My gear is actually hilarious, but does a lot of stuff.
[url]http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_ace_s5830-3724.php[/url]
I actually like taking pictures with it, there's an app called Vignette where I can make simple editing by adding effects and frames. Pretty wicked if you ask me.
Guys, somehow my 550D takes a lot of "bloomish" pictures. Looks like someone ran one of those "angelic" photoshop filters over it. How do I prevent it ? My 450D didn't do any such stuff. :|
Edit:
Disregard that, I am a fool. The pictures didn't turn out bloomish, they turned out perfectly fine.
I'm thinking about picking up this guy
[url]http://www.ebay.com/itm/280731314744?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649[/url]
because it's like $100 less than normal, probably because of internal dust. Which my 50mm f1.8 has right now, so it won't be much of a change.
But my only problem is, should I buy this, or save money ($300) for the 50mm F1.8 sony is making for my nex, because it'll be lighter, smaller, more durable, no dust inside, optic stabilization, and most importantly autofocus?
i thought about it and saving for the nex lens is definitely the better option. with image stabilization at up to 4 stops, i'd be getting MUCH better low light performance with it (like stable pictures at 1/13 instead of 1/60), with more in focus.
Canon 400D Kit Lens + 50mm f/1.8
And gotta repair these.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/ZTTUb.jpg[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/rg4lp.jpg[/img]
Polaroid and others not worthy attention.
[QUOTE=Trogdon;32060268]I'm thinking about picking up this guy
[url]http://www.ebay.com/itm/280731314744?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649[/url]
because it's like $100 less than normal, probably because of internal dust. Which my 50mm f1.8 has right now, so it won't be much of a change.
But my only problem is, should I buy this, or save money ($300) for the 50mm F1.8 sony is making for my nex, because it'll be lighter, smaller, more durable, no dust inside, optic stabilization, and most importantly autofocus?
i thought about it and saving for the nex lens is definitely the better option. with image stabilization at up to 4 stops, i'd be getting MUCH better low light performance with it (like stable pictures at 1/13 instead of 1/60), with more in focus.[/QUOTE]
I don't think that one will mount on any of the current canons, it's got that crazy locking ring mount.
i have lots of crazy mount ring things, i only shoot with FD lenses haha. Because they are sooo cheap.
But I am going to save up for this guy
[url]http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921666375271[/url]
because then i'll get image stabilization. The first and only 50mm prime with it built in! So I'll get awesome low light performance and amazingly smooth video.
Maaaaan, I want a TLR.
[QUOTE=Slippery-Q;32068227]Maaaaan, I want a TLR.[/QUOTE]
Same. Think I'm going to go for a Mamiya C330 within the next week though, been saving for it.
[QUOTE=Killerelf12;32069130]Same. Think I'm going to go for a Mamiya C330 within the next week though, been saving for it.[/QUOTE]
My C22 (slightly older model) is pretty damn sweet to use
got some new equipment!
[img]http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/304963_2341462735014_1203306379_32893898_5648647_n.jpg[/img]
[editline]2nd September 2011[/editline]
heh.
[img]http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/307870_10150426900298572_633323571_10822574_3729820_n.jpg[/img]
that is a nifty strap
i have that on my me super
[QUOTE=Trogdon;32067644]i have lots of crazy mount ring things, i only shoot with FD lenses haha. Because they are sooo cheap.
But I am going to save up for this guy
[url]http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921666375271[/url]
because then i'll get image stabilization. The first and only 50mm prime with it built in! So I'll get awesome low light performance and amazingly smooth video.[/QUOTE]
Isn't it built into all Sony bodies? Sensor shift stabilisation rather than lens element. Which is why the Tamron lenses with VC don't include VC on Sony bodies, only Nikon and Canon.
