The Professional Photography and Photoshop Thread

[Swoosh]

By D90 and 35/2

[Joz]

One of my favorite formats for Valk (and other collectibles) photography is "On Black".

Well I just recently acquired my VF-1J Max & Milia customs so here's the latest pic:

[ruskiiVFaussie]

Nice one Joz.

BEAUTIFUL PICS SWOOSH!!! *right-click, save picture as....*

Edited November 8, 2009 by ruskiiVFaussie

[Vegas]

One of my favorite formats for Valk (and other collectibles) photography is "On Black".

Well I just recently acquired my VF-1J Max & Milia customs so here's the latest pic:

nice shots. favorited some of your macross pics

[Kicker773]

Quick test

[Vegas]

Quick test

looks good. try focusing on the eyes/face area cuz thats what people look at first.

keep shooting

[MacrossMan]

I'm expecting to get the Nikon D90 pretty soon. I decided to buy brand new instead of refurbished. I'll be buying the body and lens seperately and have narrowed my lens choices down to three as a starter lens. What would you guys suggest?

Nikon 10mm-24mm DX

Nikon 35mm f/1.8 DX

Nikon 55mm-200mm DX with VR

[eugimon]

the 10-24 is a wide angle lens, good for landscapes, group shots, etc but relatively long focal point and the bubble front element prohibits filter use. I'd recommend the 12-24mm f/4 DX instead.

the 35 f/18 is a wonderfully fast and sharp lens, it's my lens of choice for everyday shooting. I love this lens.

the 55-200 is slow... decent if you're shooting during the day or well lit conditions but a poor performer in all other situations.

If you're looking for a cheap but decent all purpose zoom, I'd suggest the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. Nice construction with a metal mount.

It's pretty fast and pretty sharp. Not as sharp as the nikkor 35mm though. The only issue I have with it is that sometimes the lens and body lose their synch and you have to reseat the lens. Not that big of a deal for me but it is an issue with tamron lenses.

Edited November 25, 2009 by eugimon

[MacrossMan]

the 10-24 is a wide angle lens, good for landscapes, group shots, etc but relatively long focal point and the bubble front element prohibits filter use. I'd recommend the 12-24mm f/4 DX instead.

the 35 f/18 is a wonderfully fast and sharp lens, it's my lens of choice for everyday shooting. I love this lens.

the 55-200 is slow... decent if you're shooting during the day or well lit conditions but a poor performer in all other situations.

If you're looking for a cheap but decent all purpose zoom, I'd suggest the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. Nice construction with a metal mount.

It's pretty fast and pretty sharp. Not as sharp as the nikkor 35mm though. The only issue I have with it is that sometimes the lens and body lose their synch and you have to reseat the lens. Not that big of a deal for me but it is an issue with tamron lenses.

Thanks for the insight eugimon. If you had to choose from the three I've selected which would it be? My thought was to have three solid choices to cover a wide selection of different situations. I'm leaning towards the 35/f 1.8 because I think it will force me to grow and develop. Starting out I only plan to do table top studio shots of my toys, but plan to later get into shooting family events indoors and out as well as my son's sporting events.

[eugimon]

I would definitely go for the 35mm f/1.8. it'll be great for taking shots of toys since it's very versatile and produces a very sharp image while having a very pleasing bokeh. It;s great for potraits and as an all around lens.

[Toonz]

you can also consider nikkor 50mm f1.8

cheap, fast, and good!

[logos]

Hey eugimon do you want to post some pics to show the difference between the kind of pictures you can take with the Prime 35mm F1.8 lense you have and some of the others you may have? Would be interesting to see the difference you get between an f1.8 and a higher f stop lense (like a zoom) in Macro Photography.

[MacrossMan]

Hey eugimon do you want to post some pics to show the difference between the kind of pictures you can take with the Prime 35mm F1.8 lense you have and some of the others you may have? Would be interesting to see the difference you get between an f1.8 and a higher f stop lense (like a zoom) in Macro Photography.

Good idea logos. I'd like to see these as well whenever you can.

