Any photographers in the house?

Ranger Rick wrote:

IMAGE(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6051/6258474590_6406354479.jpg)

Pilot Mountain is favorite mountain. (I don't know why. It just has always been.)

MonoCheli wrote:

I have one of those little Minox 35mm cameras too, I loved the heck out of that camera! It was my backpacking camera. It took great photos. They really need to make a digital film mod type thing that could be used in place of a roll of film and shoot digital so you could use old film cameras without spending a fortune on film and processing.

Looks like it's still in the concept stage

RichyRambo wrote:
Landshrk83 wrote:

That's an awesome pic, Richy, and congrats on the prize! Did you do much post-processing on it?

Sorry for the delay. Color corrected, a bit of saturation and sharpening, and played with the gradient filter in Lightroom to get the sky more polarized.

And of course I spent the money on more camera stuff, backdrops, stands and some simple lights for portrait work (maybe someday...)

It looks really nice- the corrections on it are subtle, unlike the photo that won the contest. I'm not sure why people are so obsessed with the cartoonish look you can get with bad HDR processing. It's a great technique when used well, but most of the time people go over the top with it.

Got my Nikon-mount adaptor for m43 in the mail today. Just took a few shots just to see how it works. Not bad, and they're all pretty sharp lenses so far. I guess now I'm going to have to *really* learn aperture vs. shutter vs. ISO now.

They definitely need a proper cleaning, but look to be in otherwise good shape.

IMAGE(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6236/6265235030_4a748b324a.jpg)
taken with the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 on my PEN E-PL1

IMAGE(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6171/6265238348_138c86a25d.jpg)
taken with the Vivitar 75-205mm f/3.8 (Nikon-mount) on my PEN E-PL1

IMAGE(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6158/6265238648_b1cc68c0ae.jpg)
taken with the Vivitar 75-205mm f/3.8 (Nikon-mount) on my PEN E-PL1

IMAGE(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6157/6265239158_226643a703.jpg)
taken with the Soligor 135mm f/1:2.8 (Nikon mount) on my PEN E-PL1

The PEN looks rather hilarious with the giant 75-205mm lens on it:

IMAGE(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6093/6264693767_12d99f1361.jpg)

So, the wife has asked me to start putting together a Christmas list (I know). One of the things I wanted to ask Santa for is a new prime lens for my Nikon D5100. I'm considering the Nikon 35mm f/1.8G and the Nikon 50mm f/1.8G.

Any thoughts on the difference between the 35mm and 50mm? I am leaning towards the 35mm, considering the magnification factor of the camera, but wanted to know if others have any thoughts.

bennard wrote:

So, the wife has asked me to start putting together a Christmas list (I know). One of the things I wanted to ask Santa for is a new prime lens for my Nikon D5100. I'm considering the Nikon 35mm f/1.8G and the Nikon 50mm f/1.8G.

Any thoughts on the difference between the 35mm and 50mm? I am leaning towards the 35mm, considering the magnification factor of the camera, but wanted to know if others have any thoughts.

They are both excellent lenses. They're close enough that the final picture's won't be vastly different. You'll find that with the 50, you have to be a bit further away to fit people into the frame - with the 35 you'll have to be closer to get the same framing. So I suppose it's down to shooting style and subject, closer or further? We're talking a few small feet at portrait distance too, not yards.

I'm looking to add another lens to my kit. To be honest, I'm looking for a lens to effectively remove a few lenses from my kit. On my recent vacation I was lugging around four lenses the entire time:

Tokina 11-16mm
Canon 50mm f/1.8
Canon 100mm macro
Canon 70-300mm f/3.5-5.6

I ended up primarily using the 50mm while walking around, and the 70-300 while on passive tours (bus/boat). I pulled out the Tokina and the macro as needed for specific shots.

The big problem, and I'm sure you can see it coming, was when I was in 'walking around' mode and found myself needing a bit more reach. If I left the 70-300mm on though I lost flexibility and speed.

So ideally I'd like to pick up something that covers the top of the wide angle side (say 25mm or so) up to the bottom of the telephoto side (say 100mm to 150mm). Based on my experience on my last few trips, that would cover a significant portion of my walking around shots. I could then add in the more specialty lenses as needed.

Any suggestion? I'm currently looking at the Canon 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 or the Canon L 24-105 f/4. As my recent experience with the Tokina has shown me though, there are some really nice non-Canon lenses out there for very reasonable prices.

Edit to add: I'm looking at this lens as being a long term investment, particularly if it's going to become my primary every day lens. That's why the "L" series lens is in contention. I'm not looking to spend thousands and thousands of dollars, but I'd prefer quality in this lens and am willing to shell out up to about $1k.

