Post Your Photography Here #2
May 11, 2008 at 7:16 AM Post #1,516 of 15,770
Quote:

Originally Posted by vagarach /img/forum/go_quote.gif
This is OT, but please forgive me, this is the place where all the photography buffs hang out!

Going from the D50 kit Nikon 18-55mm lens, which new lens around $500 would provide the greatest increase in versatility? I have noticed two things shooting with the kit lens so far: More zoom would be great (birds and small animals really need longer focal lengths) and that I can only get f5.6 zoomed all they way in, and I want mooooore DOF
biggrin.gif
. I have a thing for macro shots too. Having 1:1 on a lens would also be very nice, though these more obscure lenses will have to be found online.

The Nikon 70-300mm with VR seems the best candidate, and Towert7 has already done some superb work a similar Nikon lens, so I can rest assured I won't be disappointed!



This is the best thread to ask this in:
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f90/ni...f-here-222099/

If you like macro pictures, you should seriously consider a macro lens. Only thing is, they are pretty much fixed focal lengths.

As strange as it sounds, if you got the 70-300mm VR with a +2 or +4 diopter (close up adapter), you could get some close to , if not true 1:1 size pictures.
I recently got myself a +4 (and +2) diopter for my 70-300mm and tried it out. It is scary! Instead of a min focus of 5ft, I was focusing in at 300mm at about 5inches or so in front of the subject. A persons eye easily filled up the whole screen.

Sadly, I haven't tried taking any pictures with the 70-300 + diopter. Maybe I will just for haha's. The reason though is because I just got the Nikon 60mm micro lens.

Another thing to think about it the 18-200VR. It'll increase your focal length range, plus it allows you to get pretty close to the subject even at 200mm. That should be another one for you to consider.

Keep us posted on what you end up getting.
 
May 11, 2008 at 11:58 PM Post #1,518 of 15,770
I've been shooting RAW only for over a month now, but ironically, I've only just downloaded an NEF converter. Luckily, I've had the chance to get out recently and take some nice "real world" shots - so I figured I'd post some keepers here.

_DSC0042.jpg

_DSC0037.jpg

_DSC0007.jpg

_DSC0004.jpg

_DSC0001.jpg


As an aside, I'm still truly amazed at just how sharp my 85 f/1.8 can be when stopped down a little. All of these shots above were taken at f/2.8; and by that aperture the lens has basically reached its peak resolution performance. I can even say, based on comparable images I've taken, that my 85 bests the famous Nikon 80-200 until f/8 or so; at least in the case of one particular sample.
 
May 12, 2008 at 1:55 AM Post #1,519 of 15,770
Curiosity killed the


Used my parent's D80 with old kit 18-55mm. I'm amazed at how sharp this is (looks more like something I would have got from my 85mm or 60mm).

Glad to see you are enjoying your new 85mm M0T0XGUY.
 
May 12, 2008 at 12:11 PM Post #1,520 of 15,770
I took off early Friday afternoon and went for walk in a local park. I din't feel like lugging around a tripod and a bunch of gear, so I took just my 20D, 17-40/4 L and a Kenko 12mm extension tube. Here are a few macro shots taken with this combination.

293633459_JgyPp-L.jpg


293644249_pVREK-L.jpg


293643573_wszFw-L.jpg


293644138_Svnif-L.jpg
 
May 12, 2008 at 4:23 PM Post #1,521 of 15,770
Quote:

Originally Posted by ronin74 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
GT, I prefer the panorama version on deviantArt. In this case more is better, more sense of "place." Post it up and make Baines' day.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Baines93 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Nice! I love these. I still have your last centred on my desktop!

Please more of these, in panorama! (so it fits widescreen) I have the old one centred with a black border, looks great. I think it wouldnt look as good if it fitted! Strange!
confused.gif


Matt



I'll post up a widescreen version of both soon.
wink.gif


20080313schoolspaintripng2.jpg
 
May 12, 2008 at 8:06 PM Post #1,522 of 15,770
Few B&W's again using HP5.

1. This building was crying out for it's photo to be taken
img001-pp-r-1.jpg


2.
img008-pp-r-1.jpg


3.
img006-pp-r-1.jpg


4.
img007-pp-r-1.jpg


5. Self Portrait - had two shots left on film to get this shot, guess i got lucky.
img015-pp-r.jpg
 
May 12, 2008 at 8:08 PM Post #1,523 of 15,770
A few from a colour film i wanted to try, Velvia100.

1. extra points for guessing the vinyl lol
img002-pp-r-1.jpg


2.
img008-pp-r.jpg


3.
img016-pp-r.jpg


4.
img006-pp-r.jpg
 
May 12, 2008 at 8:10 PM Post #1,524 of 15,770
oh, and a few more B&W's.. i promise, it's my last ones for a while again!

1.
img011-pp-r.jpg


2.
img019-pp-r.jpg


3.
img021-pp-r.jpg


4.
img034-pp-r.jpg
 
May 13, 2008 at 12:41 AM Post #1,527 of 15,770
Quote:

Originally Posted by GTRacer /img/forum/go_quote.gif

Still experimenting with some PP.



I can see the lines around the people where you 'painted' the selection. The contrast/lightness around the people is noticeable.
 
May 13, 2008 at 3:31 AM Post #1,528 of 15,770
Portraits:

1.
F1000004.jpg


2.
00220032.jpg


3.
00220013.jpg


4.
00220011.jpg


I'm very impressed with how the first and third came out. I'm always a hit/miss with film, but I always seem to get better shots with it, on average. I refuse to waste film with numerous shots on one subject. I take one, maybe two if I'm worried I did something stupid on the first, and move on. With Digital, I snap off as many as I can.

Landscaping up next.
 
May 13, 2008 at 3:37 AM Post #1,530 of 15,770
Landscaping:

1.
01040024.jpg


2.
01040025.jpg


3.
IMG_0030-1.jpg


4.
DSCN0150.jpg


The last two were both Digital. 1 and 2 are from Sackville, NB. 3 is from Lake Petoe, Alberta. Apparently it's a very common shot, but I didn't know that when I took the picture
tongue.gif
. Of course when I got home from the trip, I saw the same shot, in B&W, for sale as a big poster. 4 is from British Columbia. Something or other Falls, fairly close to Chilliwak.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top