[eugimon]

Hey eugimon do you want to post some pics to show the difference between the kind of pictures you can take with the Prime 35mm F1.8 lense you have and some of the others you may have? Would be interesting to see the difference you get between an f1.8 and a higher f stop lense (like a zoom) in Macro Photography.

sure, I'll try and get some done today, otherwise I'll have some up on monday.

[Dante74]

Lets talk tripods!

Up until a few weeks ago, when I needed a tripod, I would just borrow my dad's 35 year old aluminium tripod. I've been getting into urbex photography lately and the thing is just way too heavy to walk and crawl around with all day. It also creeps off the subject when I tighten it into position.

So I've been looking into getting a decent lightweight tripod and I've been having a hard time deciding what to get (meaning what ridiculous amount of money to spend on some sticks and a balljoint )

After reading this article I've come to the conclusion that getting it right the first time (meaning spendig a ridiculous amount of money on some sticks and a balljoint ) will actually save me some cash. However, that doesn't mean I have an unlimited budget.

This Gitzo GT2932 Basalt tripod combined with this Gitzo GH2780QR ballhead should suffice for a couple of years (hopefully decades!)

Anyone have any experience with a 'real' tripod and would like to share their thoughts?

[eugimon]

As requested, here's shots from my lenses, all shots taken at 3'8" from subject, the vf-11 with spot metering and using the center focus point. ISO is at something ridiculous like 1250 as I didn't bother to check and shooting in aperture priority mode. I didn't bother to check for exposure, just think of it as a lesson on what high ISO and a wide open lens can do.

Nikkor 12-24mm f/4 DX at 12mm

f/4

f/5

f/11

24mm

f/4

f/5

f/11

Edited November 26, 2009 by eugimon

[eugimon]

nikkor 35mm f/1.8

f/1.8

f/5

f/11

[eugimon]

Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 at 75mm

f/2.8

f/5

f/11

tamron 90mm f/2.8

f/3.2

f/5

f/11

[eugimon]

nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6

55mm

f/4

f/5

f/11

200mm (the focus point was on the shoulder, not the head)

f/5.6

f/11

[anime52k8]

Lets talk tripods!

Up until a few weeks ago, when I needed a tripod, I would just borrow my dad's 35 year old aluminium tripod. I've been getting into urbex photography lately and the thing is just way too heavy to walk and crawl around with all day. It also creeps off the subject when I tighten it into position.

So I've been looking into getting a decent lightweight tripod and I've been having a hard time deciding what to get (meaning what ridiculous amount of money to spend on some sticks and a balljoint )

After reading this article I've come to the conclusion that getting it right the first time (meaning spendig a ridiculous amount of money on some sticks and a balljoint ) will actually save me some cash. However, that doesn't mean I have an unlimited budget.

This Gitzo GT2932 Basalt tripod combined with this Gitzo GH2780QR ballhead should suffice for a couple of years (hopefully decades!)

Anyone have any experience with a 'real' tripod and would like to share their thoughts?

tripods are crazy expensive arn't they? what you need to look at with a tripod is how heavy it is and how much your camera weighs. if you have a big full frame body and a huge super telephoto, you'll need a heavy duty tripod and ball head, if you've got a small camera and lens you should be fine with a lighter set up.

you're looking at a 22lb tripod and a 30lb ball head, is the weight of the camera (with lens), ball head and ballast (i.e. full backpack/camera bag) going to be less than 22lbs?

anyways, Gizo is a very good brand for tripods, so is Manfrotto/bogen,

As for ball heads, that's a good one but if you're going the route of "spurge now and be set for decades" look at arca-swiss it's probably way more than you need now but you'll never need another ball head ever. you'll also need a quick release plate

[anime52k8]

oh, also if you just need something for extra support and stability a Mono pod can be a good alternative to a full tripod. Bogen makes some nice, relatively inexpensive monopods. Gitzo makes very nice but very pricey ones.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews...pod-Review.aspx

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews...pod-Review.aspx

anyways, I've been looking at a similar set of tripod legs myself (although new lenses are a higher priority right now, my bulky aluminum tripod works fine indoors and it's so heavy I don't even need ballast). Although I'm saving up for a kirk or Acra-swiss head.

[Lynx7725]

I'm expecting to get the Nikon D90 pretty soon. I decided to buy brand new instead of refurbished. I'll be buying the body and lens seperately and have narrowed my lens choices down to three as a starter lens. What would you guys suggest?

Nikon 10mm-24mm DX

Nikon 35mm f/1.8 DX

Nikon 55mm-200mm DX with VR

A bit late to the party, but...

You'll need to think carefully about this. All three of these are DX lens, which is fine if you stick with digital bodies -- specifically, digital bodies with a crop factor. On full frame bodies (film and higher end digitals), these are significantly less useful, as their smaller circle of image means there are certain ranges which would not be useable (as the non-imaged portion will show up black).

Again, if you stick with the semi-pro Nikons DX would be nice -- I don't think Nikon would move away from the 1.5 ~ 1.6 crop factor -- but full frame digitals had been the vogue lately, and these things do tend to propagate downwards. If you seriously get the photography bug and upgrade in the distant future, then you might end up stuck with a piece of glass that is less useful.

[Dante74]

The Really Right Stuff and Arca Swiss ballheads are so friggin' expensive it's beyond ridiculous! I'll have to try to convince my boss that I need it for work and let him sponsor me.

I've got a Canon 40D, an EF-s 17-85 mm (which will someday be replaced by a 24-70 mm f2. and a 70-200 mm f2.8 IS lens weighing in at 1.5 kg. I might get a 1.4x extender some day, but that's about as heavy as it's gonna get. The series 2 Gitzo ballhead should do fine for at least a couple of years.

I've looked into getting a monopod for when I'm taking pics at the race track but it won't do when I'm in a dark abandoned building with hardly any light.

tripods are crazy expensive arn't they? what you need to look at with a tripod is how heavy it is and how much your camera weighs. if you have a big full frame body and a huge super telephoto, you'll need a heavy duty tripod and ball head, if you've got a small camera and lens you should be fine with a lighter set up.

you're looking at a 22lb tripod and a 30lb ball head, is the weight of the camera (with lens), ball head and ballast (i.e. full backpack/camera bag) going to be less than 22lbs?

anyways, Gizo is a very good brand for tripods, so is Manfrotto/bogen,

As for ball heads, that's a good one but if you're going the route of "spurge now and be set for decades" look at arca-swiss it's probably way more than you need now but you'll never need another ball head ever. you'll also need a quick release plate

[Kicker773]

Took some quick shots with 200ISO and F5. My room doesn't have that much lighting so bare with me. Btw sorry for the dust. LOL

[logos]

Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 looks nice. If I ever decide to upgrade from my G11, I so have to invest in a fast lense. I really like how the depth of field is so short and you can really use it to only keep exactly what your shooting in focus. Which camera do you have again eugimon...a nikon?

Maybe I'll break down and get an Olympus EP-2 next year now that they will include a detachable EF on it with the pancake lense. I still want something more portable than a dslr and have body image stabilization. My G11 is really nice for keeping in my backpack that I take everywhere with me but it seriously lacks in the quickness department.

As to the tripod if totally recomend a monopod as while it may not be as stable as a complete tripod it should still give a few stops better performance to hand held. If that's not enough I have used a gorilla pod allot at work mainly because it's so damn portable. Both options are nice because you can fit them in a bag....usually with your camera.

The ultimate is still a tripod though if you don't mind lugging it around. So when it comes to this I can't recommend enough using surveyor tripods designed for Theodolites, Levels, and Total stations. Rugged and reliable, if you can find one on ebay or at an auction somewhere pick it up. You will have to modify it to fit the screw mount of your camera. These are larger and heavier screw heads designed to hold 5-30 lbs. pieces of survey equipment afterall. Again though you could probably pick a used one up cheap at a government auction or something and would make a good project to convert, if you are looking for such a thing. They are way better than some lightweight aluminum ones from most stores. There are some decent camera tripods that are pretty good but they get pretty expensive fast. It all depends on how much you want to spend.

