The Official Photography Thread - Vol. 3

[mylesp]

6D

6D

same camera and lense people are saying its not the sharpest thing out there. maybe thats the problem. i havent used that camera or lense so i have nor personal experience. people are saying its not as sharp as it could be.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3864272

 

[yanky]

6D

6D

same camera and lense people are saying its not the sharpest thing out there. maybe thats the problem. i havent used that camera or lense so i have nor personal experience. people are saying its not as sharp as it could be.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3864272

Dang had I of known before I went on my trip I would've just rented a lens. Thanks for posting that!

 

[tokes99]

^That's actually unedited but I would like to get more detail from the buildings when I zoom in. Not exactly sure how to do that though. Was using my 24-105.

if you want more detail/sharpness you prolly don't want to be at f22, while what you have probably acceptably sharp once you get up around the higher f-stops with certain lenses, you start to lose detail/sharpness to diffraction; also it could be that your focus might have been slightly off/focused at infinity? you can try other stops small aperture short of your smallest aperture of your lens(es) to see what is the highest you can go and get acceptable detail/sharpness to you...

 

[mylesp]

Dang had I of known before I went on my trip I would've just rented a lens. Thanks for posting that!

no problem. i would do as tokes suggested. find where you think its sharpest on that lens

 

[yanky]

^That's actually unedited but I would like to get more detail from the buildings when I zoom in. Not exactly sure how to do that though. Was using my 24-105.

if you want more detail/sharpness you prolly don't want to be at f22, while what you have probably acceptably sharp once you get up around the higher f-stops with certain lenses, you start to lose detail/sharpness to diffraction; also it could be that your focus might have been slightly off/focused at infinity? you can try other stops small aperture short of your smallest aperture of your lense to see what is the highest you can go and get acceptable detail/sharpness to you...

I always thought the larger the aperture the more light doing in so more detail but haven't done too many long exposures to find the sweet spot. Maybe if I was down to f/8 or 10 I would have gotten better results.

 

[mylesp]

I always thought the larger the aperture the more light doing in so more detail but haven't done too many long exposures to find the sweet spot. Maybe if I was down to f/8 or 10 I would have gotten better results.

i just saw this

• Put your camera on a tripod and place a sheet of newspaper in front of it at a distance that allows you to see the whole paper in the frame.
• Focus on the newspaper and then take a photo at every aperture the lens allows.
• Import the images to your computer, zoom to 100% on each one and then compare them.
• The image with the most legible text will be the one shot with the lens’s sweet spot.

while that can tell you which is sharpest, dont pixel peep too much. if it looks good then cool lol. unless you are printing huge mages then thats a different story

 

[tokes99]

I always thought the larger the aperture the more light doing in so more detail but haven't done too many long exposures to find the sweet spot. Maybe if I was down to f/8 or 10 I would have gotten better results.

that is certainly true, that is apart of the balance you have to figure out for long exposures; if you open up your aperture you don't get as long an exposure, which may defeat the purpose, just gotta experiment with the aperture & exposure time to get your desired result(s)...you could also use an ND filter to get those longer exposures while being more at the sweet spot of your lens(es), it really just depends on how serious you want to get about pixel peeping to achieving the most detail

 

[nachobroadweezy]

Stopped by B&H Photo today in Manhattan, noticed a Profoto lighting event and shoppers were able to use a 5D Mark III to shoot a model against a backdrop, pretty dope and the Brazilian model was . Too bad the strobe lights they were promoting costs $2k. Triggers set at TTL, it was impossible to take a bad shot. Signed up for an event to see my favorite photographer, Rodney Smith, speak on Thursday about his career and purchase a signed copy of his latest coffee table book.

On another note, I wanted a non-dslr camera that was easier to travel with on a daily basis for general and street photography so I picked up a used Fuji X100 on craigslist for $400. I only shoot fixed 24mm & 50mm on my Canon so this 35mm lens was perfect. Updated the firmware to fixed the slow autofocus and I am back in love with photography. This little thing is beast! Here some shots from a recent photography workshop my friend and I signed up for. $85 and we got to shoot 2 models for 3 hours, different looks (activewear, lingerie, implied and bathing suit)

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

[nachobroadweezy]

Did the chopper thing in Seattle over the weekend. Only did during the daytime cause I was afraid I'd get blurry photos. Pretty dope experience but only cause it was cheap or cheaper than what I see in SF an NYC. I got a flight for $207 but a second person would be $275 total. They take off the doors and everything and get you your shots that you need. It sort of freaked me out cause I never done this but I literally was on a simple harness and just used my hands from not totally falling out of the helicopter. Also they even tilted the copter to get better views as well. Totally recommend them if you are out there but they are about 30-40 mins from the city which was like an $80 Uber drive which is $160 round trip. Renting a car would be probably more worth it.

http://www.seattlehelitours.net

So dope, I'm in the playground business, we designed the park, would have love a closer birds eye view of our equipment.

