PF Photography: Tips, Tricks, & Photo Sharing

[binzing]

I already know how to make good photos and what I like, I'm trying to go pro. I was just asking if you thought it was a good deal. It comes with prolly like 5 or 6 lenses. For $300!

 

[larkspur]

I already know how to make good photos and what I like, I'm trying to go pro. I was just asking if you thought it was a good deal. It comes with prolly like 5 or 6 lenses. For $300!

Do you have specifics on the lenses? mm, f/x

 

[binzing]

Let me grab the ad real fast.

 

[Astronuc]

Oh look! It's a beaver-like mammal!

http://www.beaverlikemammals.com/

It's notabeaver. We have lots of notabeavers in our area. We used to have a family of them in our yard before I relocated them some miles away. They are notawelcome here.

 

[binzing]

OK, here's everything it comes with.

Albinar ADG 28 mm f 1:2.8, Sigma 35mm to 70mm f2.8-22, JC Penney 80mm to 200mm f4.5-22, Minolta 50mm f1.7-22, Minolta 50mm f1.7-16, 2x teleconverter, set of 14, 21, and 28mm Minolta Extension Tubes, Minolta Auto Winder, Sunpak MX - 1D Hot Shoe Adapter, Sunpak MX - 2D Hot Shoe Adapter, 16" Elect, Cable Release and Misc.

This is word-for-word. All that for $300 what do you think?

 

[Mech_Engineer]

A girl's best friend...

 

[neutrino]

Coming in for a Landing

Sunday! I got to use my camera again after a week. I noticed a flower in front of our house that I usually miss. It was just after mid-day and the bright sun above created a nice photo-op. (although I was cramped for space.) And there was this insect (I'm just going to call it a bee) to boot!

I haven't processed this shot, and I'm looking for tips. The shadow at the bottom right has to go, right? Too bad the bee appears fuzzy . This was taken in Av mode. I later changed to manual, and made the shutter speed sufficiently fast to get a couple of other images with the bee clearly in focus.

A larger version can be found http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2391/2270482871_ce3cbc9133_b.jpg".

 

[Andre]

OK, here's everything it comes with.

Albinar ADG 28 mm f 1:2.8, Sigma 35mm to 70mm f2.8-22, JC Penney 80mm to 200mm f4.5-22, Minolta 50mm f1.7-22, Minolta 50mm f1.7-16, 2x teleconverter, set of 14, 21, and 28mm Minolta Extension Tubes, Minolta Auto Winder, Sunpak MX - 1D Hot Shoe Adapter, Sunpak MX - 2D Hot Shoe Adapter, 16" Elect, Cable Release and Misc.

This is word-for-word. All that for $300 what do you think?

I have exactly that same camera ever since 1978 or something with a shipload of assessories. I contemplated to donate it to a museum, never thought of selling it.
Digital photography however is outclassing the classic SLR's by miles.

If I was to spend $300 on a camera, I'd recommend mine here and you have even lots of money left for some gadgets. I added a filter converter ring to 55mm so I can use all my old filters and close up lenses.

You could also contemplate it's slightly bigger brother

but if you compare the life size studio pictures, you might settle for the cheaper one:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz8/samples/comparedto/panasonicfz8-ISO100.jpg
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicFZ18/samples/comparedto/xfz18_ISO100.JPG

These crops for instance:

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz8/samples/crops/panasonicfz8-ISO100-crop.jpg and
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicFZ18/samples/crops/xfz18_ISO-100-crops.jpg

After all, the output and only the output counts. Who needs all the gadgets when the picture is inferior?

 

[Astronuc]

Sunday! I got to use my camera again after a week. I noticed a flower in front of our house that I usually miss. It was just after mid-day and the bright sun above created a nice photo-op. (although I was cramped for space.) And there was this insect (I'm just going to call it a bee) to boot!