Teneman wrote:

Any suggestion? I'm currently looking at the Canon 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 or the Canon L 24-105 f/4. As my recent experience with the Tokina has shown me though, there are some really nice non-Canon lenses out there for very reasonable prices.

I have the Canon 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 and it is a nice lens... that being said I have been a diehard prime user for a long time and am very attached to my 50mm f/1.4 I only find myself using the 28-135 when I want to get a longer lens and can tolerate the loss of a few stops. I tend to shoot most of my photos in the f/1.4 to f/4 range so the zoom is often not what I like to shot with because to the limitations. It is a clear lens and it is also a good price. I cannot speak to it's performance on a crop sensor so you will get a different feel then I do if you have a crop sensor.

MonoCheli wrote:

I have the Canon 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 and it is a nice lens... that being said I have been a diehard prime user for a long time and am very attached to my 50mm f/1.4 I only find myself using the 28-135 when I want to get a longer lens and can tolerate the loss of a few stops. I tend to shoot most of my photos in the f/1.4 to f/4 range so the zoom is often not what I like to shot with because to the limitations. It is a clear lens and it is also a good price. I cannot speak to it's performance on a crop sensor so you will get a different feel then I do if you have a crop sensor.

I've actually gravitated more towards my primes over the last year as well. If I'm shooting a planned subject I definitely prefer the 50mm, or even the 100mm, for the wide open aperture. I only ran into troubles when walking around and shooting subjects of opportunity at indeterminate distances. I found myself changing lenses from the 50mm to the 70-300mm way too often, the 50 just incapable of reaching as far as I wanted when shooting from a tour bus for instance.

Teneman wrote:

I've actually gravitated more towards my primes over the last year as well. If I'm shooting a planned subject I definitely prefer the 50mm, or even the 100mm, for the wide open aperture. I only ran into troubles when walking around and shooting subjects of opportunity at indeterminate distances. I found myself changing lenses from the 50mm to the 70-300mm way too often, the 50 just incapable of reaching as far as I wanted when shooting from a tour bus for instance.

If I had to pick a zoom and could take any I wanted I would most likely go with the 24-70mm f/2.8L given that you now have a 70mm-300mm it would fill out the rest of your dynamic range and has a the f/2.8 so then you are not giving up stops for focal lengths you already have.

Enjoyed the pumpkin carving this year. Hope you all did too.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/swigger...

Took a few shots in The Lakes last week. Here's a selection.

IMAGE(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-OAqvZTruG0w/Tq2V2H9UejI/AAAAAAAAGJA/9PIE_6hEz8E/s400/P1110154.JPG)
IMAGE(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-Dc3fKfJ2q20/Tq2WDT-hvII/AAAAAAAAGJk/y85599fwKD4/s400/P1110168.JPG)
IMAGE(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-xcp8ybPOpZI/Tq2V-jFxIcI/AAAAAAAAGJY/Q3ne-yoPJWw/s400/P1110164.JPG)
IMAGE(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-JuLVHhvlU74/Tq2WpsTOMBI/AAAAAAAAGLU/OHRw7s81aS4/s400/P1110223.JPG)
IMAGE(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-PYlBtVsfqtQ/Tq2XR5eulCI/AAAAAAAAGNU/WQwnABs8S2Y/s400/P1110280.JPG)
IMAGE(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-0B4yH46OERc/Tq2YaXKjf7I/AAAAAAAAGPk/9jEYN9IOPfs/s400/P1110371.JPG)
IMAGE(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-bWo7OB2cMBU/Tq2YhpDMswI/AAAAAAAAGP4/7Yl31YNeEsQ/s400/P1110383.JPG)

Gotta say, I am so in love with the 25mm f/1.4 Leica lens.

IMAGE(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6043/6300916072_bf20d19a68.jpg)

Like I said on Twitter:

me wrote:

It wasn't until I got that Leica 25mm lens that I truly understood the photography term, "creamy bokeh." #SoNice #ThatsNotAEuphemism

Note to self: don't get so comfortable with your camera that you stop experimenting.

I've been shooting the Hurricanes hockey warmups with my 25mm (sweet-ass) prime lens for a while now, and settled on shutter priority at 1/400 or 1/500 shutter, with the ISO set to 400. I was getting pretty acceptable quality despite my camera not being a full-frame DSLR. I hadn't really payed much attention to what aperture it ended up using, though.

On a whim last night, I switched to aperture priority and pegged it to 2 or even lower, and holy crap! 1/2000 shutter! Dropped the ISO to 100, and I was still getting 1/640! Warmups look better with a tighter aperture anyways, since people skating behind the target just kinda make things too busy, so I end up deleting plenty where it's just a blob of people regardless. Have I mentioned holy crap this lens is awesome?

