| INTERFERENCE.COM U2 Fans, 'Zine, and More |
| |
| | #1 |
| The Fly Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Australia
Posts: 108
Local Time: 12:19 PM | The 5d MkII is nice ! My dad has just come back from Coonabarabran in western New South Wales where there is almost no population (and almost no light pollution). Just near the Anglo-Australian telescope. There is also a small private observatory that lets you attach your camera. They're a bit noisy, but...how often do you get to do this ! ![]() ![]() I don't know details for the telescope, but these are 1600 ISO at 60 seconds. |
| | |
| | #2 | |
| Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,086
Local Time: 08:19 PM | Quote:
Nice shots- always wanted to try astro. I wonder what the focal length on that scope is. | |
| | |
| | #3 |
| Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: San Mateo
Posts: 6,224
Local Time: 05:19 PM | Ok so I have the nikond200 its a 10.2million mega pixel camera. How big can I print? |
| | |
| | #4 |
| Resident Photo Buff Forum Moderator Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 8,862
Local Time: 05:19 PM | these kinds of things are easily searchable on google, Justin. But since you asked... Native resolution works out to about 12x18 or so. You should have no problem printing up to 16x24s if you want though. Hell, I've printed a few 20x30s and even a 24x36 from my 8.2MP 20D, and they came out pretty darn well. |
| | |
| | #5 |
| Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: the ASIAN TEAM
Posts: 7,006
Local Time: 12:19 PM | To keep this thread ticking over, some photos I took with my friend's 50mm f/1.2 lens: ![]() ![]() I'd never gone to anything as high as 1.2 before, so this was a real learning experience for me. But the room was dark, and so this worked really well. I'm also looking to make a little flash diffuser thing for my pop-up flash - another friend was using one, and it seems to really make a huge difference. |
| | |
| | #6 | |
| Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,086
Local Time: 08:19 PM | Quote:
).For flash, I would recommend a Speedlite unit. That will really improve the shots. | |
| | |
| | #7 |
| Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: San Mateo
Posts: 6,224
Local Time: 05:19 PM | ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Some Model photos I took last night |
| | |
| | #8 |
| War Child Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Bring on the razzle-dazzle
Posts: 604
Local Time: 02:19 AM | That's just reminded me, I need to get my film in my camera developed. |
| | |
| | #9 |
| Best in Show Premium Gold Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In the dog house.
Posts: 17,992
Local Time: 08:19 PM | Generally I am 10-20 feet away (I'm thinking in terms of my backyard and where I stand when the dogs play). If I'm too close I can't use that lens (like my 55-200VR lens). In that pic the dog is probably 8 feet from the bushes. How far away should I be? |
| | |
| | #10 |
| Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,086
Local Time: 08:19 PM | Nikon's site says the minimum focusing distance for that lens is about 3 feet. To use a smaller aperture (e.g. f/6 to f/8) and still get the bokeh, I would get in a few feet closer and use a more distant background (e.g. 20-30 feet). |
| | |
| | #11 |
| Best in Show Premium Gold Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In the dog house.
Posts: 17,992
Local Time: 08:19 PM | K, thanks! At the moment the bush is all I have since it's an evergreen and we don't have leaves until late May or June 3 feet seems really close, I don't think I've ever been able to focus that close with that lens besides with my macro adapter on it (but the closer I am to the dogs, the more likely they are going to run and jump on me or lick the lens!). |
| | |
| | #12 |
| Best in Show Premium Gold Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In the dog house.
Posts: 17,992
Local Time: 08:19 PM | Is this one better? I was much farther from the dog than the previous pic, but and the background was farther back as well. Light was kind of bright but these women asked us to snap a headshot of their puppy and they wanted him to look nice and red/yellow. F/5.3, 1/640, 145mm. When I look at the original of this one, the face seems to be equally in focus (rather than the nose or ears slightly out) ![]() But then this one, the nose is out of focus (f/5.6, 1/500, 200mm) ![]() This one turned out OK I think but it's from the side so there's not the same depth like there is from the nose to the earset (also f/5.6, 1/500, 200mm) ![]() |
| | |
| | #13 | |
| Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,086
Local Time: 08:19 PM | Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #14 |
| Refugee Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: MTY, Mexico
Posts: 1,043
Local Time: 07:19 PM | Justin you should buy yourself a grey card, they are quite cheap!! your white balance is way off in some pics, and the first and second are out of focus probably because of the shutter speed you were using, another tip with the black background the best way to achieve a true black is to put the subject as far as you can from the background |
| | |
| | #15 | |
| Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: San Mateo
Posts: 6,224
Local Time: 05:19 PM | Quote:
The background was actually blue. I should have used a faster shutter speed. I should have used a faster shutter speed. I used Daylight WB and Tungsten. I kinda like the effect. I also messed around in Photo shop. | |
| | |
![]() |
| Tags |
| photographers, photography, photos |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |