Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed
125 Pages « < 42 43 44 45 46 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

Photography The Sony Alpha Thread V39!, The Orange Legion

views
     
neo_lam
post Apr 21 2010, 01:19 PM

Player
******
Senior Member
1,921 posts

Joined: May 2006


QUOTE(albnok @ Apr 21 2010, 01:10 PM)
porkchop: Nice! I was expecting the newer Sigma 28mm F1.8 EX DG Macro, though. Am surprised at the filter size of 58mm, as the newer one has a filter size of 77mm, probably to allow close focus!

The Minolta 20mm F2.8 has a MFD of 25cm though.

ieR: Tilt!
*
bro...i tried the DxO....can i know the way to get the most accurate default color?? coz i felt bit yellowish....

Wonka
post Apr 21 2010, 01:28 PM

U n k o ™
******
Senior Member
1,643 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
From: U n k o L a n d


Which one has nicer IQ between Minolta 24mm and 28mm? Would 24mm b too wide ah? Cause I plan to change my setup to all primes. Optimus primes. Hahahah~
shootkk
post Apr 21 2010, 01:41 PM

Loyal Sony A100 User
Group Icon
Elite
2,540 posts

Joined: Mar 2008
From: KL


wonka : 24mm will not be too wide. It will be approx. 36mm on an APS-C so that is ok. I still prefer wider but that's just me.

I have no idea on their IQ though. Check out the reviews on dyxum.
porkchop
post Apr 21 2010, 01:57 PM

Lalala Life's Sweet
*******
Senior Member
6,633 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: www.kelvinchiew.com


hi albnok, well no budget for the new sigma at the momentlo, so can catch anything would b good........ smile.gif

wonka, i think i like the 20mm better, and also depends u use FF or APSC
Wonka
post Apr 21 2010, 02:30 PM

U n k o ™
******
Senior Member
1,643 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
From: U n k o L a n d


QUOTE(shootkk @ Apr 21 2010, 01:41 PM)
wonka : 24mm will not be too wide. It will be approx. 36mm on an APS-C so that is ok. I still prefer wider but that's just me.

I have no idea on their IQ though. Check out the reviews on dyxum.
*
I still want your 20mm. Sell to me when ur not using it anymore. Hahahahahah~!


Added on April 21, 2010, 2:30 pm
QUOTE(porkchop @ Apr 21 2010, 01:57 PM)
hi albnok, well no budget for the new sigma at the momentlo, so can catch anything would b good........ smile.gif

wonka, i think i like the 20mm better, and also depends u use FF or APSC
*
Im using APSC still but not planning to upgrade to FF anytime soon.

This post has been edited by Wonka: Apr 21 2010, 02:30 PM
Banzai_san
post Apr 21 2010, 02:49 PM

Samurai Spirit
******
Senior Member
1,185 posts

Joined: Mar 2006
From: KKinabalu


QUOTE(wha7ever @ Apr 21 2010, 10:20 AM)
--------- 8< --- snip --- 8< -----------
Banzai_san : Is the ceiling high? If it is, don't bother to do make a ceiling bounce. Just use a bounce card will do; and if you're beside a wall (if the wall is not dark in color), do a light bounce on the wall instead.
*

The ceiling is not very high but due to the distance to the subject, when using ceiling bounce... the distance travel to the ceiling + ceiling to subject... that is quite a distance too.
I was using ceiling bounce + the F58 built in bounce card... I dont know if the built in bounce card was much help... but some photos looked OK (ie nice to my novice standard la)

QUOTE(albnok @ Apr 21 2010, 10:34 AM)
--------- 8< --- snip --- 8< -----------
Banzai_san: Nice #1 and #4 (his band is called Estranged by the way.) Single crops are very obvious - maybe it should've been a full group picture.

And yes, cropping is what made it obvious.

If you're on a budget, the Minolta 135mm F2.8 will be just long enough for stage. It would be in the RM1xxx range.
*

Thanks for correcting me on the Estranged correct spelling smile.gif
The original picture I shot the whole group... but unfortunately got 1 service waitress's head entered the frame... thus I purposely cropped thighter... hehe

Also thanks for the suggestion Minolta 135mm F2.8. I need to read about that lens. Sound interesting...
zstan
post Apr 21 2010, 02:52 PM

10k Club
********
All Stars
15,856 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Zion



hey guys...when do we use a bounce card and diffuser? or when is a bounce more preferred to a diffuser?a bit confused on this issue.
shootkk
post Apr 21 2010, 03:04 PM

Loyal Sony A100 User
Group Icon
Elite
2,540 posts

Joined: Mar 2008
From: KL


QUOTE(zstan @ Apr 21 2010, 02:52 PM)
hey guys...when do we use a bounce card and diffuser? or when is a bounce more preferred to a diffuser?a bit confused on this issue.
*
A bounce card and a diffuser serves the same purpose - to diffuse the light hitting your subject to reduce hard shadows.

If you have a diffuser then use that. If not, you can fashion a bounce card simply out of a folded piece of blank white paper and strap it to the back of your flash head.

Most times it's better to just bounce the flash as it creates a bigger area of reflected light that will light up your subjet more evenly. Having a small bounce card when bouncing the flash will help to give your subject some catchlights in his/her eyes as the card will reflect some light directly onto the eyes as you bounce the flash.
albnok
post Apr 21 2010, 03:06 PM

Alpha Male
Group Icon
Elite
4,956 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: KL


neo_lam: Eh same lah like every RAW converter, you need to adjust the WB yourself.

