Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm not fully happy with some of the shots, but it was getting late in the afternoon, making it harder to take some of them. I was also experimenting with a polaroid filter, which I took off for the last shots (including the close-up below) as I felt it was making things worse, not better (and I don't have a fucking clue what I'm doing with it yet for that matter). These were shot using the D7000 with the original 18-200mm. I think the latter could do with being replaced with some better glass for this kind of thing as the D7000 with the standard 35mm 1:2 is fantastic.

7034760211_f883d4a948_b.jpg

7034760985_ef3ac07db6_b.jpg

Flikr set: http://www.flickr.co...157629714694633

Here's the 35mm at ISO 800 with the built-in flash. My daughter with her older cousin mucking around under the dinner table last night.

2012-03-31_Aira-and-Wakana.jpg

Posted (edited)

Yeah, facing the sun with too many contrasting elements. Like one of the kids I shot today who has black hair and was wearing a white shirt. I have a morning off later this week during which I hope to spend some time at one of the parks and get some better shots.

I recall reading about neutral density filters previously in this thread. I might have to investigate. I think though that I need to learn more about photography in general.

Edit: I just found the Active D-Lighting setting in the menus, which may be what I'm after.

Edited by Currawong
Posted

Nice capture Padam.

Been busy Island hopping so not much to shoot lately.

Ohau1-X2.jpg

One of the hundreds of chickens roaming the island.

hanalei1-X2.jpg

Hanalei Valley

hanalei2ps-X2.jpg

Posted

VPI: I'm enjoying your photography travels immensely. smile.png

Any of the Nikon shooters here shot with 20/2.8D? I'm lookin to get a small wide lens and that one caught my eyes. It appears Ken Rockwell likes it, but he's crazy.

I have a 35 and am going to get the 24/2.8D. However, I've been scratching my head about going for broke and getting the 17-35 or 17-55/2.8D as either may be good for indoor shots, of which I take many.

Today I took both lenses with me to a local park and set the bracketing to vary the Active D-Lighting between shots. The results did indeed lift the shadows and darkness considerably in highest mode.

This is an un-edited shot with Active D-Lighting at the highest setting using the 35/1:2D

Shirozuoike_Park_Gazebo_un-edited%20002.jpg

I wish I'd tried the same shot with the polaroid filter, now I think of it, but when I went there I forgot that the park surrounds a lake.

Not being rushed and being able to use the 35mm more at a more suitable time of day I like the results I got better. It's very easy to tell which ones used the dyanamic lighting setting in the camera as it almost looks as if a fill flash or HDR merging was used.

7044172129_6a26d7db3a_b.jpg

7044171609_91fc86c073_b.jpg

7044172875_12c45382e7_b.jpg

7044173949_8004eb97c3_b.jpg

7044175317_b60306f826_b.jpg

7044176423_a779540345_b.jpg

7044177069_278dc3a457_b.jpg

The rest of the set: Shirozuoike Park Fukuoka Hanami 2012 (Set: 42)

Posted (edited)

Just spent a week in Thailand trying out some new (to me) rangefinder gear (Leica M4 + Konica Hexanon 50 f/2 and Bessa R3A + CV 40 f/1.4).

Can't remember what is what:

7044915199_ed400e8d33_z.jpg

7044860119_25bf592f2e_z.jpg

6898907912_e594f2a1b1_z.jpg

7044937841_f6b0acf4b7_z.jpg

Edited by The Expanding Man
Posted

Any of the Nikon shooters here shot with 20/2.8D? I'm lookin to get a small wide lens and that one caught my eyes. It appears Ken Rockwell likes it, but he's crazy.

I had the Nikkor 20mm f/2.8 AF D when I had the D700. It was a great combo, especially with FX. Here are some samples from a meet in SFO.

MOA10-103.jpg

MOA10-120.jpg

MOA10-129.jpg

Posted (edited)

After doing some lens microadusting on 5D III, I thought I would do some test shots with Canon's cheapest to most expensive lenses to see if "it's worth it" in real life use. Spot AF with all lenses stopped down 1/3 stop from max aperture.

Canon 35mm f/2

6905434316_4f6e130ed3_c.jpg

DZ3C1116EF35F2 by drjlo1, on Flickr

Canon 35mm f/1.4L

6905435712_5a6d1e2517_c.jpg

DZ3C1128EF35F1.4 by drjlo1, on Flickr

Canon 50mm f/1.4

7051527205_7a0ffb5ba0_c.jpg

DZ3C1119EF50F1.4 by drjlo1, on Flickr

Canon 85mm f/1.8

6905438112_cef207791a_c.jpg

DZ3C1122EF85F1.8 by drjlo1, on Flickr

Canon 85mm f/1.2L

6905439286_025f5d3431_c.jpg

DZ3C1126EF85F1.2 by drjlo1, on Flickr

Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5 MkII to mix things up

7051531411_1c161b6bbe_c.jpg

DZ3C1131TSE24 by drjlo1, on Flickr

Edited by Jon L
Posted

Having shot with both 35/2 and 35/1.4, unless you need/want that extra stop (be it for low light or thinner DoF), I'd say the $1000 premium of 35/1.4 over 35/2 isn't worth it.

As for 85's, I think the intended applications are different.

Posted

It's good once in awhile to do a reality check. Carrying heavy L glass sure makes you feel good and important, but dang in the center, there really isn't a heck of a lot to comment on difference-wise, even for the $350 35 f/2. This was done on full frame sensor even.

However, keep in mind all those above are prime lenses, and I have certainly seen different results for Canon zoom lenses compared to primes. Color rendition also seems quite consistent among Canon primes, whereas I have seen a little different color from other companies' lenses.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.