I haven't processed this shot, and I'm looking for tips. The shadow at the bottom right has to go, right? Too bad the bee appears fuzzy . This was taken in Av mode. I later changed to manual, and made the shutter speed sufficiently fast to get a couple of other images with the bee clearly in focus.

Cool picture, neutrino. I'd leave the shadows as they are. If you process the photo, just sharpen it.

 

[larkspur]

Sunday! I got to use my camera again after a week. I noticed a flower in front of our house that I usually miss. It was just after mid-day and the bright sun above created a nice photo-op. (although I was cramped for space.) And there was this insect (I'm just going to call it a bee) to boot!

I haven't processed this shot, and I'm looking for tips. The shadow at the bottom right has to go, right? Too bad the bee appears fuzzy . This was taken in Av mode. I later changed to manual, and made the shutter speed sufficiently fast to get a couple of other images with the bee clearly in focus.

A larger version can be found http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2391/2270482871_ce3cbc9133_b.jpg".

Too bad the camera focused on the petals instead of the pistils and stamens. or the bee. Those are what the eye is drawn to and I doubt you could sharpen that with enough with software. That is where the fun of digital comes in, you toss this one and try again for perfection.

 

[larkspur]

OK, here's everything it comes with.

Albinar ADG 28 mm f 1:2.8, Sigma 35mm to 70mm f2.8-22, JC Penney 80mm to 200mm f4.5-22, Minolta 50mm f1.7-22, Minolta 50mm f1.7-16, 2x teleconverter, set of 14, 21, and 28mm Minolta Extension Tubes, Minolta Auto Winder, Sunpak MX - 1D Hot Shoe Adapter, Sunpak MX - 2D Hot Shoe Adapter, 16" Elect, Cable Release and Misc.

This is word-for-word. All that for $300 what do you think?

Here is a site to look at that may help you decide:
http://www.rokkorfiles.com/" /

I doubt the jc penny or the other off-brands with get you professional quality images. Having owned off brand lenses I would not recommend them. They never match the quality of the name brands.

 

[neutrino]

Thanks for the feedback, Astro and larkspur. I actually made an error in my earlier post. This was taken in manual mode, but 1/1000s wasn't fast enough.

larkspur, I had trouble focussing due to the glare from the sun. The flower was bright and the tightly-packed stamens didn't help much. :(

 

[larkspur]

Thats a cool shot. What is being done to the diamond? I see the little flecks coming off in nice detail.

 

[turbo]

Thanks for the feedback, Astro and larkspur. I actually made an error in my earlier post. This was taken in manual mode, but 1/1000s wasn't fast enough.

larkspur, I had trouble focussing due to the glare from the sun. The flower was bright and the tightly-packed stamens didn't help much. :(

It may help to reduce the aperture on shots like this to get the depth of field a little larger so that more of the flower is in focus. This will increase the exposure time, so flying bees will be blurred. I like to catch them when they're working, so blur won't be as much of a problem.

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x318/turbo-1/thistle_bee.jpg

 

[Mech_Engineer]

Thats a cool shot. What is being done to the diamond? I see the little flecks coming off in nice detail.

Yeah, it's dirty. That's my fiance's engagement ring, with one of the prongs of the ring that holds the stone. You can see how the soft metal crushes and deforms against the perfectly angular and hard geometry of the diamond... Maybe I'll try editing out the dust/scratches.

 

[Astronuc]

Thanks for the feedback, Astro and larkspur. I actually made an error in my earlier post. This was taken in manual mode, but 1/1000s wasn't fast enough.

larkspur, I had trouble focussing due to the glare from the sun. The flower was bright and the tightly-packed stamens didn't help much. :(

In manual mode, it's best to increase the f/stop (reduce aperture size) to get a greater depth of field as turbo mentioned. For that reason, I prefer manual as opposed to autofocus. I still have to get around to using my new DSLR.

 

[binzing]

I was really just going to pick it up for some fun (and maybe profit by selling individual parts) My Evolt E-500 does just fine, and the lens I want to get next will be at least $500.