No need for a remote switch with one of the survey ones though. ....ah I miss surveying some days. Note that they are heavy but the feet are heavily spiked so you can get a firm purchase in most surfaces except concrete and tile. I converted an old survey tripod from work for this use at a previous job and it worked great.

Edited November 28, 2009 by logos

[eugimon]

yeah, I use a nikon D90

[anime52k8]

The Really Right Stuff and Arca Swiss ballheads are so friggin' expensive it's beyond ridiculous! I'll have to try to convince my boss that I need it for work and let him sponsor me.

I've got a Canon 40D, an EF-s 17-85 mm (which will someday be replaced by a 24-70 mm f2. and a 70-200 mm f2.8 IS lens weighing in at 1.5 kg. I might get a 1.4x extender some day, but that's about as heavy as it's gonna get. The series 2 Gitzo ballhead should do fine for at least a couple of years.

I've looked into getting a monopod for when I'm taking pics at the race track but it won't do when I'm in a dark abandoned building with hardly any light.

hey, what's an extra $100 when you're already spending $700 on a tripod set up.

like I said though, I'm looking at a kirk ballhead http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=KIBH1*&N=0

it's only $15 more than the Gizo, and it'll hold 20 more pounds and I just like the construction and finish better. (i.e. more like the Arca-Swiss ballheads. )

[Dante74]

I used to be a surveyor and although nothing beats a surveyors tripod for stability I don't see myself dragging something that heavy around all day when I'm climbing and crawling into old buildings.

As to the tripod if totally recomend a monopod as while it may not be as stable as a complete tripod it should still give a few stops better performance to hand held. If that's not enough I have used a gorilla pod allot at work mainly because it's so damn portable. Both options are nice because you can fit them in a bag....usually with your camera.

The ultimate is still a tripod though if you don't mind lugging it around. So when it comes to this I can't recommend enough using surveyor tripods designed for Theodolites, Levels, and Total stations. Rugged and reliable, if you can find one on ebay or at an auction somewhere pick it up. You will have to modify it to fit the screw mount of your camera. These are larger and heavier screw heads designed to hold 5-30 lbs. pieces of survey equipment afterall. Again though you could probably pick a used one up cheap at a government auction or something and would make a good project to convert, if you are looking for such a thing. They are way better than some lightweight aluminum ones from most stores. There are some decent camera tripods that are pretty good but they get pretty expensive fast. It all depends on how much you want to spend.

No need for a remote switch with one of the survey ones though. ....ah I miss surveying some days. Note that they are heavy but the feet are heavily spiked so you can get a firm purchase in most surfaces except concrete and tile. I converted an old survey tripod from work for this use at a previous job and it worked great.

I ordered a Gitzo GT2940 (EDIT it's a GT2941) which should arive by tuesday.

I still haven't decided which ballhead to get. Gitzo's new line of series 2 ballheads seem to be cheaper than the old one. I'll try to find out why and decide which one to get later this week. The Kirk ballhead looks good too, I might have to go to a brick and mortar store to compare it to the others. Thanks for the advice guys! I'll post pics of, and taken with, the new set up when it's complete.

hey, what's an extra $100 when you're already spending $700 on a tripod set up.

like I said though, I'm looking at a kirk ballhead http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=KIBH1*&N=0

it's only $15 more than the Gizo, and it'll hold 20 more pounds and I just like the construction and finish better. (i.e. more like the Arca-Swiss ballheads. )

Edited December 2, 2009 by Dante74

[VFTF1]

I'm making a new photo-comic. Yesterday I had a nervous breakdown which apparently led to my writers block of the last three months magically going away - the birth of a new idea for a story - and hey presto. For now, I'm writing the first episode. But I already have the cover picture ready, and thought I'd share it.

As you might tell at a guess, the comic book stars Haruhi, Yuki and Mikuru... Haruhi gets to pilot a VF-22S The shining boobs effect is my doing.. I don't know if it works or not - but I like it

Pete

[Dante74]

My tripod arrived last week and I've ordered a, hold on,...wait for it,... Really Right Stuff BH-40 ballhead with quick-release clamp.

I noticed a local (Dutch) website has them on sale but it's really weird 'cause I ordered a separate ballhead and clamp and got 'em cheaper than the same pieces as a set. The ballhead was $238 and the clamp was $184 making my set $422. The store sold them as a set for $520. I'm gonna have to wait a few weeks because they have them on backorder, but I called them and confirmed the order for $422 (they sent me a pdf invoice). That's even cheaper than ordering from the RRS website shipped ($50) and taxed (%20 + handling fee)

<--me being happy

Edited December 9, 2009 by Dante74

[anime52k8]

My tripod arrived last week and I've ordered a, hold on,...wait for it,... Really Right Stuff BH-40 ballhead with quick-release clamp.

I noticed a local (Dutch) website has them on sale but it's really weird 'cause I ordered a separate ballhead and clamp and got 'em cheaper than the same pieces as a set. The ballhead was $238 and the clamp was $184 making my set $422. The store sold them as a set for $520. I'm gonna have to wait a few weeks because they have them on backorder, but I called them and confirmed the order for $422 (they sent me a pdf invoice). That's even cheaper than ordering from the RRS website shipped ($50) and taxed (%20 + handling fee)

<--me being happy

Hmm... I'm never heard of them before. let us know how they are once you get them.

[MacrossMan]

You guys might already know about this website, but I have been reading this guys' reviews and reccomendations. I've been learning a lot from reading the information here. The website is: www.kenrockwell.com

I was reading about the Leica M9 and that camera reminds me so much of when I used to sell home audio equipment for a living. The higher stuff didn't have all the bells and whistles that you see on the lower stuff. Everything in the higher end audio gear had a clear purpose. There was nothing there to get in the way of comprimising the sound. They're always plain looking and to those that didn't know any better they would look right over it because there is no "flash" or "wow" factor when looking. But man oh man when you fire it up and turn on the sound?!?!? Schweet!!!

I'm still ignorant about this photography stuff, but if I had the money I swear I'd drop it for that M9!

[eugimon]

take *everything* he says with a huge grain of salt... he's almost universally not respected.

[anime52k8]

You guys might already know about this website, but I have been reading this guys' reviews and reccomendations. I've been learning a lot from reading the information here. The website is: www.kenrockwell.com

I was reading about the Leica M9 and that camera reminds me so much of when I used to sell home audio equipment for a living. The higher stuff didn't have all the bells and whistles that you see on the lower stuff. Everything in the higher end audio gear had a clear purpose. There was nothing there to get in the way of comprimising the sound. They're always plain looking and to those that didn't know any better they would look right over it because there is no "flash" or "wow" factor when looking. But man oh man when you fire it up and turn on the sound?!?!? Schweet!!!

I'm still ignorant about this photography stuff, but if I had the money I swear I'd drop it for that M9!

the M9 (like the M8) is a very specialty camera. Rangefinders lack much of the versatility and precision of SLR's. accurate framing and composition is difficult at closer distances due to the viewfinder being offset from the lens, and focusing through the viewfinder doesn't always work with zoom lenses (hence why rangefinder lenses are usually primes).

the benefits of a Rangefinder are that they are very compact relative to the quality of lens and sensor size they have, and because of their design they can use VERY wide angle lenses. also because of the nature of the viewfinder you can shoot with both eyes open, and can get a view that's larger than the actual size of the picture you're taking.

basically for studio photography, macro/close up photography, and super-telephoto photography, SLR's are better. but for environmental photography where you want to be in amongst your subject, Range finders are better. (compact size, better situational awareness, and the look of the camera doesn't make people as nervous/attract as much attention)

really rangefinders like that are more for serious, experienced photographers than for the casual shutterbug/guy just getting into photography. that said, I'd sell my soul and take out an advance on the souls of my future children to get my hands on one.

also, Ken Rockwell is an arrogant, self-righteous tool.

[eugimon]

the m9 is petty much a toy anyways... crappy ISO performance, a buggy and limited autofocus, generally subpar IQ.