I'll probably go for a D90 as a second body. Gf wants a SLR so she might be getting my D40 body for use. Dunno should get a D90 or D300... hmm....

Money money money...

On second thought, maybe I'll just stick to a D40 hahaha. It's not too bad as well.

Other than money and other awesome lenses (say the 10-20 Sigma ), nothing hehehe





The 30mm Sigma, is a keeper for me. And to think I got it 2nd hand for 'only' RM1.1k. When the sun sets and cameras go to bed, out comes the D40+30mm Sigma

OK, enough poison. Photos taken in Kota Kinabalu during a recent trip last weekend. Went with my full arsenal of gear: Bagman Trekka, SB600, 8 alkaline batteries, 30mm f1.4, 10-20 Sigma f4-f5.6, 18-200 Sigma f3.5-f6.3, 7 GB worth of SD. Came back with around 600 RAW files.

This post has been edited by ebernie: Aug 28 2008, 08:31 PM

85mm f1.4 or f1.8? If it's the f1.4 then I'm slightly jealous

If that's the case then just overexpose the background. Since the subject is what's important, I know I wouldn't care if the background is out (you can crop away too). Anyway, hope to see more stuff from the 85mm (though personally, I've seen my share of 85mm poison, but I just love that lens so much I wouldn't mind seeing more). Why didn't just grab the 85mm f1.4? If you did that, I'll be *very* *very* jealous

This post has been edited by ebernie: Aug 31 2008, 05:32 PM

The SB600 does wonders outdoors. I use it as fill-flash (direct flash if you're wondering) to eliminate harsh shadows especially when I shoot outdoors. Typical scenarios:

1. Person is in the sun. Eye and face are full of ugly shadows if I take using natural light. I'll usually use the SB600, flash exposure compensation at -1 or -0.7 in iTTL-BL. See the pics below for example:






2. Person is in the shade but the environment is still very bright. What will happen is that if I use natural light, I'll either underexpose the person while keeping the environment properly exposed or I'll expose the person correctly while blowing out the environment. I'll mount the SB600, again dial-in -0.7 or -1 compensation in iTTL-BL and meter for the environment then underexpose it slightly (about 1 stop) by increasing the shutter slightly.



Enjoy flashing

Oh, wah lau! Dream lenses! Hahahahahah I'm VERY VERY HAPPY. Now I'll wait for a price war between the Sigma 50mm f1.4 and Nikkor 50mm f1.4. And will there be a price drop for the 70-200mm VRI? Hahahahaha

But worried about the prices though!

RM 1k is not expensive for a f1.4 prime lens. If RM1.8k, it borders my budget for a good lens but I'm sure the price will come down.

IMHO, I won't mind paying slightly more for the premium lenses. I've said it before - you get much more than just HSM/AFS. Expensive lenses means SLD & multi-coated glasses, better sharpness, and usually a better build (internal focus, no moving parts, all-sealed body, metal mount, damped focusing ring, etc). Remember HSM/AFS gives much more than just auto-focus - it gives fast & silent auto focus.

This post has been edited by ebernie: Sep 3 2008, 01:49 PM

One can say the same thing with mediocre camera + good optics

If both are equally the same, my personal 2 sen is to go for good optics/lens because they depreciate only a little over time. Not so true for a good body. The D300 for example has dropped tremendously after its initial launch. Use to be very difficult to find anything for less than 5k 2nd hand. Nowadays it hovers around 4.4k for those with a couple of months of warranty left.

This post has been edited by ebernie: Sep 3 2008, 04:30 PM

What's the fisheye lens used?

Like pic number 2. I think that's the best out of all.

Aisey, both lenses serve different purpose. So I guess you tend to shoot portraits more?

Anyway, I love all my lenses - 18-200mm, 10-20mm and 30mm.

Here's street shooting with all 3 lenses:
18-200mm


30mm


10-20mm


This post has been edited by ebernie: Sep 7 2008, 02:29 PM

TTL, by nature, fire pre-flashes. First flash to judge exposure, then the 2nd flash comes after the camera has got exposure information from the first flash. On all cameras, TTL flash will work that way. Setting your flash to REAR, has got nothing to do with this.

If you set the flash to manual, then obviously it's no longer TTL flash. You are telling the camera to how powerful the flash is going to be, hence no pre-flash to get exposure information.

Consider the D80 + 18-55 kit lens (or 18-70 if budget allows) + a 50mm f1.8

Much longer lifespan then spending on the D60. D60 will cost your 2k++.

I meant body only + a cheap kit-lens. If you get the body + 18-135 it'll be quite a jump from the D60. I say a 2nd hand body with warrant about 2.1k + about 300 ringgit for a 18-55 should do it. Add a 50mm 1.8 for another 300 and that's a pretty nice setup already.

Guys, let's lay off the gear wars.

I wonder though, if sharpness is the only way to show good picture is, then that tells me a lot about it. Sharpness only says that the gear is good, nothing about the photog or the pic.

Another point to remember, a lot of ground breaking shots were taken back in the 60s & 70s. Those were not pin-sharp. If anything, they are noisy and blurry but their other qualities outshone these issues.

But I guess everyone has their own opinion about photography.

Well, yeah, they didn't have what we have today. But it still does not change the fact that the photos looks much better than what we churn out by the dozens everyday.

What's better? Frankly, I think it's the attention to detail, the thought that is put into each photo, the planning that goes into each of them. Sometimes it's the fact that they were brave enough to be there to take pictures (world war pictures for example). But ultimately I think it was because each photo had a story to tell, and they told the story really well. But really, I can't do justice explaining the pictures. Heck, I can't even remember the names of all the photographers I think highly off.

They definitely did not:
1. Keep on snapping pictures of girls
2. Keep on showing off the lens' bokeh by shooting mundane stuff

No, I am not comparing the work of career photogs of the past with the current ones. They are about the same in quality. Obviously the current pics are mostly in color and they are sharper, but seriously, sharpness and color rarely come into play when judging a picture, so long as it's not too blurry until I can't make anything out of it.

And I know better than to judge any photogs. Especially ones that do not do it for a living. But if I did, flickr has plenty of examples of ppl not doing this thing at work but produce mind blowing pics.

I guess my initial post was a reflection of how frustrated I am when some keeps on posting about gear. D3s and 70-200VRs are nice and all, but they don't make good pics.

I bet if I gave 'zio' another 105mm lens, he'd be able to produce good photos. Heck, his photos are compressed and resized already but because of how he captured emotions and told stories, generally I think his series has been the better works shown here. They definitely don't have to be pin-sharp.

Sorry for the last post. Back to the regular D40 channel from my side now

No doubt the SB900 is more powerful. It reaches 200mm! But I also hear it overheats easily, though for us casual shooters, shouldn't be a problem. Wedding photogs beware though.

A good thing is that the SB800 is now much cheaper. And so is the SB600. There's always the choice of 2 SB600 + radio transmitters for some really awesome strobist action Cheap ones from phottix is only RM140 (http://www.lelong.com.my/Auc/List/2008-09DeSale18751086_AUCTION_Phottix_Wireless_Flash_Trigger_2_Receiver_Nikon_SB_600_800_900.htm). This combo is still cheaper than just 1 SB900, and you get 2 flash.

A few questions:

1. Why wanna resize before uploading to flickr? Can use flickr as an online-backup
2. Anyone can comment on the radio trigger by phottix? Reliable or not? Easy to die?

Btw, CLS is not a replacement for radio triggers. Outdoors when there are other sources of light (sun or even other flashes), CLS might not be as useful as radio triggers. Range is considerably less too.

Also - apologies on the misinformation about the SB900. I just assumed it would be more powerful because of its extra reach. Wrong I guess

And zio, those were indeed nice pics. Though you used an expensive lens, I bet you'd give out nice pics even if you had another brand but similar range lens.

And the silve camera sucks. Yuck. All the way black man