Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Photography

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Photography

    Originally posted by strikeaholic View Post
    Keep the nut and just save up for a while

    I don't have a flash yet. I was tempted to buy one, but decided to save up for the D700 instead. The only lens i have that is MINE is the kit lens 18-55mm VR. But lucky for me I have some connections and a friend is letting me borrow some of his top dollar Nikon lenses at the moment that include the 70-200mm, 14-24mm, 105mm micro, and 24-70mm - all f2.8, which is why they are nearly all $2000 lenses O_o
    I hear you..unfortunately, my cash is tied up elsewhere.

    Right now on my N75 I have a 28-100MM and a 70-300MM zooms--not good for close-up but they kick ass for the photography I do--usually low-light extended exposure work. For my backup--my Pentax K1000, i just have a 28MM wide. My external flash, and SB-28 is a bit on the weak side--I'm thinking about picking up either an SB600 or an SB400--erring more towards the 400...

    Still, excellent work--especially the macro work.

    Also good to see someone else that puts the camera fully manual
    "Cross creviced chasms vast, and endless plains of unshaven ass"
    ~~GWAR's description of Hell
    Skaði: 2008 Pontiac G6 GXP Street Edition

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Photography

      Originally posted by LordKOTL View Post
      I hear you..unfortunately, my cash is tied up elsewhere.

      Right now on my N75 I have a 28-100MM and a 70-300MM zooms--not good for close-up but they kick ass for the photography I do--usually low-light extended exposure work. For my backup--my Pentax K1000, i just have a 28MM wide. My external flash, and SB-28 is a bit on the weak side--I'm thinking about picking up either an SB600 or an SB400--erring more towards the 400...

      Still, excellent work--especially the macro work.

      Also good to see someone else that puts the camera fully manual
      At least you've got some variety in your lenses though! You can catch all sorts of things with those lenses. I'd go for the SB600 if I were you. You can catch more creative lighting with it by tilting and turning it and bouncing the flash off walls and everything. I'm a "you get what you pay for' type guy, so I don't like going with the cheapest option on things. I even considered getting the SB900 before I decided to not get a flash and save up for the D700 body.

      Yeah, shooting in manual enables you to capture much more creative pictures, so that's what I always use!


      Progression Page

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Photography

        Nice shots. If i would have known what i know now i would have bought myself a nikon instead of a canon. Nikon is by far way better then canon.
        A whole lot of mods and a freakin lesbo after me....
        Originally posted by 08blackgt
        hahaha i fukin love Darlene

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Photography

          Originally posted by strikeaholic View Post
          At least you've got some variety in your lenses though! You can catch all sorts of things with those lenses. I'd go for the SB600 if I were you. You can catch more creative lighting with it by tilting and turning it and bouncing the flash off walls and everything. I'm a "you get what you pay for' type guy, so I don't like going with the cheapest option on things. I even considered getting the SB900 before I decided to not get a flash and save up for the D700 body.

          Yeah, shooting in manual enables you to capture much more creative pictures, so that's what I always use!
          I know you can tilt the 400 for bounce flash, the only thing that would make me go full-on 600 is that I know the 600 has a ring flash attachment avaliable--not sure about the 400. Either of those has enough capability that I could set my own gels, bounce flashes, et al.

          The 900 is a no-go; it doesn't interface as well with the older film cameras like my N75. The 600 will and the 400 will.

          The only problem with my lenses is that the minimum f-stop that either will do is 3.8. I had to get a close-up lens to try any macro-work (arguably my weak point as a photographer). Aside from a couple of more lenses not wide-angle for my K1000, I want to try and get myself a standard 50mm prime for my N75--something fast as hell...when i can afford it.

          Anyhow, some of my work--sorry for the facebook links for most of them:
          http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...&id=1324763189
          http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...&id=1324763189
          http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...&id=1324763189
          http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...&id=1324763189
          http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...&id=1324763189
          http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...&id=1324763189
          http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...&id=1324763189
          http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...&id=1324763189
          "Cross creviced chasms vast, and endless plains of unshaven ass"
          ~~GWAR's description of Hell
          Skaði: 2008 Pontiac G6 GXP Street Edition

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Photography

            Spend your money in getting better lenses, if you take care of them they will outlast your body and provide the biggest improvement in image quality. One misconception that people have is that getting a better body will give them better images and that is not necessarily true, the lens will influence it more than the body. A better body will give you things like larger images, cleaner images at higher ISO settings, more frames per second and other bells and whistles.

