Post Your Photography Here #2
May 27, 2008 at 3:05 AM Post #1,681 of 15,743
Thanks devwild.
 
May 27, 2008 at 3:41 AM Post #1,683 of 15,743
Quote:

Originally Posted by M0T0XGUY /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Did you happen to take the first one along the Hudson River Park pier (pier 51, 49)?


No, a bit further down, around soho.
 
May 27, 2008 at 7:05 AM Post #1,684 of 15,743
2358017909_74e74524f9_b.jpg


2358047775_2c3434072e_b.jpg


2357950615_88bee02d2c_b.jpg


2358888474_9922775549_b.jpg


2322193547_d92a15db7a_b.jpg
 
May 27, 2008 at 4:05 PM Post #1,687 of 15,743
My 35 F/2 just got here a couple days ago, and I've been having a hell of a time with it since. It may not be as sharp as the 85 F/1.8, or as well-built as the 80-200 F/2.8 but its near-macro abilities easily steal the show for me. All in all, I'm quite satisfied with my purchase; here are a couple of photos which hopefully illustrate that.

Image007-1.jpg

Image008-1.jpg

_DSC0083.jpg
 
May 27, 2008 at 4:06 PM Post #1,688 of 15,743
Image002-1.jpg

Image003-1.jpg

Image004-1.jpg

Image006-1.jpg


I'm still not totally satisfied with my RAW converter, but it'll do until Nikon Capture gets here.

EDIT: These and the one's above have been re-sharpened in GIMP so as to look closer to the original RAW image captured by the camera. Originally, they were quite soft; explaining the following few comments.
 
May 27, 2008 at 4:40 PM Post #1,690 of 15,743
Quote:

Originally Posted by M0T0XGUY /img/forum/go_quote.gif
My 35 F/2 just got here a couple days ago, and I've been having a hell of a time with it since. It may not be as sharp as the 85 F/1.8, or as well-built as the 80-200 F/2.8 but its near-macro abilities easily steal the show for me. All in all, I'm quite satisfied with my purchase; here are a couple of photos which hopefully illustrate that.


Those pictures look pretty soft.... It is strange, because my 35mm is AS sharp as my 85mm. I bought both new, so I know the 35mm can be as sharp as the 85mm. I wonder why you are getting unsharp results.
 
May 27, 2008 at 6:19 PM Post #1,691 of 15,743
Yes indeed, they look rather soft, maybe a smidge out of focus. Even the (rather good) 18-55 kit lens can manage much, much sharper images if everything is optimal, whereas the 35mm is a prime lens!
 
May 27, 2008 at 7:52 PM Post #1,692 of 15,743
Quote:

Originally Posted by Towert7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Those pictures look pretty soft.... It is strange, because my 35mm is AS sharp as my 85mm. I bought both new, so I know the 35mm can be as sharp as the 85mm. I wonder why you are getting unsharp results.


It's unfortunately the fault of my RAW converter. Out of camera the RAW files are pretty much tack sharp and don't need any further sharpening, but the corresponding JPEG's do indeed look horribly mis-processed. As an example, I've sharpened in GIMP a photo from above; which itself looks much closer to the original RAW image:

_DSC0083.jpg


The RAW is actually even sharper than this, but it's closer to the original than the sample a few posts back.
 
May 27, 2008 at 8:14 PM Post #1,693 of 15,743
Recent trip to Block Island, RI:

beach1.jpg


beach2.jpg


water1.jpg


sam1.jpg


Unfortunately I broke my camera and 18-55IS while I was on the trip. The 18-55 is still under warranty so I can get that repaired, but I'm going to have to do something about the good ol' XT. It's been 3 years, so it's high time for an upgrade, but I don't think I'm going to go crazy and probably only upgrade to an XTI or XSI. I personally find the lenses a LOT more important than the body.
 
May 27, 2008 at 8:25 PM Post #1,694 of 15,743
I haven't posted for a while so here's a couple pics

dwb0272bx5.jpg

Veterans cemetery during Memorial Day.

dsc4792sb1.jpg

Some of the desert out here.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top