<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Silkypix for Mac &#8211; Studio session..</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rytterfalk.com/2009/12/10/silkypix-for-mac-studio-session/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rytterfalk.com/2009/12/10/silkypix-for-mac-studio-session/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:21:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robin</title>
		<link>http://www.rytterfalk.com/2009/12/10/silkypix-for-mac-studio-session/#comment-112013</link>
		<dc:creator>Robin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 09:10:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rytterfalk.com/?p=1105#comment-112013</guid>
		<description>Timmy without noise reduction gives me an analog feel while looking at it. Very very fine details, less pixellated and a whiff of grain.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Timmy without noise reduction gives me an analog feel while looking at it. Very very fine details, less pixellated and a whiff of grain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh</title>
		<link>http://www.rytterfalk.com/2009/12/10/silkypix-for-mac-studio-session/#comment-111958</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 23:04:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rytterfalk.com/?p=1105#comment-111958</guid>
		<description>-&gt; &quot;I brought my SD14 and the trusty 18-50 2.8. It’s a bit short to be a perfect studio lens, I often find myself a tad too close. :) I think the 24-70 might be better suited but what the 18-50 really has is a GREAT crispiness, very sharp and nice to handle. Most of the time spot on.&quot;

For portraits on a crop sensor, I liked the Sigma 70mm f/2.8 macro.  Not as flexible as a zoom, but it is tack sharp.

BTW: do you have the older 24-70mm &quot;macro&quot;, or the new one with the HSM?  The new Sigma 24-70mm with the HSM is pretty darned sharp in it&#039;s own right (but not as sharp as the 70mm macro).  Mine has a habit of being glued to my D700.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>-&gt; &#8220;I brought my SD14 and the trusty 18-50 2.8. It’s a bit short to be a perfect studio lens, I often find myself a tad too close. :) I think the 24-70 might be better suited but what the 18-50 really has is a GREAT crispiness, very sharp and nice to handle. Most of the time spot on.&#8221;</p>
<p>For portraits on a crop sensor, I liked the Sigma 70mm f/2.8 macro.  Not as flexible as a zoom, but it is tack sharp.</p>
<p>BTW: do you have the older 24-70mm &#8220;macro&#8221;, or the new one with the HSM?  The new Sigma 24-70mm with the HSM is pretty darned sharp in it&#8217;s own right (but not as sharp as the 70mm macro).  Mine has a habit of being glued to my D700.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

