1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

Post your photography skills! (self-gloss)

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by JetBlast, Jan 9, 2007.

  1. dcg

    dcg Senior member

    Messages:
    4,113
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Philly
    ^To clarify, my comparison was based on the f4 IS (~$1280) vs. f2.8 IS (~$2380). There are, of course, non-IS versions of both. If you're planning to eventually upgrade to the 2.8, may as well save yourself the hassle and save up for it the first time.
     
  2. Szeph el raton

    Szeph el raton Senior member

    Messages:
    1,103
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Location:
    Ze South of Germany
    
    Important to keep not only price but also weight in mind. I wouldn't want to carry the f/2.8 IS around the whole day at 1500g for the lens alone.
     
  3. Crane's

    Crane's Senior member

    Messages:
    6,237
    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    Location:
    Chasing tornadoes across the plains.
    All this talk about Canon IS lenses is giving me a headache. LOL. This IMO is another example of the equipment trap. I have been shooting for decades without IS with no problems. You use a tripod and remote trigger and it's all good in low light. While we are on the subject of IS another thing to think about is equipment failure. You not only have a complicated lens group with auto focus motors now you're adding a whole new group of complicated electronics into the mix. At 1k additional cost no thanks.
     
    1 person likes this.
  4. il ciclista

    il ciclista Senior member

    Messages:
    1,294
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2009
    Location:
    ft worth, tx
    truth I don't think I will ever own a IS or VR lens..don't they operate with a gyro or something? It's like taking all the technique out and replacing it with something manmade..which will break as said.
     
  5. Szeph el raton

    Szeph el raton Senior member

    Messages:
    1,103
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Location:
    Ze South of Germany
    I have only one lens with IS and I honestly think it can get quite handy sometimes. I like that lens for example for the snapshots when we have a BBQ in the late afternoons in summer.

    Was a bit around the city but didn't get anything really interesting. On the way back stumbled over someone less fortunate.

    [​IMG]
     
  6. CDFS

    CDFS Senior member

    Messages:
    5,048
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Location:
    Ljouwert
    Nice Colours.
     
  7. il ciclista

    il ciclista Senior member

    Messages:
    1,294
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2009
    Location:
    ft worth, tx
    I have a question that needs some quick answering if you don't mind. I'm doing the editorials for a suicide article and I took this picture but I'm trying to burn the piss out of the background to darken it but around the thumb and left lower side of the arm it looks like it needs some smoothing over (kind of notchy looking) any tips or suggestions to do this? I've also tried masking but my mouse isn't the greatest so getting a smooth curves line by hand isn't much of an option.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2011
  8. Krp480

    Krp480 Senior member

    Messages:
    472
    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Location:
    NY
    

    Ah, well I would just get the 70-200 2.8L non-is then. I would rather have the extra speed of the lens. I mean there is a couple stops we're talking about. I would get the IS of the 2.8 but honestly it is pointless because the couple of times I will REALLY need it won't even come close to outweighing the times I won't need it. If I were to use it also I would really be using it for sports, otherwise I like to use wider angle lenses anything that is 50 or less.

    As for the IS debate on whether or not it breaks, I think every lens is bound to fail one time or another. Unless you are getting like a full manual zeiss, most lenses have AF and a lot have IS as well. I mean personally it is a nice feature and even though I would keep my lens on IS all the time, you won't really need it unless you are hand-held @ 200mm and at a slower shutter speed. I have been using my 50L and yes it is a light absorber, but even when I use speeds like 1/100th of a second I don't need IS. Shots turn out fine, then again if you are at 200mm they will be shakier... w/e I mean if someone needs the IS let them buy the IS.

    Anyways...


    here are todays shots (will probably be getting a ton more), helps that I can shoot in school now at all times :)!

    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]
     
  9. il ciclista

    il ciclista Senior member

    Messages:
    1,294
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2009
    Location:
    ft worth, tx
    Im not saying someone shouldn't buy it. I'd rather have a nice tripod which could act as my IS/VR for all my lenses though ;) I used to own one and I could shake the lens and feel the thing moving in there..I've worked on equipment like this for helicopters and it's very sensitive. I'm not the most sensitive person to my equipment sometimes.
     
  10. Szeph el raton

    Szeph el raton Senior member

    Messages:
    1,103
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Location:
    Ze South of Germany
    Tripod is nice and all but it's a weighty addition o the stuff you already cary and you can't use it everywhere.

    I love my tripod but I have to say there is a place for the tripod AND the IS.
     