IMAGE(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6055/6408427505_c78eb316f3.jpg)
Cam Ward

IMAGE(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7146/6408434899_5612e2a1cb.jpg)
Justin Faulk

IMAGE(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7033/6408433023_de9911c2c8.jpg)
Tuomo Ruutu shoots

Got plenty of blurrier shots but some of that is the uncertainty of what shutter I end up with on aperture priority. Now that I realized the error of my ways, I'll definitely be going full-manual and pegging it to something decent and tweak from there.

I pretty much always shoot aperture priority. I don't see why you would want to go full manual, Ranger Rick. You would be forced to rely on auto-iso for a properly exposed image. For sports, you might try shutter priority mode.

The hockey shots look great btw.

I thought I would share some of my favorite shots from my vacation.

IMAGE(http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee132/Bonnonon/IMGP2898.jpg)
IMAGE(http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee132/Bonnonon/IMGP3040.jpg)
IMAGE(http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee132/Bonnonon/IMGP3028.jpg)

tuffalobuffalo wrote:

I pretty much always shoot aperture priority. I don't see why you would want to go full manual, Ranger Rick. You would be forced to rely on auto-iso for a properly exposed image. For sports, you might try shutter priority mode.

The hockey shots look great btw. ;)

Well, I ended up with a number of shots that had too low of a shutter. I'd rather clean up a dark image in Aperture than end up with blurry action shots 'cause it tried to drop to 1/125 or something. And as I mentioned before, I was originally on shutter priority, and it was getting much worse results. I was, however, pegging the ISO to what I thought I could safely get away with, I suppose I could try shutter priority + auto ISO and see what I get.

Honestly, most of the time, the ice reflects so much (almost-white) light that I don't expect the exposures to vary *that* much regardless of subject, so I bet I can do manual and clean up the exposure some in post.

Regardless, I'll definitely do more experimenting at the next home game. =)

Bonnonon wrote:

I thought I would share some of my favorite shots from my vacation.

Nice! I like the frozen wave in the last one.

Ranger Rick wrote:
tuffalobuffalo wrote:

I pretty much always shoot aperture priority. I don't see why you would want to go full manual, Ranger Rick. You would be forced to rely on auto-iso for a properly exposed image. For sports, you might try shutter priority mode.

The hockey shots look great btw. ;)

Well, I ended up with a number of shots that had too low of a shutter. I'd rather clean up a dark image in Aperture than end up with blurry action shots 'cause it tried to drop to 1/125 or something. And as I mentioned before, I was originally on shutter priority, and it was getting much worse results. I was, however, pegging the ISO to what I thought I could safely get away with, I suppose I could try shutter priority + auto ISO and see what I get.

Honestly, most of the time, the ice reflects so much (almost-white) light that I don't expect the exposures to vary *that* much regardless of subject, so I bet I can do manual and clean up the exposure some in post.

Regardless, I'll definitely do more experimenting at the next home game. =)

Ahhh, I see. I think it depends on the camera how manual mode works. I always think of it as a film camera thing where you have a set ISO, and then you have to set your aperture and shutter speed. To do that properly, you would need to use a lightmeter which is a slow process. That may not be the case for auto-ISO situations. Since you have so much experience shooting in those conditions and have a great idea of what the shutter and aperture should be, that would be cool if you could get away with relying on auto ISO (assuming manual mode still relies on auto ISO for a proper exposure. I also forgot that snow/ice type stuff already screws with a proper exposure, so you will have to do a lot of post processing to adjust exposure/white balance anyways.

Good luck, and I'm curious to see how you fare in a manual mode.

I'm pretty sure grey, rainy days were made so we'd occasionally shoot a still life.

IMAGE(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6120/6373406393_0823ab3033.jpg)
Morning Still Life by swiggers_ERI, on Flickr

Rahmen wrote:

I'm pretty sure grey, rainy days were made so we'd occasionally shoot a still life.

IMAGE(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6120/6373406393_0823ab3033.jpg)
Morning Still Life by swiggers_ERI, on Flickr

Nice! The lighting is quite good for that... =)

I liked these...

IMAGE(http://popspond.smugmug.com/Amanda-Steve/Best-Of-2011/B-2011-11/i-MqGWscm/0/XL/11-11-12-8863-Leland-XL.jpg)

IMAGE(http://popspond.smugmug.com/Amanda-Steve/Best-Of-2011/B-2011-11/i-RrFt8SH/0/XL/11-11-12-8870-Leland-XL.jpg)

I also enjoyed the still life and the frozen wave.

