Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
For those into photography and have SLR cameras
Topic Started: Mar 8 2009, 05:48 AM (616 Views)
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
Just wondering what interchangeable lenses , wideangle , standard, zoom , telephoto and macro lenses you've got .

Why did you chose the lenses you have ?

I've an EFS 17-85mm IS USM came with my 40D, I've splashed out on also on an EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS, an EF 300mm f2.8 L late last year , and my newest baby is an EF 135mm f2 L , and , and have some older MD lenses I am now using too (from my old Minolta XD5 lens collection (good old lenses are worth keeping and adapting) , a MD Rokkor 58mm f1.12 , and some others including my older MD 200mm f3.5 and an MD 85mm f1.2 which I am now able use since I have now got an MD - EF adapter.

I don't mind manual focus and operating the camera manually , expecially for astroimaging and those old MD lenses are all great lenses all designed for 35mm film.

My brother has offered me his old collection of Pentax 6x7 PK lenses and his Nikon lenses if I want them too , PK- EF and Nikon - EF adapters are cheap to get and do a very good job. He's invested in a Canon 5D (the new model) and is converting completely to all Canon EF L lenses and been offered next to nothing for his old Pentax and Nikkon cameras and lenses by the local camera shop. The trade ins offered were an insult.

Guess he'd rather the lenses at least stay in the family than accept a pitance for them and he knows I'll make good use of them.

Edited by somerled, Mar 8 2009, 05:53 AM.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
~Luthien~
Member Avatar
Little Sister Of Sistertrek
I have a Nikond70s with a Nikon lens of 25-80MM and one with 80-200MM.
I have a little tripod and a big one, Im still looking to buy an independent flash to use with it.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
8247
Member Avatar
Apparently we look like this now
Bodies: Nikon D80 with battery grip, Nikon D70s, Sony A200

Lenses: Nikkor VR 24-120 3.5, Nikkor 50mm 1.4, Nikkor 70-200 2.8, Nikon DX VR 18-55 (The kit lens that came with the D80) Sony 18-70 3.5, Sigma (Sony) 70-300 3.5

Flashes, Nikon SB-900, Nikon SB-800, 4 slave flashes

Tripods: a really big and heavy Bogen with a Manfrotto head, and a smaller, lighter Sunpak.

EDIT: Hell, I've come this far, might as well list it all. :D

I also have a stroboframe for the Nikon cameras with the sync cord for the flashes.
2 umbrellas and a softbox
And, a remote control for the Nikons.
And between the 3 cameras, I have about 10 CF cards, and 8 SD cards. (The D80 takes SD) My laptop has an SD reader built in...I've had this laptop for almost 2 years, and I never noticed the SD reader until about 5 months ago.


I use the 50mm for portraits. I don't really do macro very much. If I do, I'll also use the 50mm. The 24-120 VR is my prime lens. I use it for large groups of people, or if the lighting is low, I'll use the 70-200 2.8. I never use the 18-55 unless I need a slightly wider angle than the 24-120. I've used it twice. I got the Sony for my wife. The 18-70 came with it, and I bought the 70-300 for her because she likes taking pictures of birds in flight.

Sometimes, I perfer to use manual focus, especially when I'm using the 50mm 1.4
Edited by 8247, Mar 8 2009, 02:48 PM.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
~Luthien~
Member Avatar
Little Sister Of Sistertrek
gah yes I have Nikkor lenses too, just forgot the word. Its funny that you dont do alot of macro because I LOVE to do macro, that way we get to see different sorts of photography and thats fun :)
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
8247
Member Avatar
Apparently we look like this now
^^^

The Sigma 70-300 for the Sony has a macro lock between 180 and 300mm. It isn't true macro, but it works. My wife is really into that. She likes to get into a flower, and get all the detail of the pollen, or hairs on a bee if there is one in the flower.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
70-200 f2.8 APOs are very handy bit of kit , especially if it has IS , reduces the need to cart a monopod or tripod about all the time if the light may be low.

I'd like a Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 APO ( http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3274&navigator=3 ) but will have wait to get one , would be a super cart about lens for daylight walk about , wildlife and holiday snaps. Pretty handy apeture and focal length range for astroimaging too.

I have opted for very fast fixed focal length lenses for astroimaging because they produce sharper focus at infinity with the iris wide open than zooms. Key is good chromatic correction (aspericals and APOs) , low f no (less than f4) and widest possible front lens (max light gathering). Currently testing all my lenses with on the 40D with ISO settings of 1600 and 3200 , and short exposures (astroimaging of between 15 and 30 seconds) to assess the 40D (noiselevels , sensitivity , fovs , etc) before I build my permanent piers and my backyard observatorty.

Then I need to get hold of CS3 and learn about image processing and image stacking.

For holidays and my walkabout camera kit , I'd rather 2 maybe 3 zooms covering a wide range of focal lengths (a relatively fast f no) to keep the weight down and for max flexibility.

A good bounce - pivot head flash with plenty of power is also on my to get list , fortunately I don't often take images requiring a flash. My old SunPak bounce - pivot head flash has been retired .