 

[mylesp]

So dope, I'm in the playground business, we designed the park, would have love a closer birds eye view of our equipment.

what about a drone?

 

[kdawg]

^That's actually unedited but I would like to get more detail from the buildings when I zoom in. Not exactly sure how to do that though. Was using my 24-105.

if you want more detail/sharpness you prolly don't want to be at f22, while what you have probably acceptably sharp once you get up around the higher f-stops with certain lenses, you start to lose detail/sharpness to diffraction; also it could be that your focus might have been slightly off/focused at infinity? you can try other stops small aperture short of your smallest aperture of your lense to see what is the highest you can go and get acceptable detail/sharpness to you...

I always thought the larger the aperture the more light doing in so more detail but haven't done too many long exposures to find the sweet spot. Maybe if I was down to f/8 or 10 I would have gotten better results.

That's totally it - find the sweetspot and shoot there. You would probably only need something like 20s at f10 which gets rid of some shake too - in an exposed place like that the vibration due to wind can remove some sharpness too so shorter is better.

 

[Nike Jordan]

Sports Illustrated got their hands on the iPhone 7 Plus used it for take photos at an NFL game this past weekend.

http://www.si.com/nfl/photo/2016/09/11/iphone-7-plus-sneak-preview-photos

Some of these shots still look like they were taken from a phone though.

 

[kdawg]

^yeah, that's what I thought. They're nice snapshots but they're not anything special and certainly not as good as a SLR with a big lens. I'd be more impressed if it was a nice game and the action was a bit further away.

 

[tokes99]

Sports Illustrated got their hands on the iPhone 7 Plus used it for take photos at an NFL game this past weekend.

http://www.si.com/nfl/photo/2016/09/11/iphone-7-plus-sneak-preview-photos

Some of these shots still look like they were taken from a phone though.

being that we all here are to varying extents are photography literate, you can definitely see the limitations of the smaller sensor...but for most that quality is more than passable, the 7 plus with the dual camera looks like it will make digital zooming a decent endeavour & might very well dead/eat into the iphone lens kits era...having multiple image sensor seems like it will be the wave going forward

 

[djyoung08]

Sports Illustrated got their hands on the iPhone 7 Plus used it for take photos at an NFL game this past weekend.

http://www.si.com/nfl/photo/2016/09/11/iphone-7-plus-sneak-preview-photos

Some of these shots still look like they were taken from a phone though.

being that we all here are to varying extents are photography literate, you can definitely see the limitations of the smaller sensor...but for most that quality is more than passable, the 7 plus with the dual camera looks like it will make digital zooming a decent endeavour & might very well dead/eat into the iphone lens kits era...having multiple image sensor seems like it will be the wave going forward

They should test out to see how good the camera is when its not direct sun light

i wanna see that camera suffer @ low light since the key note they were going on and on about how good it is a low light... even showed a couple TERRIBLE low light photos

 

[djyoung08]

^That's actually unedited but I would like to get more detail from the buildings when I zoom in. Not exactly sure how to do that though. Was using my 24-105.

if you want more detail/sharpness you prolly don't want to be at f22, while what you have probably acceptably sharp once you get up around the higher f-stops with certain lenses, you start to lose detail/sharpness to diffraction; also it could be that your focus might have been slightly off/focused at infinity? you can try other stops small aperture short of your smallest aperture of your lense to see what is the highest you can go and get acceptable detail/sharpness to you...

I always thought the larger the aperture the more light doing in so more detail but haven't done too many long exposures to find the sweet spot. Maybe if I was down to f/8 or 10 I would have gotten better results.

That's totally it - find the sweetspot and shoot there. You would probably only need something like 20s at f10 which gets rid of some shake too - in an exposed place like that the vibration due to wind can remove some sharpness too so shorter is better.

this man knows.

 

[Fong$tarr]

So dope, I'm in the playground business, we designed the park, would have love a closer birds eye view of our equipment.

Dude.....how ironic. Sounds like a rad job but I would assume the liability portion of making that stuff can be scary since kids are the ones using it.

Sports Illustrated got their hands on the iPhone 7 Plus used it for take photos at an NFL game this past weekend.

http://www.si.com/nfl/photo/2016/09/11/iphone-7-plus-sneak-preview-photos

Some of these shots still look like they were taken from a phone though.

I actually was expecting worse but it seems the person shooting must have been running everywhere to get those shots.

 

[yanky]

I always thought the larger the aperture the more light doing in so more detail but haven't done too many long exposures to find the sweet spot. Maybe if I was down to f/8 or 10 I would have gotten better results.

i just saw this

• Put your camera on a tripod and place a sheet of newspaper in front of it at a distance that allows you to see the whole paper in the frame.
• Focus on the newspaper and then take a photo at every aperture the lens allows.
• Import the images to your computer, zoom to 100% on each one and then compare them.
• The image with the most legible text will be the one shot with the lens’s sweet spot.

while that can tell you which is sharpest, dont pixel peep too much. if it looks good then cool lol. unless you are printing huge mages then thats a different story

Will try this and see what sort of results I get.

I always thought the larger the aperture the more light doing in so more detail but haven't done too many long exposures to find the sweet spot. Maybe if I was down to f/8 or 10 I would have gotten better results.

that is certainly true, that is apart of the balance you have to figure out for long exposures; if you open up your aperture you don't get as long an exposure, which may defeat the purpose, just gotta experiment with the aperture & exposure time to get your desired result(s)...you could also use an ND filter to get those longer exposures while being more at the sweet spot of your lens(es), it really just depends on how serious you want to get about pixel peeping to achieving the most detail

Thanks I'll just continue to mess with long exposures and see what sort of results I get. What's the consensus on how long to keep the shutter open? Is there a general rule on that?

 

[Fong$tarr]

Not sure if people watch SLR Lounge but the guy is really informative on flash and even wedding specific stuff. He by far had the best video for posing couples.

Just saw this super quick tutorial and hate how I never tried this yet and it seems so simple. I need a new reflector though since I lost the one I had but should be able to pull this off easily.

 

[djyoung08]

Not sure if people watch SLR Lounge but the guy is really informative on flash and even wedding specific stuff. He by far had the best video for posing couples.

Just saw this super quick tutorial and hate how I never tried this yet and it seems so simple. I need a new reflector though since I lost the one I had but should be able to pull this off easily.

Love SLR lounge.. especially Pye.

I use his pose workflow with all my couples

Did the shutter drag thing at a wedding last Saturday to get some crazy lights based on his video on it.

 

[tokes99]

Thanks I'll just continue to mess with long exposures and see what sort of results I get. What's the consensus on how long to keep the shutter open? Is there a general rule on that?

wouldn't be surprised if there was some general guidelines/rule, but i think it most likely depends on the circumstances/conditions and what image you are after...you can also use other photograph's settings as a benchmark/starting point

 

[HankHill]

Another i7+ camera review from the Apple thread.

http://austinmann.com/trek/iphone-7-camera-review-rwanda

 

[jordman23]

Just a couple of pictures from my vacation in Thailand/China as posted in the Vacation thread.

 

[yanky]

^That jet set life! You've been to a lot of places I want to go to!

Thanks I'll just continue to mess with long exposures and see what sort of results I get. What's the consensus on how long to keep the shutter open? Is there a general rule on that?

wouldn't be surprised if there was some general guidelines/rule, but i think it most likely depends on the circumstances/conditions and what image you are after...you can also use other photograph's settings as a benchmark/starting point

So I shot this one at 73mm f/22 for 80 seconds and I'm happy with the way it came out as far as details go. I guess the zoom played a role in getting the most out of the details. Guess I'll just have to go back to Toronto to get the perfect shot....lol Sucks becuase my cousin wanted to blow up the last shot to put in her living room but now I'm like ermmm....

 

[tokes99]

So I shot this one at 73mm f/22 for 80 seconds and I'm happy with the way it came out as far as details go. I guess the zoom played a role in getting the most out of the details. Guess I'll just have to go back to Toronto to get the perfect shot....lol Sucks becuase my cousin wanted to blow up the last shot to put in her living room but now I'm like ermmm....

bruv do a test print and see if it can work? besides a bit of unsharp mask magic might get you right...the way we look at images on a screen at 1:1 or 2:1 (or greater!!!) may not necessarily have anything to do with whether or not it will actually be a good/worthy image...