            BTW, nice photos. They really look good!
            Vector Tune - CRAB Cold Air Box - Cquence Ultima Cross Brake Rotors

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Photography

              Originally posted by CaptRage View Post
              Spend your money in getting better lenses, if you take care of them they will outlast your body and provide the biggest improvement in image quality. One misconception that people have is that getting a better body will give them better images and that is not necessarily true, the lens will influence it more than the body. A better body will give you things like larger images, cleaner images at higher ISO settings, more frames per second and other bells and whistles.

              BTW, nice photos. They really look good!
              Assuming this was directed at me:

              Thanks

              But when it comes to camera bodies, the one thing about my isue is that I'm a film afficionado--I actually prefer the look of it to digital. Further, the N75 is one of the most capable film camera bodies there is. As such, I'm beyond happy with it. Same with my lenses.

              The issue happens if/when I upgrade to Digital. Anyone that does photography for something more than snapshots wll tell you that when you jump into it, you're going to pretty much stay on the same system becase the cost of replacement is ginormous. As such, since my camera is standard 35MM film, all of my lenses are calibrated to that standard--being a image area of about 24x36mm.

              If I would just go out and buy a D50, let's say, my range of lenses goes from 28-300mm to about 40-500mm. The DX-format digital nikons, which most people's DSLR's are, is about 20x20mm, which would increase the effective lens size. Great way to get an inexpensive long zoom, but being someone that does more landscapes, removing the wide-angle would handicap me--and usually the shorter lenses (less than 28mm) can be very expensive. The optimum upgrade route for me would be getting an FX body, which is considerably more expensive, but is the same size as a 35mm film frame.

              Right now, about the only 2 things I need for my kit is a better flash (my weak speedlight can only throw about 18'--I noticed that limitation in some caves), and possibly a very fast normal/macro lens if i want to dabble a bit more in that realm.
              "Cross creviced chasms vast, and endless plains of unshaven ass"
              ~~GWAR's description of Hell
              Skaði: 2008 Pontiac G6 GXP Street Edition

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Photography

                Well said, Matt. Lenses are just as important as the camera body if not more important. Main reason I want to go up to the D700 is because of it's high iso capabilities.

                LordKOTL, I really like those photos you shared, especially the church in the valley... that one is fantastic!! I agree, the cost for some specialty lenses can be so high!


                Progression Page

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Photography

                  Wow that's totally amazing work. Not sure if you're on it but sign up on DeviantArt and post your pics on there. It's a site for artists to also network and meet others with the same interest. Keep it up
                  http://www.cardomain.com/id/MidnightLS

                  "Peace, Love, Speed"

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Photography

                    I do need a deviant art page, but i need to get off my arse and get many of my negatives scanned first.



                    Anyhow, the Church in the Valley? I was upset when I took it because I thought it didn't come out because I was taking it from a moving vehicle. I consider that one pure luck

                    But thanks .
                    "Cross creviced chasms vast, and endless plains of unshaven ass"
                    ~~GWAR's description of Hell
                    Skaði: 2008 Pontiac G6 GXP Street Edition

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Photography

                      Originally posted by LordKOTL View Post
                      I do need a deviant art page, but i need to get off my arse and get many of my negatives scanned first.



                      Anyhow, the Church in the Valley? I was upset when I took it because I thought it didn't come out because I was taking it from a moving vehicle. I consider that one pure luck

                      But thanks .
                      WOW that makes it even better!! I don't use deviantart, but I've got a flickr. It's a aimed more towards photography than anything else.

                      I really want to learn to take better night pictures, but I went out tonight and got a couple I kind of like. The 2nd one, the field is lit up only by the sidemarker lights on my car!

                      I think I got some of the milky way in this picture of the stars



                      Progression Page

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Photography

                        awesome pics man, I would like to get into photography too but right now money is tight and cant afford a nice camera.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Photography

                          Wow Shane. Those are pretty detailed shots. I dont see stars in NY lol Too much light. So I have the Canon EOS 50D. Is it possible to get pix like that with mine? What kind of lens do I need? I have not purchased any new lenses yet from when I got my camera so i'm using the one it came with (28-135mm)
                          2011 Ibis B8 Audi S4

                          *When you turn your car on... does it return the favor?*

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Photography

                            Originally posted by Xxgxpstreet08xX View Post
                            Wow Shane. Those are pretty detailed shots. I dont see stars in NY lol Too much light. So I have the Canon EOS 50D. Is it possible to get pix like that with mine? What kind of lens do I need? I have not purchased any new lenses yet from when I got my camera so i'm using the one it came with (28-135mm)
                            I have the 40D with the same lens, you can get those kind of pics, you just need to know what settings to use.

