No fair I can only shoot in 720p!

 

hahaha I think there is not going to be anybody on the forums that can shoot 1080p!

 

I need the 16-35 for indoor cuz its the perfect focal for what I need amd the 2.8 helps. The 10-20 would barely be used because I hate the effects it creats at 15mm and below unless its intended that way. Both toher lens should only cost less than $2k so its not a big deal and i find it worth it. Now what Im debating is between the 70-200L f/4 or the 70-200 f/2.8, considering it would be used outdoors only on daylight I might just settle for the f/4 version and save me the extra grand.
I won't get out because it started right and I was in early on. I normally don't say this but hush if you don't know how forums work. Threads start with a title and an initial post and it's intended to stay on topic. If you deviate from the originl post then it just becomes misleading from people reading title and initial post only. So yes, technically rules are broken but hey, if the OP (peter) is cool with that and like how the thread headed then cool.

 

I've heard good things about the 27-70L and I was considering that before the 25-105L. But after reading reviews it seems like a lot of people changed from 27-70L to 24-105L. Only downside from that change is going from f2.8 to f4.
I actually like that pic u took there Peter but since I offer sincere and positive critisims (spl?) it appears to be very noisy. If u had a tripod it would of helped slowing the shutter or upping the aperture and lowering ISO. Other than that I think it looks good and compositions seems to be in the right direction

Dude, Flash photography is a bitch! At least for me it is. I have two Canon 430EX and have tried a few things and it came out like crap. I n eed to pick up a couple more tripods and a trigger so I can do some creative shit with cars. Have you tried any of that yet? I'm still trying to learn about flash photography.

 

I'm not all that interested in car photography so I haven't tried it with my Fit yet, but I've been meaning to get out there and set them up and at least give it a try but it's cold as hell up here in NE. Aside from that I'm starting to get the hang of it a little bit for portraits. Here's one a did last night, the main light is roughly 45 degrees and a good 2 feet above the shoe pointing down, I've also got another one at maybe 30 degrees camera right being bounced off the ceiling.



It's kinda fun using two of them but it can be a real pain in the ass, I've gone away from using people for now and just playing with static objects so I can move the strobes around and really get an idea for what changes as I do. I tried another one last night with the main light still above it but moved the second one at roughly 135 degrees camera right firing right at the back side of the shoe. The iTTL set that one at more power than the main light so most of the shoe was properly exposed on the front but there was a huge light shining from behind it. Looked awesome but it messed up the smoothness of the t-shirt backdrop since it showed every wrinkle and spec of dust on it.

 

oohh nice pic and definetly nice set of AF 1's

 

That interesting for most of your night shot bewould 16-35mm on a crop body that still wide....for me it 24-70mm and 70-200mm or even 300mm.... I would recommend go for 70-200 f/2.8 b/c the higher aperture offer less DOF so your subject is focus and everything is blur around it....

But then again this off topic section....

C&C are welcome in this thread, that how we learn true the shot are very noisy shot. Plus I would love have my tripod but I was there for event that was pack a f**K.... but the magazines I was shooting for was happy with the shot.

Flash photography is hard to learn....I will admit...took me along ass time to figure it out... you really don't need to all the tripod for the flash, just use your surrounding and bounced it off correctly and using filler cards, and you will be surprise with the result...

haha Same here...never seem to be interested in shooting my car! LoL
I love doing informal portraits shot!

 

Man, I stay away from here for a short while and I'm missing out on all the fun. We should set up some kind of informal photo challenge just for kicks -- pick a subject, set some simple rules and a time frame, shoot, post, vote for a winner, then winner gets to pick next topic, rinse and repeat. I rarely shoot my car either, aside from parts shots etc. for my homepage (which is now defunct at the moment anyway due to my old ISP going under). Here's some random grabs from the last few months though:









And finally, a stylized pussy shot (obligatory cat photo)

 

That D3 seems to be treating you well!

 

I Like the idea!!!! I'm in for some informal photo challenge...Let see if everyone else is down for this...so I can start another thread or some thing...and set it up too. LMK

Now this give reason for all you lazy butt to bring out your camera and shoot!