  11. NOBD

    NOBD Senior member

    Messages:
    8,666
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
  12. Krp480

    Krp480 Senior member

    Messages:
    472
    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Location:
    NY
    Personally I baby my stuff. Some consider that not that great and others will agree. When you have $2K+ worth of equipment the last thing you want to do is have it break and have to replace it. Especially since I am in HS and that shit would take a long time to save up for.

    I have to agree on the tripod though, I really only need it for self shots or long exposures. I know that the sports photographers use monopods because of the weight of their lens, but if you are doing sports IMO it would be pointless to be using a tripod unless of course you needed the field level. That isn't to say if you wanna use a tripod, go for it. I know with my 50 @ 1.2 the DOF is so thin that even at 1/4000th of a second the pictures can be blurry if I move my camera back and forth less than an inch. IS won't even help that.
     
  13. dcg

    dcg Senior member

    Messages:
    4,113
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Philly
    

    Yup, I briefly touched on this, but the 2.8 is twice the weight and takes up a lot more space in your bag than the 4.


    I like IS, especially because I'm rarely in the mood to carry a tripod around with me. Still, you bring up a good point re: the equipment trap, and the Canon 70-200mm L lenses are a good example....you can buy the 70-200 f4 non-IS for a quarter of what the f2.8 IS version costs, and from f4 on up in non-IS situations who's going to be able to tell the difference in your shots?
     
  14. Crane's

    Crane's Senior member

    Messages:
    6,237
    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    Location:
    Chasing tornadoes across the plains.
    A general rule of hand held photography is the slowest shutter speed you can get away with is 1/focal length. (Don't forget about crop factoring if necessary.) So a 200mm lens on a full frame camera can be shot at 1/200 of a second without much worry.

    Again, I'm never opposed to buying what you actually need to get the job done effectively and efficiently. There is a place for IS lens stabilization. The problem is the actual useful range for that function is very limited if you think about it. For instance that 200 mm lens should be able to be shot hand held down to about 1/60th of a second before you are stuck with having to use a tripod. Around here we talk about the importance of buying the best glass you can afford. Internal stabilization is not glass. It's very expensive solution to a very limited set of shooting conditions and that's it. Add in the fact that it goes against the KISS rule of engineering and no thanks I'll stick with the non IS lenses.
     
  15. dcg

    dcg Senior member

    Messages:
    4,113
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Philly
    ^Devil's advocate - do you use AF?

    IS on the 70-200mm L lenses is pretty advanced (3-4 stops), so you're looking at 1/12 to 1/25 on the 200mm end.

    The f2.8 non-IS isn't too far off price wise from the f4 IS. Personally, I'll take the f4 IS...but hey, that's why they make them both!
     
  16. Krp480

    Krp480 Senior member

    Messages:
    472
    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Location:
    NY
    Some want IS some don't...

    I absolutely hate bringing this lens to school - but I absolutely love the pictures it is able to create.

    [​IMG]

    Wish I used a faster shutter speed for this.
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  17. Kas

    Kas Senior member

    Messages:
    1,187
    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Il ciclista: cool picture! As for the advice, can't you do the shot over? Much earlier in this thread Crane's gave the advice that you should get the shot right from the camera - at the time I was under the impression that photoshop can fix most stuff, but I'm starting to see that he's right really. Surely this shot can be retaken under more favorable conditions?


    As for myself I'm thinking about photojournalism and editorial stuff: from all the pictures I've taken in the past year, the ones that have a story to them mean much more to me than the pretty landscapes, churches, animals and landmarks. I guess that means that I'm growing as a photographer and as a person. But where can I learn about this sort of thing? The technical stuff is covered by strobist.com and I can get the inspiration from the NY times lens blog and world press photo archive - but what are common techniques used? What method achieves a certain effect? Or have I arrived at a point where I am ready to develop my own style, that I'm no longer a young grasshopper?
     
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2011
  18. NOBD

    NOBD Senior member

    Messages:
    8,666
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
  19. Kaplan

    Kaplan Senior member

    Messages:
    4,171
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Location:
    In Hedonic Decline
    Cool effect NOBD, but may I suggest cropping out the lower 4th? Try to scroll your screen down so the pic is cut off just below the bottom row of boats and see what you think...
     
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2011
  20. il ciclista

    il ciclista Senior member

    Messages:
    1,294
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2009
    Location:
    ft worth, tx
    

    Thanks for the input, but unfortunately I can't think of any favorable conditions where just the hand can be lit up and the rest dark, any suggestions?
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by