 

[turbo]

neutrino, with my camera, you can half-way depress the shutter button to set the autofocus, then re-frame your shot while holding the button, then fully depress to get the shot. I tend to use autofocus a lot more than I thought I would for that feature alone.

 

[binzing]

Yeah, my camera does that too, its nice, except when the AF is trying to focus on the wrong thing.

 

[~christina~]

It is a bit on the pricey side, but the image quality is great over all of its focal length range, and I have noticed that a lot of nature photographers are using this lens instead of (or along with) primes. Critters tend to move around, and since they aren't posing for you (most of the time) you often need to be able to change focal length on the fly. The built-in image stabilization (with 2 modes available) and very fast auto-focus capabilities make this a very versatile lens in fast-changing situations. I've got another 30D that pretty much stays mounted to a 28-135mm zoom, so two cameras can cover a LOT of ground. When I was shooting film, I used to tote 3-4 Olympus bodies, all with prime lenses.

Hm..I like those expensive prime lens' but I don't think I'd be willing to shell out the money for them, especially since I could use it for something else. The 2 lens' I have now don't have stabalization but the one I want does have it (70-300).

 

[~christina~]

I went to a park along the Kennebec river looking for raptors one day last summer, but the only interesting character I found was this fellow.

It's a either a groundhog or a marmot..but I'm leaning toward groundhog.

 

[larkspur]

Playing with my light tent. Here are a few shots:

The other one is posted in the still life thread.

 

[larkspur]

Photo shopped Tulips:

 

[binzing]

That'd be a groundhog.
Nice shots Larkspur.

 

[neutrino]

It may help to reduce the aperture on shots like this to get the depth of field a little larger so that more of the flower is in focus. This will increase the exposure time, so flying bees will be blurred. I like to catch them when they're working, so blur won't be as much of a problem.

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x318/turbo-1/thistle_bee.jpg

In manual mode, it's best to increase the f/stop (reduce aperture size) to get a greater depth of field as turbo mentioned. For that reason, I prefer manual as opposed to autofocus. I still have to get around to using my new DSLR.

neutrino, with my camera, you can half-way depress the shutter button to set the autofocus, then re-frame your shot while holding the button, then fully depress to get the shot. I tend to use autofocus a lot more than I thought I would for that feature alone.

Thanks, guys. I guess I took the macro+larger aperture=shallower DOF too seriously.(all were taken at F2.7) Next time, I'll reduce the aperture size and use the AF. :)

 

[neutrino]

Here's another shot from the same batch as the previous photo. (please wear a pair of sunglasses before viewing the flower. )

Crop and unsharp mask. Does any of you think the background stuff on top is distracting?

 

[turbo]

That one is nice. The diagonal border adds a bit of a dynamic to the shot, the DOF is just about perfect, with the fly and the sexual organs of the blossom in good focus. The proportions of the shot are pleasing to me. (border delineates upper 1/3rd, blossom occupies bottom 2/3rds, fly is almost dead center of the shot, yet off-centered with respect to the blossom)

 

[larkspur]

Here's another shot from the same batch as the previous photo. (please wear a pair of sunglasses before viewing the flower. )

Crop and unsharp mask. Does any of you think the background stuff on top is distracting?

It seems the detail in the petals have been lost somewhat. Needs a tiny bit of yellow in the reds(selective color).
[edit] I like this shot much better than the other. Nice job! [/edit]

 

[turbo]

To add to larkspur's comments - I tried to to concentrate on composition, focus, DOF - the mechanics of getting the shot. If you have some post-processing software like Photoshop or The Gimp you may be able to improve the range of colors in the petals and increase the sharpness of the veins by playing with color curves or other adjustments or filters.

Edit: I am NOT good at post-processing, nor do I have the patience for tweaking over and over again, so I really can't be helpful in advising you how to get more detail out of the petals. OK I'm hooked on photography, but I'm a pretty lazy Photoshopper.

 

[vincentm]

I'll post some when i get home :)