                            Looking back at some of the pictures of the insects, it looks like those were taken with the macro lens, am I right? If so you probably won't get that much detail that close with the 28-135.
                            Last edited by CaptRage; 11-10-2010, 09:53 AM.
                            Vector Tune - CRAB Cold Air Box - Cquence Ultima Cross Brake Rotors

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Photography

                              Originally posted by g6cruiser View Post
                              awesome pics man, I would like to get into photography too but right now money is tight and cant afford a nice camera.
                              Thanks dude! Yeah, good photography equipment can be very pricey, but if you enjoy it, then it will be well worth investing in once you get the money!!


                              Originally posted by Xxgxpstreet08xX View Post
                              Wow Shane. Those are pretty detailed shots. I dont see stars in NY lol Too much light. So I have the Canon EOS 50D. Is it possible to get pix like that with mine? What kind of lens do I need? I have not purchased any new lenses yet from when I got my camera so i'm using the one it came with (28-135mm)
                              Aw yeah, that's one reason I love living in the country, but we're still close to our small town so I still get some light pollution. Mine was shot with a wide angle lense at 14mm so I captured a lot more sky than you will with your 28-135, but you can still get shots of stars! Just zoom all the way out, have your focus on infinity, point it to whatever part of the sky you want to capture, you WILL NEED a tripod, of course. You can shoot in S-mode (shutter priority) and crank the shutter speed up as far as it will go (mine was at 30seconds) Also, I don't know what ISO your camera will choose in S-mode but I shoot in Manual and had my aperture as high as it would go (f2. and put my ISO at 400.

                              Originally posted by CaptRage View Post
                              I have the 40D with the same lens, you can get those kind of pics, you just need to know what settings to use.

                              Looking back at some of the pictures of the insects, it looks like those were taken with the macro lens, am I right? If so you probably won't get that much detail that close with the 28-135.
                              Yep, a few of those are with the Nikon 105 Micro lens. I love this lens, it's so fun to use! Though it's a bit tricky sometimes with such a small focal point and the absolute need for lots of light if you close up your aperture to get more in focus.


                              Progression Page

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Photography

                                Originally posted by strikeaholic View Post
                                Aw yeah, that's one reason I love living in the country, but we're still close to our small town so I still get some light pollution. Mine was shot with a wide angle lense at 14mm so I captured a lot more sky than you will with your 28-135, but you can still get shots of stars! Just zoom all the way out, have your focus on infinity, point it to whatever part of the sky you want to capture, you WILL NEED a tripod, of course. You can shoot in S-mode (shutter priority) and crank the shutter speed up as far as it will go (mine was at 30seconds) Also, I don't know what ISO your camera will choose in S-mode but I shoot in Manual and had my aperture as high as it would go (f2. and put my ISO at 400.
                                Very interesting. First off, the star shots are wicked.

                                Secondly, comparing your setting on your starshots--specially the horizon shot, to mine with the large white mountain (Mt. Rainier). Both night shots. Both 30 second exposure. You: ISO 400--me: ISO 1600 (+2 EV), You: 2.8 aperture--me: 4 aperture (-1 EV). Your wide and my normal zoom shouldn't take into account the exposure settings, but I find it interesting that just a little overexposure on my part can give such a huge difference. Your looks almost cinematic in that shot-like one would expect a UFO to just dart across the sky. I've been told that mine looks almost surrealistic and dreamlike--like night during the day. Granted, the intended grainess of 1600-speed film will do that.

                                Still, some general qustions about your shot, especially the horizon one--what were you shooting towards that gave the yellow hue? Was there any moon out? I think the reason mine came out vivid was because I was shooting with a gibbous moon to my back. I have another that i uploaded to panorimo in which with very similar camera/lens settings (the photo is over 5 years old), I shot into a quarter moon towards Diamond peak in oregon:

                                Which had a different feel to it.

                                Always great to bounce things off of someone else in the craft.

                                Anyhow, Ally: a big tip for night shots--get yourself a shutter remote--cable or IR button, or set your shutter release on a delay--that way you don't jolt the camera and blur the image.
                                Last edited by LordKOTL; 11-10-2010, 01:52 PM. Reason: formatting
                                "Cross creviced chasms vast, and endless plains of unshaven ass"
                                ~~GWAR's description of Hell
                                Skaði: 2008 Pontiac G6 GXP Street Edition

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X