Edited by somerled, Mar 9 2009, 12:18 AM.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
~Luthien~
Member Avatar
Little Sister Of Sistertrek
8247
Mar 8 2009, 05:24 PM
^^^

The Sigma 70-300 for the Sony has a macro lock between 180 and 300mm. It isn't true macro, but it works. My wife is really into that. She likes to get into a flower, and get all the detail of the pollen, or hairs on a bee if there is one in the flower.
I think that is just gorgeous to make such detailed photos. Offcourse I like to photograph other things than macro but macro is a favourite of mine. I even use it in ballet, simply to focus on a dancers feet for example
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
~Luthien~
Mar 9 2009, 07:15 AM
8247
Mar 8 2009, 05:24 PM
^^^

The Sigma 70-300 for the Sony has a macro lock between 180 and 300mm. It isn't true macro, but it works. My wife is really into that. She likes to get into a flower, and get all the detail of the pollen, or hairs on a bee if there is one in the flower.
I think that is just gorgeous to make such detailed photos. Offcourse I like to photograph other things than macro but macro is a favourite of mine. I even use it in ballet, simply to focus on a dancers feet for example


Do you find , since the lens has such a high f number across it's range and under dance floor conditions you are likely compelled to use a flash frequently , that it's a bit slow for your purposes.... this may also disrupt the dancers concentration somewhat ....

Maybe you'd be better off going for something like a 70-200mm f2.8 with the equivalent of image stabilization and a 1.5x or 2x matched teleconvertor in order to take these dancing photos without the need to resort to needing a flash (by judiciously selecting a reasonably high effective ISO setting , 800 - 1600 say , so you freeze the movement of the dancers by having a reasonably quick shutter speed .... yes , I appreciate lower f nos like f2.8 , f3.5 , f4 have limited depth of field ....it is a compromise ....

Of cause even higher effective ISO settings on the camera , if your camera can go there will mean you can get away with higher (slower) f nos at the same exposure (flash-less) and thereby achieve better depth of field ....

Just thought I'd toss some ideas at you.... I've also photographed dancers (in my case square and round dances , and ballroom ,and gymnasts , also under poor dance floor and gymnasium lighting ....
Edited by somerled, Mar 9 2009, 07:33 AM.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
~Luthien~
Member Avatar
Little Sister Of Sistertrek
Luckily the dancers I had to protograph so far, had very good lighting in the rooms so I never use a flash when photographing dancers. It makes the camera go slower and its very disctracting for the dancers. I also dont use auto zoom, which is still something I need to train at but its coming along.
Edited by ~Luthien~, Mar 9 2009, 07:39 AM.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
~Luthien~
Mar 9 2009, 07:38 AM
Luckily the dancers I had to protograph so far, had very good lighting in the rooms so I never use a flash when photographing dancers. It makes the camera go slower and its very disctracting for the dancers. I also dont use auto zoom, which is still something I need to train at but its coming along.
Autofocus (which is what I think you meant) is OK sometimes , but has it's limitations and with difficult subjects you can find the autofocus will continuously hunt and never find that nice focus point , manual focus is better in my view .... and I rarely engage autofocus.

I like having as much control as possible over focus , depth of field , exposure as possible and often select exposure or aperture priority only to get my starting point for my settings , then select manual mode and go with experience and instinct. (can usually take another picture with minor adjustment if the photo isn't quite right).

Fully automatic camera control is for novices and dummies or the lazy IMO.
Edited by somerled, Mar 9 2009, 08:30 AM.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
~Luthien~
Member Avatar
Little Sister Of Sistertrek
yes i meant autofocus, im not so great yet with all the photography terms, but i dont use autofocus, im trying to do it manual (for a while now) sometimes they tend to turn out unsharp though
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
Quote:
 
Fully automatic camera control is for novices and dummies or the lazy IMO




I personally use autofocus because I wear contacts lenses and I have trouble using manual because you have to keep your eyes open a relatively long time without blinking which I cannot do with lenses. Also for some reason I have always had a fair amount of trouble with manual focus. I cannot explain it fully but I just have.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dwayne
Profanity deleted by Hoss
Got a Nikon D60. Here's some samples of my work...
Light trace of an '06 Mustang... 2 examples.
Posted Image
Posted Image

Panorama samples of central Wichita and the Arkansas River
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image

Pictures from Pawnee Prairie Park in Wichita, KS
Posted Image
Posted Image

Here's some of my work as a Photosynth...
http://photosynth.net/userprofilepage.aspx?user=Kehvan
Edited by Dwayne, Mar 9 2009, 12:04 PM.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
HistoryDude
Member Avatar
Shaken, not stirred...
Dwayne,

Nice pic of the Arkansas...Now I'm all nostalgic about RiverFest! :)
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dwayne
Profanity deleted by Hoss
^^^ Thanks. I'm actually proud of those panoramas of the river, because each was created from the same set of photos, but the blending and perspective of each one is different.

It took some work.

As for the Riverfest... Man, it was so much better a decade ago before they got rid of the Medallion Hunt. In my opinion it's only gone downhill since.
Edited by Dwayne, Mar 9 2009, 04:03 PM.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Ten Forward · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus