Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

Photography The Official Nikon Discussion Thread V13 !, Le D4 is awaiting you @ 6000 bucks only

views
     
gerald7
post Dec 11 2011, 10:10 AM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


which is better range for portrait ? 85 or 70/80-200 ?

I like the Kyra & S2000 photo. what lens was that ?

This post has been edited by gerald7: Dec 11 2011, 10:11 AM
gerald7
post Dec 11 2011, 10:16 AM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


85 on FX or DX ? Sorry new to the thread. biggrin.gif
gerald7
post Dec 11 2011, 02:39 PM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


Still it shows a good level of knowledge of how to use the light & camera & compo etc. I cant seem to get as celciuz does in his pics.
gerald7
post Dec 12 2011, 08:08 PM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


QUOTE(celciuz @ Dec 11 2011, 11:45 PM)
Definitely smile.gif
Tip for you, 2 important variable to take note.

1. Exposure
2. White balance

Try it out and see if you get what you want or not.
*
biggrin.gif my exposure always slight under have to post process to correct. Every time forget check WB cos always on AWB sweat.gif then amoi skintone come out not white white smooth smooth like that la... saw my KL friend photo result on camera, wa.. so nice the amoi skin color, he only tell me WB.. then I forgot jor till i read ur tip haha ! Hopefully I can remember when got chance shoot amoi.
gerald7
post Dec 13 2011, 12:16 AM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


QUOTE(celciuz @ Dec 12 2011, 09:31 PM)
This is the added advantage of RAW, even if you shoot at fixed WB indoors especially with fluorescent lighting will change the hue. Unless you kill ambient light and use flash as main light source.
*
I seldom shoot raw, maybe once a year haha probably should look into learning about it xD


Added on December 13, 2011, 12:17 am
QUOTE(sakurakinomoto @ Dec 13 2011, 12:00 AM)
RAW is for masterraces  rclxms.gif
*
indeed notworthy.gif

This post has been edited by gerald7: Dec 13 2011, 12:17 AM
gerald7
post Dec 13 2011, 10:02 PM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


its RAW the color tat ran away (hehe) in lightroom is actually with out color profiles, less sharp, less contrast but more information. it is as the name implies, RAW information. compare the jpg file size vs raw. Jpg is a compressed format. maybe thats why i seldom shoot raw, so many things to tweak n put back...headache i see it ... but in bad lighting conditions its a life saver
gerald7
post Dec 14 2011, 09:27 PM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


QUOTE(Andy214 @ Dec 13 2011, 10:07 PM)

Before digital era, if RAW is like Negative, then Jpeg is something like those Polaroid that produce/print picture right away.

That why I say depends on condition, if shooting for wedding/actions, etc. there maybe no time to adjust this and that, even shooting in manual is also not easy, even shooting in A/S/P mode, it doesn't mean it can be correct as well, the metering can still be fooled, in the same room, just changing different angle or moving slightly may affect the camera WB settings. I believe those who have experience it will understand what I'm talking about; if you're editing the raw file, you may notice a certain photo suddenly require major adjustment to the WB from the rest, it's just so happen that you're at the spot that may have produce warmer or cooler tones, even you're in the same room/place.
*
Ya, I agree. Those with experience will know when entering the room where they need to be to have best kind of lighting. they say la. I just straight straight shoot, can see face, can see expression, sharp. OK ONz! laziest kind of hobbyist around.

but from what I see, canon ppl damn keng at using RAW. why is that ah ? why mostly nikon ppl (me) no head no tail when shoot raw? rclxub.gif
gerald7
post Dec 14 2011, 10:36 PM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


QUOTE(168257061 @ Dec 14 2011, 10:13 PM)
Step 5 - Wrap The Cake

Paint it all black.  shocking.gif  shocking.gif  how to "Paint" ?

Step 9 - Eat  shocking.gif


Added on December 14, 2011, 10:16 pm
i shoot raw last time using digital. raw or jpeg does it bother ?

for me shooting raw is more secure, compromise the spacing a bit nvm wan lah.
if you can secure yourself why take the risk and challenge to shoot jpeg?
shooting good straight-out-of-camera image can boast nothing,
all you wanted to do is impress people.
*
but how does shooting in jpg impress ppl? sweat.gif I thought its about the end image not the gear or the tools ?
gerald7
post Dec 14 2011, 11:18 PM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


Even when I shoot jpg, I will still tweak my photos. 100% of the pics. Unless it was from my handphone, then I dun really care la. I admit Im weak in processing RAW, does not mean im showing off my jpeg damn keng. u think i dun wan make my pics as nice as (insert name)'s pic. But to me, jpg enuf for my needs at the moment.

Everyone is always saying something bad about others to make themselves feel better. Or when u talk like you know what your doing ppl actually will think you know what your doing?

Maybe we all just over read the situation ? Oh well, Im not really sure what the fuss is about, its a means to an end. And the end is getting the image u saw in your mind. It could be something everyone hates, or love.

Anyways, looks like too much text, anyone got nice pic to share?
gerald7
post Dec 15 2011, 11:58 AM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


QUOTE(sakurakinomoto @ Dec 15 2011, 12:12 AM)
The reasons why I shoot RAW:

2) My camera forced me to.
*
hahaa I like it! rclxms.gif
gerald7
post Dec 25 2011, 11:41 AM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


Hello! Merry Xmas & Happy New Year friends!

Wishing u all shoot nice nice photos n win many awards and accolades!

» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


dun mind the awkward photochopping. haha still learning.

This post has been edited by gerald7: Dec 25 2011, 11:44 AM
gerald7
post Jan 2 2012, 11:07 AM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


Hi guys!

My first lightning of the year ! Happy New Year! Taken on 01.01.12 4.30am

user posted image

This post has been edited by gerald7: Jan 3 2012, 11:13 PM
gerald7
post Jan 3 2012, 11:11 PM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


QUOTE(Agito666 @ Jan 3 2012, 09:39 PM)
with filter
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «

without
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


okay false alarm doh.gif  my bad
*
i got same thing w/ my B+W UV filter tat came w/ my 2nd hand 50mm. I suspect mine is counterfeit use once only after that left the filter in my drawer dy. also had issues with B+W CPL color a bit off (dull and no contrast) ... now all my filters i change to HOYA's. no more B+W for me
gerald7
post Jan 3 2012, 11:17 PM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


QUOTE(celciuz @ Jan 3 2012, 11:13 PM)
Dull color with B+W XS-Pro?

Here's my shot, B+W XS-Pro 77mm on my 85G.

user posted image
Calen and Roger by CY Pixels, on Flickr
*
not the new XSPRo... mine was the old MRC slim... maybe I just got no love from B+W

lol and why u so many muah muah fotos ! less guys.. more gals pls! brows.gif

This post has been edited by gerald7: Jan 3 2012, 11:17 PM
gerald7
post Jan 4 2012, 02:14 AM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


QUOTE(Agito666 @ Jan 4 2012, 12:22 AM)
i m not really get what your mean  hmm.gif  sweat.gif

anyway whole album is here... i still got many shot havent upload   unsure.gif
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.3...85948571&type=3
*
i like the use of monopod. smile.gif interesting.

QUOTE(Everdying @ Jan 4 2012, 01:20 AM)
i've used the 80-200 AF-D two ring and its sharp at 200mm wide open, tho u will need to source for a good copy.
focusing also is decently fast enough on a body like D7000 / 300s and above.
anything below and the body motor wont be able to drive the lens fast enough.
if its the 80-200 one touch, then its focusing speed is like a turtle...but if u intend to use it for portraits etc...then who cares about focusing speed tongue.gif
of cos the VR2 focuses faster, and has better color saturation etc, but its double the price.
*
Im currently using the 80200 one touch. speed for me feels like kit lens, maybe slightly slower. but if you know how to work it, its ok la. not that bad (trying to console myself ). sports shots also can... glad im not using film, sure broke with so many fail shots.

This post has been edited by gerald7: Jan 4 2012, 02:14 AM
gerald7
post Jan 4 2012, 02:31 AM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


QUOTE(razuryza @ Jan 4 2012, 02:19 AM)
i use 70-210 only.. very cikai telephoto lens
*
Why is it very cikai ? I never tried the lens. only tried 70300G which was slower and hunts more than my 80200.
gerald7
post Jan 4 2012, 04:00 PM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


user posted image

continuous focus with 3D matrix (only time I switch on the 3D matrix for testing purposes, have not since, too slow to be usable in most cases for me) on with my 80-200 one touch kura kura. I would say if the condition is right, (where the car has many stickers for the AF to focus on) hunt time is less for the lens. I think was shot at f5.6 or f8 at 1/4000. Not the best photo in the world, but just saying that 80200 if got meet good condition and budget is enough why not. Lucky for me I got mine under rm1.5k super mint condition and the best part can pay 4 months installment.

If we got chance to buy all latest and bestest I'm sure we all will la. I would like to have the latest 70-200 f/2.8 VRII. But so far the kura kura has not failed me in a way that makes me wanna spend so much of my hard earned $ to invest. What more to say I'm just shooting for fun. Maybe if an affordable 80-200 2touch comes my way I might consider tho. smile.gif

This post has been edited by gerald7: Jan 4 2012, 04:03 PM
gerald7
post Jan 4 2012, 06:03 PM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


QUOTE(seather @ Jan 4 2012, 04:25 PM)
thanks for the advise... i managed to test a 80-200 AF-D and picture quality wise i cant tell the difference with the VR2  rclxub.gif

the x2 price is for the VR2 n Nano coating i guess  hmm.gif
*
I would say, if your budget allows you to go for the new one ..then go for new one lo. Most of the time you cant go wrong with the latest lens(unless its super crap). There is no rule saying new / hobby photographer must use old lens then slowly move up. You may never know when situation arise where a newer tech say, VR2 helps you to nail a shot or the pin point AF accuracy. For tele lens, spot on focus is critical, wider lens off by a bit still ok ok... tele, if you off .. haha sorry, rambling...

QUOTE(jchue73 @ Jan 4 2012, 04:58 PM)
Most of the time, you cannot tell the difference on image quality alone. But the difference will show in the speed of focus acquisition. The AF-S motor makes blinding speeds to acquire it's target.
*
Actually there are minor image quality differences. with older lens they tend to lost their coating after a while (a long while). mine duno why very slight yellow tint/hue. and sharpness well... that would be nitpicking now wouldnt it? If newer Nikkor lens cannot beat older lens then we are in the wrong camp. That said, I fully agree that the major difference between 80-200 and say 70-200 vr2 is probably the SWM & VR, then probably weight, my kurakura weights a tonne. and ergonomics. push pulling quite inaccurate need more dexterity to fine tune. even the two touch is a major improvement already. notworthy.gif
gerald7
post Jan 4 2012, 06:11 PM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


QUOTE(Andy214 @ Jan 4 2012, 04:17 PM)
What do you mean drag few levels?
Normally if you're shooting for people, you also have to consider what people like/want or preference. As with art, people may appreciate or like different kind.
Hehe, no worries, it didn't write anything about working for Nikon  tongue.gif
Sometimes, we have to work-around to comprehend for the lens limitation; E.g. slow focus, we can pre-focus first, unless the focus hunt, then you'll end up with long turn-around, lol.
If have enough light (e.g. daytime outdoor) can use smaller aperture.

People back in those days doesn't have such modern lens with blazing fast focus (not to mention other limitations, like ISO, etc), still manage to capture amazing action photos, I can't imagine those using manual focus. These skillls...  thumbup.gif
*
missed a post. Yes I fully agree again! and during the times that these lens were at their prime. it was era of film! cant hit the delete button. notworthy.gif
gerald7
post Jan 7 2012, 09:16 AM

r a n d o m l y
*******
Senior Member
2,452 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
From: Kuching, Sarawakland


Also most PnS have auto everything. It wil boost the ISO to keep the minimum shutter speed.

2 Pages  1 2 >Top
Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0572sec    0.45    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 12th December 2025 - 02:19 AM