 

Check this out then: *** CSLR Challenge 135: Red or Green *** [Page 1]: Canon EOS 50D - 10D Forum: Digital Photography Review

I can't take credit for the idea really, but when I had my 40D I did the above challenges from the dpreview 40D forums and they were fun. They have special galleries and voting scripts set up, but we don't need that really. Maybe set up a separate thread and each person gets one post to post all their shots in. Votes could be via PM -- pick three shots, #1=3pts, 2=2pts, 1=1pts, total all the votes up and highest points wins. Just an idea.

 

They are pretty fun, I started doing one about a year and a half ago over at 8thCivic when I had my Civic, pretty much just stay on that forum now for the photography section since it's rather small and everyone who frequents it knows each other.

 

I'll get us back on topic so we don't get yelled at again



most of it, some stuff it missing from the pic....








but anyways, I like the idea of a contest. That could be fun, its at least worth giving it a shot.

 

Actually, the first 2 were w/ the 40D and 17-55 2.8. The D3 (D700 too) though, shines for things like #3 -- handheld available light, ISO 3200. That was no NR at all, and with a mediocre, slow 24-120 3.5-5.6, so not even good glass. With the 24-70 2.8 it's even better. Now I need to get some longer glass, but that won't be for a while till I can work off some of it this spring/summer.

 

Alright I will set one up on Monday then! This going to be fun!

I will be going off topic very soon.... like this week we can talk about world of flash....

 

all i use is a canon powershot A590IS. works great for the stuff
i do. here's a terrible pict taken from my bb...



i usually need picts for my how-to's (DIY) and some work related
to explain my point. took this pict with the canon

 

havent really messed w/ it. the weather is crappy, and i dont feel like shooting stuff around the house

 

do it. but mine "only" shoots in 1080i hahaha

 

why do you shoot with sony? just wondering

 

My first camera was an old Sony film camera. When I decided to step up to a digital camera my first one was the Sony Cyber Shot T-1. It was great camera and I still have it today, that's the camera that really sparked my interest in photography. I really wanted to step up to a DSLR and when I won a $200 Best Buy gift card in a raffle I decided to finally take the plunge. Continuing with the pattern I went with the Sony Alpha A100 DSLR with the standard Sony 3.5-5.6/18-70 kit lens. After a couple years of using the A100 I was itching for more. Recently I passed the A100 on to my fiance and moved up to the Sony Alpha A700 DSLR with an upgraded Sony 3.5-6.3/18-200 lens instead of the standard kit lens and started adding a few more higher quality lens.

Alot of people are biased to Canon and Nikon because they are popular. Sony is alot less popular and if you find an actual unbiased review/comparison typically the Sony's give you a little bit more for a little bit less compared to the more popular Nikons and Cannons. Sony is relatively new to the DSLR business, they took over Konica/Minolta and turned it digital, so it'll probably be a few more years before they become a little more widely accepted. But the A700 for example is direct competition of the Nikon D300, Canon EOS 40D, and the Olympus E-3.... if you actually compare the 4 you will be hard pressed to find a noticeable difference in image quality, some are better at some things then others but all are more then enough. If your really interested.... a 33 page review...Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review (with an old Minolta lens not a current Sony, and level 2 firmware not the current level 4, which is a huge advancement in noise reduction, image quality, Dynamic Range). That's about as unbiased of a review as you can get.

Another example..

Canon EOS 1000D Rebel XS Digital Camera - Full Review - The Imaging Resource! (Canon Rebel XS review)
Sony Alpha DSLR-A200 Digital Camera - Full Review - The Imaging Resource! (Sony A200 Review)

If you read the review of both their is a clear winner for that price range.


The biggest advantages IMO is a very accurate, very effective Steady Shot built into every Sony body. Every lens you could possible attach is now an IS lens. The only real advantage that Cannon / Nikon has is the amount of super top end equipment, but then again I'm not going to ever spend $5,000+ on a single lens let alone enough of them for it to affect my choice on what to buy.

In the end every company has an offering that's good enough. It's just a matter of personal preffernce. I like Sony cameras, I liek the look and feel, the button layout, it has bright view finder, its comfortable to hold up to my eye, my fingers reach all the buttons, the LCD screen is a work of art on the A700. I love my Sony gear, no regrets at all.