Photography related discussions

[mike c]

Less lenses, more skill. I can shoot 1/20th without VR easy.

SheepStar

how much and where online can i get 'em?

do they come in bottles?

1st: ever heard of involuntary muscle movement?
2nd: 1/20 at what FL? (since we're on the subject of telephoto ... i'd like to see a 1/20 200mm shot in indoor ambient light)
3rd: cause i can

 

[mike c]

The 55-250 is a serious bargain for the price. Definitely lacks speed for lower light stuff, but it performs way out of it's class. I think the 18-55IS kit lens does a nice job as well. These cheap lenses are so good that Canon has made it tough to justify spending $500 - 600 to "upgrade" the kit zooms. Feels like you need to drop four figures on the 17-55 or 70-200 to really feel like you will get a lot of improvement.

I really do keep thinking about the 17-55, but then I think "damn, I can buy two nice primes for that money and still get change back". Makes it tough.

exactly, the 55-250 is the 50 1.8 of the telephoto range ...
i just don't like it's EF-S and can't be used on my FF cam, it's really limiting to have a lens that's only usable on one of my bodies, i'd be required to bring a lens and body cap.

i do still have my digital rebel (1st one, like jeff's) though

 

[jeffsg4mac]

I am looking at getting this lens. How do you guys feel about it for an all purpose lens. I really have liked any tamron lens I have owned. I am also going to get a new Canon this year too pssst, don't tell the wifey.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/581246-REG/Tamron_AFB003C_700_18_270mm_f_3_5_6_3_Di_II_VC.html

 

[mike c]

I am looking at getting this lens. How do you guys feel about it for an all purpose lens. I really have liked any tamron lens I have owned. I am also going to get a new Canon this year too pssst, don't tell the wifey.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/581246-REG/Tamron_AFB003C_700_18_270mm_f_3_5_6_3_Di_II_VC.html

the lens is like an elongated 18-200 - it should be fantastic as a ONE lens solution to anything. it's going to be the bomb for travel too, light and basically anything you need. of course, any super zoom will have compromises in PQ (but only when you're anal about this stuff)

that 7D is great i use it as my all around body. they say the t2i is the baby 7D if you don't need the many focus points and fast shooting of the 7D.

 

[mike c]

 

[s162216]

My current gear:

Cameras -

• Asahi Pentax Spotmatic F SLR from 1973, brought it off ebay and its literally like new! Only a couple of scraches on the base
• Russian Zenit EM - My very first SLR that my dad gave me when I was 8!
• Ansco Super Regent rangefinder - got it for free off another forum, waiting for it to come.

Lenses -

• Pentax 55mm f1.8 SMC Takumar in M42 mount
• Russian Helios 44-M 58mm in M42
• Hanimex 28mm f2.8 in M42 mount
• Vivitar Series 1 70 - 210mm f3.5 constant aperture zoom in M42 mount, the original version by Kiron with a 1:2.2 macro ratio

Accessories

• 49mm B+W Linear Polariser
• 49mm Asahi Pentax UV Filter
• 52mm Hoya HMC UV Filter
• 49mm Konica B8
• 49mm Cozo 80B Filter
• Pentax 50mm M42 Extension Tubes
• 3x Variable Teleconverter
• Matched Collapasble Rubber Lens Hood for Vivitar Series 1 70 - 210mm
• Russian Sverdlovsk-4 Cds Semi-Spotmeter
• Vivitar 225 Auto Thyristor Flash
• Numerous cable releases

As you can proberly tell I am a film guy, always have, always will, its just that feel about it, that sort of thing that I find Digital can't match.

According to friends of mine who are of the same age (18) I live in the past as digital is the 'future and is better'. I disagree with that, especially as most of my Fujichrome Velvia slides would blow their point and shoot digitals out the water very easily!

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

As you can proberly tell I am a film guy, always have, always will, its just that feel about it, that sort of thing that I find Digital can't match.

I doubt that very much, the only question is how much you are willing to pay to get comparable quality [hint: typically 5-10x times]

According to friends of mine who are of the same age (18) I live in the past as digital is the 'future and is better'. I disagree with that, especially as most of my Fujichrome Velvia slides would blow their point and shoot digitals out the water very easily!

Is digital is future - no question about it, but lets compare apples to apples, Fuji velvia 6"x6" will be comparable to mid-format say Pentax 645D and it's msrp is mere $9400
while for 35mm is Ether Canon 7D or Nikon D700 [over $2.5k each before glass]

 

[s162216]

I doubt that very much, the only question is how much you are willing to pay to get comparable quality [hint: typically 5-10x times]

Is digital is future - no question about it, but lets compare apples to apples, Fuji velvia 6"x6" will be comparable to mid-format say Pentax 645D and it's msrp is mere $9400
while for 35mm is Ether Canon 7D or Nikon D700 [over $2.5k each before glass]

Well seeing as I somehow suspect my Pentax Spotmatic F won't be shooting digital any time soon I think I will stick to my film, I don't really care that it costs a bit more, I find it more fun having to wait to see the picture and plus none of my cameras have any features like autofocus or program modes (the only thing that uses a battery is the TTL metering) to help me which along with the fact that I only have 36 exposures, helps improve my photography as I have to think just a little bit harder before pressing the shutter.

 

[mike c]

so, i killed some time at work

 

[NicolasKL]

P

I just bought a micro 4/3rds (Olympus Pen epl1) and i love it. I've got a Nikon d90 but frequently when hiking or backpacking it's just too big to drag along. Ive also got a samsung nv10 and a Sony dsc t90 which are plenty small (especially the Sony) but the image quality and user control are of course lacking.

So the micro seems like a perfect balance. Small enough to fit in a (loose) jacket pocket but with pretty serious image quality. With the 17mm prime lens its very compact but even with the standard 14-42 it'll still fit in a jacket pocket.

Thinking about 2 more lenses for it, a superzoom (17-145ish) and the one that's around 7-17mm.

Took the exact same picture with it as a typical 150-$200 point and shoot that we have at work because I wanted to show my boss why we need a new camera, and the difference in detail was staggering.

 

[NicolasKL]

Thanks! Yeah, its a cool camera, although a bit over my head.

So long exposure on a tripod without a flash?

I've never been able to get a good one of mine without a flash, Color is never quite right, but using a reflected flash always works great.

 

[droht]

I just bought a micro 4/3rds (Olympus Pen epl1) and i love it. I've got a Nikon d90 but frequently when hiking or backpacking it's just too big to drag along. Ive also got a samsung nv10 and a Sony dsc t90 which are plenty small (especially the Sony) but the image quality and user control are of course lacking.

So the micro seems like a perfect balance. Small enough to fit in a (loose) jacket pocket but with pretty serious image quality. With the 17mm prime lens its very compact but even with the standard 14-42 it'll still fit in a jacket pocket.

Thinking about 2 more lenses for it, a superzoom (17-145ish) and the one that's around 7-17mm.

Took the exact same picture with it as a typical 150-$200 point and shoot that we have at work because I wanted to show my boss why we need a new camera, and the difference in detail was staggering.

I've stared hard at the micro 4/3rds category. Seems like a nice option if you are moving up from P&S and don't want size of DSLR, or if you are a DSLR user and want to go compact. Seems hard to justify as a secondary camera to a D90 to me though. I'd probably look at a G11. Very good IQ and more zoom. No lenses to worry about. And a lot cheaper if you consider lenses with the PEN.

Of course if the Olympus is good enough to replace your Nikon then all bets are off. How do you compare them NicolasKL?

 

[NicolasKL]

I've stared hard at the micro 4/3rds category. Seems like a nice option if you are moving up from P&S and don't want size of DSLR, or if you are a DSLR user and want to go compact. Seems hard to justify as a secondary camera to a D90 to me though. I'd probably look at a G11. Very good IQ and more zoom. No lenses to worry about. And a lot cheaper if you consider lenses with the PEN.

Of course if the Olympus is good enough to replace your Nikon then all bets are off. How do you compare them NicolasKL?

I haven't done a direct comparison yet, maybe this week since I'll have some time off, but the Olympus definitely takes some damn nice pictures. It's definitely probable that the IQ difference between it and the D90 isn't enough to justify keeping the D90. In which case maybe I'll have to sell the D90 and get a Nikon D3S Nah, too rich for my blood, but maybe I could sell the D90 and my one good lens (Nikkor 18-200) and get some more lenses for the Olympus.

It's definitely just what the doctor ordered in terms of size though. Went hiking with a friend and whenever we stopped at a scenic overlook I just pulled it out of my pocket and started snapping pictures, my friend was dragging along her big DSLR bag and had to unsnap it, unzip it, pull the camera out, etc.

 

[mike c]

sheep still around?

amazon was out of stock of talent so i got the next best things ... gears!

 

[Highlander]

Composition. The most important thing to photography.

Light is the most important.

 

[Sheep]

Light is the most important.

I'm going to agree with him. Most people can't shoot for squat, even given the best condition. With Modern cameras, usable ISO ranges make getting light very easy.

SheepStar

 

[Sheep]

sheep still around?

amazon was out of stock of talent so i got the next best things ... gears!

I'm still here. Should have bought the F2.8. I picked up the 70-200 F2.8 VRI, just shot some drag racing.

And to answer your question from a while ago, I've shot a 35mm (35mm actually being 54mm on my crop sensor) at 1/10th steady. And I was shooting my 70-200 tonight with VR on, at 1/50th at 200. Nothing special. You should be able to free hand your focal length at a matching shutter speed without stabilization (IE, 200mm at 1/200th). I've also done some shooting in a motorcycle side car which was awesome.

SheepStar

 

[mike c]

I'm still here. Should have bought the F2.8. I picked up the 70-200 F2.8 VRI, just shot some drag racing.

And to answer your question from a while ago, I've shot a 35mm (35mm actually being 54mm on my crop sensor) at 1/10th steady. And I was shooting my 70-200 tonight with VR on, at 1/50th at 200. Nothing special. You should be able to free hand your focal length at a matching shutter speed without stabilization (IE, 200mm at 1/200th). I've also done some shooting in a motorcycle side car which was awesome.

SheepStar

i've never needed a telephoto ever since i started shooting ... i bought the f/4 as a practice lens. if i find the working distance and focal length of 200mm acceptable for portraiture, expect a 200/2 by next year.

but this latest purchase just completed my zoom trinity ...
17-40 f4 L on FF as UWA, 17-50 f2.8 VC on crop as mid and 70-200 f4 L IS on any format as tele

now i'm happy:

sorry this one's popup flash ... but i just had to get the eyebrows

 

[Highlander]

Sheep,

I'm going to agree with him...With Modern cameras, usable ISO ranges make getting light very easy.

You've misunderstood why I stated that light was the most important. It has nothing to do with the ability of a good modern camera to expose correctly in low light through an increase in ISO, with minimal noise.

Without light there is no photo so clearly from this consideration alone composition must take second place. However, even with light a well composed photograph can still look dull and lifeless. It takes great light to lift an otherwise good photo into the realm of a great one.

It is not the landscape, flower, building or person that you photograph; it is light itself. Remember, the literal translation of 'photograph' is 'writing with light'. Galen Rowell, for example, never set out to photograph the landscape; he sought to capture great light, and when it ocurred he would try and match it to sympathetic form and features.

 

[Highlander]

...expect a 200/2 by next year.

There it is!