Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Darryl88
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
Aug 16, 2012 01:38:29   #
wow, I am seriously impressed!! Darryl
Go to
Aug 16, 2012 01:36:13   #
Great shot - had to scratch my head for a while until I figured it out....keep 'em coming. Darryl
Go to
Aug 16, 2012 01:31:57   #
Lovely shot Josh - I am loving the distortion. What lens and setting were you using? A nice subtle HRD shot (as far as some HRD shots that I have seen). I particularly like the confusion in the sky and clouds. Darryl
Go to
Aug 16, 2012 01:26:33   #
wow, Zelda is a cutie ~ lovely expression in her eyes. Great photo btw. I don't know how to upload photos yet but I will post one of my mate when I have figured it out.Darryl ;-)
Go to
Aug 15, 2012 21:37:36   #
I forgot there is also 'Lightroom', which adds more confusion to the issue!
Go to
Aug 15, 2012 20:50:04   #
Hi all I'm hoping someone can help me out with a bit of a dilemma. I want to start shooting in RAW & process my photos myself. I have Digital Photo Professional v3.11 that came with my canon but I want to do more than just convert my RAW photos to a different format........ but, I have no idea which is the better program to use. Can someone advise me which is the most suitable program for a new (but keen to learn) user. I was about to buy Elements 10 and someone said I should use Adobe CS6 (or whatever version its up to), but they couldn't tell me why! I would like to learn the whole gamut - layers, masking, removing objects, skys etc. Help please..
Go to
May 29, 2012 07:05:29   #
Kathlpn wrote:
I been reading the posts for a year or so now, this is first posting. I'm from Ohio and have had a Nikon D50 for years, taking family, pet, and esp luv macro photos! Going to Europe this fall and looking for a smaller camera. Thinking about Nikon coolpic p510. Has anyone out there used one? Thanks any input will be greatly appreciated!


Hi Kathlpn, you could try a PM to 'Horseart'. I am pretty sure she has just purchased a p510 recently and I know she would not put you wrong. Darryl
Go to
May 23, 2012 18:30:18   #
annemarie wrote:
The Tamron was $99.00 more! I don't know how I got talked into it. He was a fast talker. He gave me some negative line abt. the Canon, but I think the Canon was falsely advertised.
I may try to send it back if I'm not happy with it. I will research what other dealers sell it for and I will read some reviews.
I initially thought I was getting the Canon for a steal (which it would have been). Thanks for your advice, everyone.



Hell, a Tamron for a hundred bucks dearer than an 'L' series Canon..........I'de be cancelling my order real fast. Darryl
Go to
May 23, 2012 18:25:08   #
Gerrymarie wrote:
I would like NOT to spend more than $1000. Do you know if Nikon and/or Canon have the same anti shake feature that Sony does? How do you feel about Sony?


Canons 'anti shake' as you call it is called 'IS' (Image Stabilisation) and is built into specific lenses (IS is in the description ie: 70~200 L f4 IS) and Nikons is built into the camera and called 'VR' (Vibration Reduction). I would personally prefer the 'stabilisation' to be in the lens as this brings the cost of the camera body down and allows you to start with non IS (cheaper ~ but still dam good lenses) if you want to. Having said that - I think either Canon or Nikon are the most popular makes. As an afterthought....Canon have waaaaay more choice of lenses than other makes. That's my two cents worth. Darryl
Go to
May 15, 2012 08:14:38   #
pounder35 wrote:
Actually in the old days I depended on DOF preview instead of looking at lines on the lens barrel. But not all bodies have that feature and at small apertures it might be hard to see. I tend to get a "feel" for different lenses and pretty much know what my limits are with a particular lens at certain aperture settings. And with digital you can always see what you got and adjust and shoot over. Unless of course we're talking action, rapidly changing light, weddings, etc. etc. etc. LOL!


"shoot over" ~ what, don't we all get the perfect shot first time :thumbup: :thumbup: Love your 'Thompson' quote btw.
Go to
May 15, 2012 08:12:01   #
birdpix wrote:
Darryl88 wrote:
birdpix wrote:
Darryl88 wrote:
Nikonian72 wrote:
The colored-lines aperture scale on older lenses is used to set lens focus to the "hyper-focal distance", which is the lens position that captures "infinity" to near-focus in DOF, depending on the aperture selected. The smaller the aperture (larger number) the greater the DOF. Auto-focus will not achieve maximum hyper-focal DOF.