Wonka: Since you're on APS-C, obviously even the 24mm is not wide enough for group shots in a crowded room! 20mm is wide enough to be close to your kit lens.

porkchop: It's still a good focal length and aperture!

Banzai_san: Given that your 16-80mm already reaches 80mm... telling you to look at the Opteka/Samyang 85mm F1.4 would not give you more reach. Just that you don't have to pump up ISO as much. The next longest bright prime would be the Minolta 100mm F2.0 but that is very rare.

If you still want a zoom, I'd prefer the Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC HSM II - it's light, 780 grams only, and sized like the beercan. The 70-200mm F2.8 lenses are all 1.4kg monsters!
neo_lam
post Apr 21 2010, 03:09 PM

Player
******
Senior Member
1,921 posts

Joined: May 2006


QUOTE(albnok @ Apr 21 2010, 03:06 PM)
neo_lam: Eh same lah like every RAW converter, you need to adjust the WB yourself.

Wonka: Since you're on APS-C, obviously even the 24mm is not wide enough for group shots in a crowded room! 20mm is wide enough to be close to your kit lens.

porkchop: It's still a good focal length and aperture!

Banzai_san: Given that your 16-80mm already reaches 80mm... telling you to look at the Opteka/Samyang 85mm F1.4 would not give you more reach. Just that you don't have to pump up ISO as much. The next longest bright prime would be the Minolta 100mm F2.0 but that is very rare.

If you still want a zoom, I'd prefer the Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC HSM II - it's light, 780 grams only, and sized like the beercan. The 70-200mm F2.8 lenses are all 1.4kg monsters!
*
while in the time waiting you, i finally figure out the settings of color and WB....
now trying its famous noise reduction....

This post has been edited by neo_lam: Apr 21 2010, 03:10 PM
Wonka
post Apr 21 2010, 03:16 PM

U n k o ™
******
Senior Member
1,643 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
From: U n k o L a n d


QUOTE(albnok @ Apr 21 2010, 03:06 PM)
Wonka: Since you're on APS-C, obviously even the 24mm is not wide enough for group shots in a crowded room! 20mm is wide enough to be close to your kit lens.
*
It should b enough for a walk around lens rite? Cause 50mm is a little too tight. Hmm.
cjlai
post Apr 21 2010, 03:20 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,631 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Puchong



letting go my A700 & jump to 7D soon tongue.gif....

might sell around 2.5k biggrin.gif
neo_lam
post Apr 21 2010, 03:23 PM

Player
******
Senior Member
1,921 posts

Joined: May 2006


QUOTE(cjlai @ Apr 21 2010, 03:20 PM)
letting go my A700 & jump to 7D soon tongue.gif....

might sell around 2.5k biggrin.gif
*
y suddenly jump??
Mikeshashimi
post Apr 21 2010, 03:24 PM

10 Years on LYN
*******
Senior Member
4,053 posts

Joined: Jun 2009
From: Kuching


QUOTE(cjlai @ Apr 21 2010, 03:20 PM)
letting go my A700 & jump to 7D soon tongue.gif....

might sell around 2.5k biggrin.gif
*
waaa alot of people jumping
cjlai
post Apr 21 2010, 03:27 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,631 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Puchong



QUOTE(Mikeshashimi @ Apr 21 2010, 03:24 PM)
waaa alot of people jumping
*
QUOTE(neo_lam @ Apr 21 2010, 03:23 PM)
y suddenly jump??
*
kena poison tongue.gif
tanjq87
post Apr 21 2010, 03:32 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
483 posts

Joined: Oct 2006


canon or minolta?
Wonka
post Apr 21 2010, 03:36 PM

U n k o ™
******
Senior Member
1,643 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
From: U n k o L a n d


QUOTE(tanjq87 @ Apr 21 2010, 03:32 PM)
canon or minolta?
*
nonaC 7D.
albnok
post Apr 21 2010, 04:12 PM

Alpha Male
Group Icon
Elite
4,956 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: KL


Boring.

The Canon 7D and Nikon D300s will be the highlight of current APS-C cameras... until the A700 replacement comes out.
Wonka
post Apr 21 2010, 04:15 PM

U n k o ™
******
Senior Member
1,643 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
From: U n k o L a n d


QUOTE(albnok @ Apr 21 2010, 04:12 PM)
Boring.

The Canon 7D and Nikon D300s will be the highlight of current APS-C cameras... until the A700 replacement comes out.
*
When will that be announced? I have been waiting. No news.
albnok
post Apr 21 2010, 04:32 PM

Alpha Male
Group Icon
Elite
4,956 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: KL


I already know how the 7D does video and their orientation-detecting zone focusing (which was a major disappointment), and how the D300s is. They have the same noise performance as the A550 by the way.

Compare that to the phase-detect-on-main-sensor patents that Sony have registered, and I would say potentially, Sony has a true APS-C video dSLR killer which gives smooth AF in video.

If you want jello shake (rolling shutter), manual focus video and jumpy auto-exposure, you can buy the EOS7D/D300s now.

125 Pages « < 42 43 44 45 46 > » Top
Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0163sec    0.42    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 8th December 2025 - 12:29 PM