used f/11 on my 50D quite often when I was in California because it was sunny all the way during my stay. I tried to find any evidence of lens diffraction but I failed completely. My images made at f/11 are as sharp as those made at F/8 or f/5.6. At least to my eyes f/11 is exactly the same as other larger apertures in this regard.



<span style="font-size: medium;"]Comments?[8-|]


<span style="font-size: medium;"]Benjamin