[QUOTE=Xera;32077560]Isn't it built into all Sony bodies? Sensor shift stabilisation rather than lens element. Which is why the Tamron lenses with VC don't include VC on Sony bodies, only Nikon and Canon.[/QUOTE]
no I don't use a DSLR I use a nex
[url]http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/NEX5/ZCOMPT2I-FRONT.JPG[/url]
it's one of the ones on the left
Got me a contrast filter for b/w film
[img]http://i.imgur.com/GdQHv.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i.somethingawful.com/forumsystem/emoticons/emot-buddy.gif[/img]
[QUOTE=daijitsu;32081847]Got me a contrast filter for b/w film
[img]http://i.somethingawful.com/forumsystem/emoticons/emot-buddy.gif[/img][/QUOTE]
What do all the different colored contrast filters do? I inherited all my camera gear from my grandfather/grandmother, who aren't around anymore to ask. I have a huge stack of filters though and don't really know what most should do.
it (somewhat obviously) only lets certain colors through. The red one tends to make people very high-key and give them even skin tones, and I've found something like green makes people look dark and gritty, showing lots of detail in the skin. The red is most commonly known, though, for darkening the blue of a sky to make a b/w exposure of a landscape look more evenly exposed.
It's p much the same as an IR filter but lets more visible light through. Try removing all the channels from a photo of yours besides red. It's gonna look really different
and it's ~fashionable~
dont filters like that, particulary the red work best with ir film like ilford 200sfx?
i was wondering the frame counter on my c3 is wonky will i be able to tell when i reach the end of the roll?
IR filters are dense reds or specially coated or something, as far as I can tell
[img]http://www.rickyrefuerzo.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/infrared01.jpg[/img]
The above one is dense, "R72", and mine's only R2. I'm not too familiar with IR films, so I'm not sure if it's better or just more common to use super dense ones. I'd be afraid I'd way overexpose using my filter when the film is designed to take in a lot less light normally(?)
Going to swoop into all the good pawn and op shops I know tomorrow to see if I can find a bargain.
[QUOTE=Jaanus;32073905]got some new equipment!
[img]http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/304963_2341462735014_1203306379_32893898_5648647_n.jpg[/img]
[editline]2nd September 2011[/editline]
heh.
[img]http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/307870_10150426900298572_633323571_10822574_3729820_n.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
nice
how come you barely ever post photos? you have a ton of pro equipment but i never see you posting work jaanusbro
Because i rarely have time to shoot anything non-work related
Got it some time back on my holiday in thailand.
I've gotta say i love taking pictures with it :smile:, I can now see why people like this camera so much, it takes stunningly good pictures with very good colours, especially with skintones.
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/6065746055/][img]http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6063/6065746055_205686485a_z.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/6065746055/]Fujifilm Finepix X100[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/leevmeister/]Leevmeister[/url], on Flickr
[QUOTE=frag4life;32095210]Got it some time back on my holiday in thailand.
I've gotta say i love taking pictures with it :smile:, I can now see why people like this camera so much, it takes stunningly good pictures with very good colours, especially with skintones.
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/6065746055/][img]http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6063/6065746055_205686485a_z.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/6065746055/]Fujifilm Finepix X100[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/leevmeister/]Leevmeister[/url], on Flickr[/QUOTE]
want.
Do you guys think it's worth it to sell my 70-200mm f2.8 L non IS for the 70-300mm f4-5.6 L?
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;32105700]Do you guys think it's worth it to sell my 70-200mm f2.8 L non IS for the 70-300mm f4-5.6 L?[/QUOTE]
Why would you want to do that? The 70-300L is a fine lens, but it isn't exactly light sensitive and the added range doesn't add much to your 70-200.
I think it would be more easy to just buy a 1.4x II or a 2x II extender (in both cases you will still have AF).
And if you want IS, my advice would be to just save for a 70-200 2.8L IS II, or get a 70-200 2.8L IS version 1 second hand instead (also a fine lens and the price is about as much or under a 70-300L new)
Zenit lenses on a 5D2 look oddly cute
[img]http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/294005_1962683748471_1284176537_31689162_1524857_n.jpg[/img]
[img]http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/320804_1962683948476_1284176537_31689163_5260869_n.jpg[/img]
I have myself Canon EOS 500D with 18-55mm and 55-250mm kit lenses. I also have a Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 lens. Panasonic DMC-FT2 is also part of my equipment, as it's waterproof and shockproof it's great company when being outdoors doing something "extreme".
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.