vikingw2k : The fact that I never bothered to tune WB each time I shoot at PC Fairs should have tipped you off to what my pics will look like WB wise now, shouldn't it?

It's not like I'm posting PC Fair pics for the first time and it's not like I have not stated previously that I don't bother to WB at these fair. And to be frank, it's not your first time commenting on my pics stating that the WB is off with regards to PC Fair either.

So my question to you is : Why are you harping on this issue? And why the allegation that I have little knowledge in tuning WB?

No worries, not everyone able to accept comments. To me, if you are sharing it online in a public forum, be prepared to receive feed backs be it good or bad. If you can't even learn how to receive constructively, by all means keep all the pics inside hard disk and don't upload so nobody would leave any remark on your pictures. Make sense?


This post has been edited by vikingw2k: Apr 19 2010, 02:28 PM

hahaha...i doubt f.18 lenses will be in the range of below 2k lor...

---

Added on April 19, 2010, 2:33 pmC & C on the WB. tq













This post has been edited by zstan: Apr 19 2010, 02:37 PM

My only wish is they reduce the weight of 24-70mm f2.8 so that it'll be nicer to walkabout with rather than carrying a brick around.

Whether you tune the WB or not in each PCFair is non of my concern. I'm just purely commenting that this set of PC Fair pictures is off in WB and the flash is too harsh. Oops, did I mentioned it too on your last PC Fair shots? If so and you still happy with your off WB shots, you may of course continue doing so.

Your pictures taking ages to load la. Upload in Flickr or photobucket =)

yeah...you are right...like the Rule of Third....if you wanna follow you can follow...
but we can break the rules also...but WB cannot be too over lah...like create a pic tht only consists blueish but the pic itself is a white cute girls will make it weird...

sorry sorry..changed source already..

1. Blue-ish and pale
2. Blue-ish and pale
3. Too warm
4. Too warm
5. Too warm
6. Middle.

Who knows? Maybe it would.

Could train your biceps la. Not a bad way to exercise. An expensive way of exercise. HAhahahA~

Add a grip loaded with extra batteries, diffuser, flashgun and trust me, you don't feel like exercising anymore especially during a long marathon to cover an event.

haha...maybe the more realistic is to wish sony to give 30 or 40% discount on its lenese

You've got a point there. hahaha~

so number 6 is the one with the correct settings?

---

Added on April 19, 2010, 2:48 pmso number 6 is the one with the correct settings?

This post has been edited by zstan: Apr 19 2010, 02:48 PM

just abit underexposed....

well, if its the shot you intended to take... theres no "correct" settings per se...

@neo_lam
yea..taken without flash..so if it were u what WB would u use in that situation?=)

@mike
really? some of my past critics said it was wrong.
ohhhhh

haha yeah.. i luv blue color ..

Alpha Chick!



i have some floral shoot to enter fujifilm contest .. will post here later ..

guys, i tried using photo filter to adjust WB but seems still yellowish to me..can advise me what should i do to fix WB??

---

Added on April 19, 2010, 2:59 pmand sien la...my shots all not bokeh enough

This post has been edited by porkchop: Apr 19 2010, 02:59 PM

Agreed. There is no 'correct' setting. Depending on your intentions, shots can be cool or warm as you like it. In tungsten lighting, there's an orange cast. If you do not want the color cast then you can choose to remove it using WB settings.

Times when the so-called 'correct' WB will work against a shot are like

1. Candle light shots. Candle light shots are also prone to orange color cast but would you remove the orange cast in a shot like this?

2. Flourescent lighting gives a greenish cast. If you intend to show a creepy environment, the green cast can work for you.

all my shots are being taken in Auto WB mode...
coz i shooting raw so will edit the WB myself to suit my taste...

Braynumb: In your signature, the Sigma 50mm F1.4 has HSM; the 12-24mm for A-mount does not.

porkchop: The STF is more able to smoothen complex backgrounds. We could've tried it at Sony Style KLCC! The primary difference is how every point of light is rendered. The following example doesn't show a complex background, but it gives you an idea of how it works.



Top-left: Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 135mm F1.8 ZA at 135mm F1.8 1/200s ISO320
Top-right: Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 135mm F1.8 ZA through a Kenko 2x MC4 teleconverter at 280mm F3.5 1/125s ISO800 (minor swirliness at the bottom, not always obvious)
Bottom-left: Sony 135mm F2.8/T4.5 Smooth Transition Focus at 135mm F2.8 (transmission factor T4.5) 1/125s ISO800
Bottom-right: Sony 135mm F2.8/T4.5 Smooth Transition Focus through a Sony 2x APO Teleconverter at 280mm F5.6 (transmission factor T9.0) 1/80s ISO3200

-milo-: Ah, updated!