***SW&D Photography Thread***

[LonerMatt]

Hey guys, for the past year I've been shooting with a Sony PnS I grabbed for $100, I've enjoyed it's portability, but I'm getting close to outgrowing it.

I'm looking to find something to replace it, preferably second hand (since I'm very much an ameteur and very much just in this for fun, so I don't want a stack of gear).

I was thinking either an older Nikon DLSR, or an older mirrorless camera, not sure exactly what to look for.

Just after something that shoots with a bit more sharpness, with the ability to capture colours a lot more richly, that's not super heavy and that's not multiple thousands. Pretty vague, but I'm pretty easy to please. Any obvious models/makes to look out for? Any dcent forums where 2nd hand gear circluates regularly that you'd recommend?

 

[Vaio]

Buy a refurbished d3100 from adorama with a fast prime. It'll run you like 500 bucks and sounds like it'll do everything you want it to.

 

[kstyle]

Glad to come accross this thread, greetings fellow photogs

A shot I took of my wife last 4th of July

Some firework shots

Anyone else rocking the moneymaker from holdfast?

 

[stickshift]

I just got a 10-stop ND filter to capture long exposures. Here are the pilot shots with it. Images were taken in sequence, just a few moments apart as the sky was changing color.

 

[Crane's]

At the end of a rainy charity event that I covered I was rewarded with this.

 

[Crane's]

Meteor showers are fun. The Draconid shower was pretty lame this year but I managed to get a couple and a whole lot of planes too. A better shower is at the end of the month and then in December is a good one.

 

[Vaio]



Sharpness is controlled by more than just the lens. ISO can play a part in sharpness, so can shutter speed and camera settings. Lenses also have a tendency to be the sharpest stopped down a few stops from wide open. Also keep in mind looking at a full size image on a computer screen isn't a good indicator of sharpness as well. To do it properly you need to look at a print done up by a lab. That doesn't mean Walmart, it means someplace like Mpix. In general sharpness is judged by a print done at 5 times the size of the film plane. For practical purposes an 8 by 10 print is what you want. Also the file type and output dpi is very important. A compressed 72 dpi image looks like crap and won't print worth a hoot either. A 350 dpi uncompressed file on the other hand is good enough for large prints and magazines. Then there's something else called the circle of confusion. That's another matter altogether. Only one distance in your image will be in critical focus. Everything else will not be in focus. You control this with depth of field. The smaller the f stop the greater the depth of what appears to be in focus.

So don't be in a hurry to buy more glass. That f1.8 50 you're talking about is a cheap lens. Cheap and glass are two things that don't play well together. The f1.4 50 is a much better piece of glass. If you want to do better than that then you look at the full frame lenses. When used on an APS-C camera full frame lenses work great and if you ever end up with say a 5D MKIII you'll be set with lenses.

My portrait lens is a full frame Zeiss Planar T 85mm f1.4. This lens is considered to be the portrait lens no matter what camera body you use. It's an absolutely phenomenal lens but it also costs 1700 bucks. Do most people need something like this? The answer is no. I get paid to shoot portraits and weddings so good equipment tends to make my job easier not to mention it's less likely to break in the middle of a job.

Anyway buy once and buy smart.

Some people just don't have the 400 dollars to drop on a 50mm 1.4. The 50mm 1.8 is great value for the money, especially if he needs a fast lens for shooting in low light situations. He's also on a crop sensor, so if he's going to drop 400 dollars, he might as well get the 35mm, which is (generally) way more usable than a 50mm on a dx.

 

[Crane's]



Some people just don't have the 400 dollars to drop on a 50mm 1.4. The 50mm 1.8 is great value for the money, especially if he needs a fast lens for shooting in low light situations. He's also on a crop sensor, so if he's going to drop 400 dollars, he might as well get the 35mm, which is (generally) way more usable than a 50mm on a dx.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on which is a better lens. As far as what focal length he really needs is subjective as well. Since the images have actual and effective focal length in the EXIF data it should be pretty easy to figure out what range he shoots at most often.

 

[Crane's]

Concerts. Tons of fun and yes I get paid to do this.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10151531564897811.1073741829.181466097810&type=3

 

[LonerMatt]

Some recent shots:

 

[stickshift]

Stayed overnight in a cabin on a lake.

View from my balcony:

 

[LonerMatt]

That middle photo is just excellent.

 

[Crane's]

The sky is on fire.

 

[Crane's]

This guy was lost for words as everyone around him turned to vapor.


Last Man Standing by DYSong Photography, on Flickr

 

[TheChefs]

I went to harvest rice in Japan and I took few snaps along the way.


working hard by Jarek Miszkinis, on Flickr


Work is done by Jarek Miszkinis, on Flickr


Rice by Jarek Miszkinis, on Flickr

And not Japan related:

Paczki by Jarek Miszkinis, on Flickr