Photographers' Union Thread

[Justin24]

 

[Justin24]

 

[Justin24]

 

[ntalwar]

Nice photos Justin.

I've done no photographty lately

Same here. I've haven't done much shooting, except for some personal stuff lately.

Took this a week ago:

Also, a recent street shot:

 

[kramwest1]

Nice photos Justin.



Same here. I've haven't done much shooting, except for some personal stuff lately.

Also, a recent street shot:

Nice.
That shot screams for some color isolating. Could be tasteful, could be lewd, either way it could be great.


Mark

 

[ntalwar]

Nice.
That shot screams for some color isolating. Could be tasteful, could be lewd, either way it could be great.


Mark

Thanks. By color isolating, do you mean selective de-saturation/saturation? I might try that if I get a chance. One reason I went black and white is that the colors weren't too interesting (red, white, and blue mostly). Plus, the mood seems a bit somber.

 

[major_panic]

Nice, Justin, although the first few seem a bit underexposed.

And damn, that's a colourful duck, and awesome DOF.

 

[major_panic]

A couple of random photos from last Friday, do critique:

 

[ntalwar]

A couple of random photos from last Friday, do critique:

Tough lighting conditions there. I think you mentioned you use the 50 1.8. Do you use aperture priority at 1.8? I'd probably try waiting for brighter and whiter lighting and stop down to 2.2-2.8 or so. I've taken club photos, and some of the colored lighting is not photography-friendly (some light colors are worse than others). Some images are a bit soft - autofocus struggles in low light and that lens (which I also own) may be a bit soft wide open. Also maybe try for some tighter crops in a few of them and more frontal views. 2 and 3 - not sure what's going on there - looks like someone rushed the stage.

 

[bonocomet]

My daughter is the photographer for a ballet company. She's amateur right now but would love to do more with this. She's been really successful with it because she's an ex-dancer so she has the instinct for it. The company she works for has hired professionals in the past and has not been able to use a single photo out of hundreds shot because dance is 99% movement that looks awkward when frozen, and they didn't get anything usable. She has the advantage of knowing what she's watching to get great shots. Anyways! I will post some of her stage shots in a bit. Right now I wanted to post something completely different.

She can't afford an expensive set up yet so she's had to do her homework and get lower priced cameras that work best for her in the low light theater situations. She tried others, but absolutely loved her Kodak Z 612. It was great because it also did well outside for general use and has a great long range focus. It started dying recently so she got a new model Kodak Z 1012.

There hasn't been an indoor show to photograph yet but she did take some outdoor shots yesterday with it for the first time and so far she thinks it's going to be

Anyways, it's a great little camera for someone looking for something versatile and inexpensive.

the original photo (cloudy day)

with a bit of PS Levels and Selective Color tweaking

she's a member here but doesn't log on often, she wouldn't mind any helpful advice!

 

[Liesje]

The company she works for has hired professionals in the past and has not been able to use a single photo out of hundreds shot because dance is 99% movement that looks awkward when frozen, and they didn't get anything usable. She has the advantage of knowing what she's watching to get great shots.

This is very similar to how I get roped into photographing dog shows. It's exhausting because we have to get a good shot of EVERY dog or the owners are pissed. Like you say, you have to know more about dogs and their movement than about photography.

Neat pics, love the color.

 

[bonocomet]

Shot with her original Kodak Z 612.

No posed pics here, these are all during performance and shot from the back row of the theatre (orchestra level) in most cases.

And 1 from the wings and 1 candid

this one shot with an Olympus SP570 (was not very happy with this camera for indoor theatre)

and a couple outdoor shots

She would be happy to have your thoughts and advice!

 

[ntalwar]

She would be happy to have your thoughts and advice!

I don't know much about dance/dance photography, but they look good. Some have high-iso chroma noise. I usually remove noise when it's present (e.g. in some low light shots) in post-processing.

 

[bonocomet]

She says thanks. Dance photography can be hard with the noise, mostly because of the lights. She's working on getting better at removing it afterward, and is improving. (Some of those shots are older as well, and newer ones are getting much better)

 

[kramwest1]

Shot with her original Kodak Z 612.

No posed pics here, these are all during performance and shot from the back row of the theatre (orchestra level) in most cases.

She would be happy to have your thoughts and advice!

Ohhh! I love this one.


Mark

 

[bonocomet]

Ohhh! I love this one.


Mark

Thanks so much from my daughter

 

[Justin24]

For a non-DSLR camera those are great photos that your daughter took.

 

[Justin24]

 

[bonocomet]

Thank you Justin. Love all your shots, especially those of the people.

 

[major_panic]

Hey Justin, have you considered saturating your colours a little more to make them stand out some? I'm thinking the ones on the streets and the one with the old man could really benefit from it, if that's what you're looking for.

For example, I think this photo could really stand out with some brighter colours.

Just a suggestion.

 

[Justin24]

yeah. When I get home from my vacation. I only had Picassa to work with, I have Photoshop at home which is better

 

[major_panic]

So has anyone had any experience with manual focus lenses, ie the older 70s-era lenses? I'm looking at getting a couple because of the much lower price and negligible (seemingly) difference in quality; for example the Pentacon 135mm f/2.8. The only downside is the lack of autofocus, which I'm fine with as all of my lenses really struggle in low light anyway (and hence I should learn to manually focus).

Any thoughts or opinions on the matter?

 

[ntalwar]

So has anyone had any experience with manual focus lenses, ie the older 70s-era lenses? I'm looking at getting a couple because of the much lower price and negligible (seemingly) difference in quality; for example the Pentacon 135mm f/2.8. The only downside is the lack of autofocus, which I'm fine with as all of my lenses really struggle in low light anyway (and hence I should learn to manually focus).

Any thoughts or opinions on the matter?

You'll also need an adapter for Canon, which you probably already know. For 135mm, you'll have to use a higher shutter speed and therefore higher ISO, which will add noise. For that lens, I would think you'll have to stay on ISO 1600 (or above) in low light. Also, manual focus on moving subjects is obviously harder.

 

[Liesje]

OK kids, how the heck do I get good macros? I used this adapter fine on my old camera, a point-and-shoot. I zoomed out to about 2-3x range and cropped the vignetting if there was any (wider the angle, more vignetting, and at around 4x it would all disappear). I got clear, sharp shots with the DOF I wanted. Now I am using it on my DSLR. The adapter doesn't fit on my 18-105 or 18-135mm lenses. It does fit on the 55-200mm VR lens and has no vignetting so that's good, but the DOF is so shallow I had a really hard time getting a decent pic. Even on manual focus the subjects are so small my eyes can't see the difference in the viewfinder and then when I pull up the pic on the computer, the area I wanted in focus is slightly off.

For example, I took this pic of a fly and as you can see, the hairs on his back are in focus while the eyes are not, and the eyes/head are what I wanted.

These are the kind of pics I was getting before

Any suggestions?

 

[ntalwar]

^ I haven't done too many macro shots, but I had a similar problem with fitting the adapter on many lenses. I'd use the smallest aperture possible (e.g. f/22), and a tripod plus Live View with 10x magnification if possible (with MF). A fly outdoors is tricky because it can move and there is wind. The 55mm focal length will be harder to get greater DOF with compared to 18mm. I might look into getting an extension tube (and not use the adapter) if I want to do more macro stuff. Point and shoots give greater DOF because they have small sensors.

 

[Liesje]

OK, so it's not totally my fault I'm not having that great of luck? I'd love to stick it on my other lens but the diameter is honestly like a milimeter or two too wide for it to snap on.

I'm trying to get results similar to these...

(this was the first pic I took with that adapter, I searched forever until I found a bug!)

 

[RedRocksU2]

I'm surprised this thread is not rated 5 stars yet.

 

[ntalwar]

OK, so it's not totally my fault I'm not having that great of luck? I'd love to stick it on my other lens but the diameter is honestly like a milimeter or two too wide for it to snap on.

I'd try a smaller aperture as well - not sure what the fly one was shot at.

Raynox specs say it fits 52-67mm filter size - maybe they exaggerate a bit. I forgot what the back of the Raynox looks like, but I wonder if it will work with a step-down ring on the lenses. I'll have to check mine at home - would be nice to use it with my 24-70mm lens.

 

[Liesje]

What is a step-down ring? Is that just an attachment that makes the diameter smaller? B/c that would be great.

The lenses I want to use have a 72mm lens cap and UV filter and the lens I have to use has a 52mm. It is tight on the 52mm.

 

[ntalwar]

What is a step-down ring? Is that just an attachment that makes the diameter smaller? B/c that would be great.

The lenses I want to use have a 72mm lens cap and UV filter and the lens I have to use has a 52mm. It is tight on the 52mm.

The Nikon site says the filter sizes are 67mm for those lenses - I assume they aren't newer models. Yeah, step-up and step-down rings allow the use of different filter sizes on different lens diamaters. I have a step-up for a UV filter. I'd have to buy a couple of step-down rings for my 72 or 77mm diameter lenses. Will have to check later whether it looks like it can work.