Ranger Rick wrote:

Gotta say, I am so in love with the 25mm f/1.4 Leica lens.

IMAGE(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6043/6300916072_bf20d19a68.jpg)

Like I said on Twitter:

me wrote:

It wasn't until I got that Leica 25mm lens that I truly understood the photography term, "creamy bokeh." #SoNice #ThatsNotAEuphemism

what do you use it on? been thinking one day ill get an m9

Blotto The Clown wrote:

what do you use it on? been thinking one day ill get an m9

I've got an Olympus PEN E-PL1. Pretty happy with it.

The super-fast autofocus on the latest E-P3 is calling to me, but luckily no one is selling them body-only yet, so I'm saved from temptation. =)

Went to full-manual last night. Set the ISO to 100, shutter to 1/400, aperture to f/1.6, and the camera worked out the EV as necessary. Got the best set of sharp pics yet, and didn't even use any noise reduction on them for the first time ever.

At this point the biggest problem I have is that the AF is not as fast as the players I'm trying to catch... I'm sure this would be better with newer hardware, but otherwise I guess my only choice is to try to learn to focus on fast-moving hockey players by hand...

IMAGE(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7002/6429077687_0b74a1da8e.jpg)
Justin Faulk

IMAGE(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7155/6429079089_46fbb5e76b.jpg)
Jamie McBain

IMAGE(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7016/6429081119_d0288a7409.jpg)
Joni Pitkanen falls on his butt

IMAGE(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7149/6429081911_629e4f16d5.jpg)
Andreas Nodl

IMAGE(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6097/6429173389_ed651cced1.jpg)
Chad LaRose

IMAGE(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6093/6429174145_6eb7d7ba68.jpg)
Brandon Sutter

Those are awesome photos Ranger Rick. I have one question. When you go into manual mode to set things and your camera adjust the EV, what setting does it adjust to get a proper exposure (aperture, ISO, or shutter speed). I'm just curious. My guess is that it adjusts the ISO.

Rather than RTFM, you could probably see what the exposure settings were in a program like Adobe Lightroom or something. If any of the photos you took at the game are different from ISO 100, shutter 1/400, and aperture f/1.6, you would know which setting is getting adjusted. I'm just curious.

Shot a friend's birthday party for their 1-year-old son. Made some pretty fun pics with the 25mm Leica lens:

IMAGE(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7005/6495913137_b35b4a479e.jpg)

IMAGE(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7142/6495968221_d96e3889c5.jpg)

Really like this one of my wife:

IMAGE(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7009/6495972759_eb022b6c46.jpg)

And here she was feeding our friends' 1-month-old:

IMAGE(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7015/6495974355_44a638403f.jpg)

In the grand tradition of 1st birthdays, Dad made a Mickey Mouse cake:

IMAGE(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7016/6495964851_f1da18d96d.jpg)

...and gave the ear to Greyson to dig into:

IMAGE(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7144/6496051855_0c95aab315.jpg)

IMAGE(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7002/6496053249_7b5b4761a2.jpg)

Is it me or does that black icing make it look like he's a zombie or something? =)

Nice shots Ranger Rick.

Anyone have experience with the Nikon d7000?

tuffalobuffalo wrote:

Those are awesome photos Ranger Rick. I have one question. When you go into manual mode to set things and your camera adjust the EV, what setting does it adjust to get a proper exposure (aperture, ISO, or shutter speed). I'm just curious. My guess is that it adjusts the ISO.

Rather than RTFM, you could probably see what the exposure settings were in a program like Adobe Lightroom or something. If any of the photos you took at the game are different from ISO 100, shutter 1/400, and aperture f/1.6, you would know which setting is getting adjusted. I'm just curious.

Yeah, they're all identical. Some end up darker than others, but the ones that are a little dark end up getting brightened in post, when I crop, brighten, and (sometimes) do noise reduction.

Every one in my last shoot was: ISO 100, 25mm, 0 ev, f/1.4, 1/500

I've been making more of an effort to use my camera (Nikon D3100 + default 18-55mm lens + a new 55-300mm lens) here in Hong Kong and elsewhere, but starting a photo blog.

I'm happy with some of the results so far, but that may just be a function of how lucky I am to live where I live.

Some favorites:

IMAGE(http://grubbandacamera.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/dsc_0082.jpg?w=1024&h=682)
IMAGE(http://grubbandacamera.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/dsc_0051copy.jpg?w=1024&h=682)
IMAGE(http://grubbandacamera.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/dsc_0177_edited-1.jpg?w=1024&h=682)

The last one is almost unfair. I mean, it's probably impossible to take a bad picture of a good steak.