Basically, you manually set focus by positioning the infinity sign at the farthest colored line that corresponds to your chosen aperture. Every distance to the matching colored line will also be in focus.
The colored-lines aperture scale on older lenses i... (show quote)


Hi Nikonian, thank you for the answer - I am aware of my aperture settings as regards my DOF. My problem is the lens doesn't have any of the coloured lines that represented your focal range (on the older lenses) - it only has one single white line in the middle of the window (the book refers to this as the 'Focus Index Line'). I am thinking maybe you use the window itself as your upper and lower focus points ie: whatever distance is in the window is all in focus. This window is probably only suitable for close up work because the range is only from .8ft~3ft and infinity. If I want to focus on something 30 feet away the whole window seems superfluous.
I wasn't aware that 'auto-focus' wont achieve maximum Hyper-focal DOF. Thanks for your help. Darryl
quote=Nikonian72 The colored-lines aperture scale... (show quote)


No, you can't use the edge of the window itself as the range for determining the depth of field. With that wide angle lens, the gradations between 3 ft and infinity become progressively so small as to be meaningless.

Depth of field, as you know, also varies with focal length. this creates problems with, let's say a 50-300 mm zoom. How do you display that range? With old film era zooms the scale was fan shaped and more or less of the scale was visible because the lens barrel moved in and out with the zoom function. How do yu do that with some of these internal zoom lenses?

The real solution is for the camera manufacturers to make determining Hyperfocal Distance a software function. A calculator could be built in and displayed on the LCD screen. In fact, that wouldn't even be necessary. A simple press of a button would set the focus at the HFD for that lens at the selected zoom and f/stop all based on a generous print size. The camera body already knows what focal length lens is on the camera and can focus the lens to a predetermined distance as these are already a part of the Exif data.

Simple, huh!
quote=Darryl88 quote=Nikonian72 The colored-line... (show quote)


Thanks birdpix - don't you just sometimes miss the old days with the fan shaped lines - no computers - just lines you could easily see....unfortunately I am still at a loss as to what the window is telling me.... :? Darryl
quote=birdpix quote=Darryl88 quote=Nikonian72 T... (show quote)

Darrell, the only thing it is telling you is what distance the lens is focused at. With the 10-20mm between 3' and infinity it may be irrevelent.
quote=Darryl88 quote=birdpix quote=Darryl88 qu... (show quote)


Yes, I think the whole window (on this lens) is as much use as tits on a bull. The DOF with this lens is so huge the window becomes superfluous. it's total range is only from .8'~3'~infinity. I don't really think I need a guage to tell me I am focusing at 2 feet! Thanks for your imput. Darryl
Go to
May 13, 2012 21:14:47   #
rpavich wrote:
I guess I'm weird.

I never think "oh no...I might miss a shot if I don't have my 10-800mm Macro SuperZoom lens with me!.."

It just doesn't cross my mind. I'm certain that I miss hundreds of good shots every day...but why worry?

If I have my 50mm on my camera, I take shots that I know a 50mm will do well...I don't think about a macro lens shot that I might be missing, or an 800mm bird shot that might be out there somewhere.

If I have the 24mm on my camera...I don't obsess over the shots I might be missing if I only had a 400mm handy...


This whole idea of trying to cover a massive range of focal lengths so I can be ready for any situation like Tom Cruise in Mission Impossible makes me smile a bit.
I guess I'm weird. br br I never think "oh n... (show quote)



A man after my own heart.... I wholeheartedly agree with rpavich~ your walkaround lens should be what you have mounted on your camera right at that precise time. Having a 28mm lens on when you see a shot that would be great, if only the 200 was on, can be somewhat annoying......but it is also making you become creative ~ just to see what you get with the 28....ok, so 28 compared to a 200 may be stretching creativity a bit far but you get my meaning. My most used lens would be my 'kit' 18~55mm but some days I will try my best to limit myself to either the top half or the bottom half of the focal length for the whole day. I also do this with my 70~300mm....makes you stop and think before you crank the zoom up and hit the button. Good topic. Darryl
Go to
May 13, 2012 10:05:22   #
unyang wrote:
I have a Canon MK II and three lenses, respectively,EF 180 mm f/3.6L Macro USM,EF 24-105 mm f/4L IS USM, and EF 70-300 mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM. I am looking for a ball head or any head which would support my equipment and is easy to use. Does anyone have used Arca-Swiss ball head? Have any thought on Arca-Swiss ball head? Thank you. You-yen Yang


Wow, you have 4 lenses there that I would be willing to kill for. I would give you my wife for the 24~105L and I would even lend you my dog for your 'DO' lens...... good luck with your ball head.
Go to
May 13, 2012 09:43:14   #
loubrown wrote:
I have a Nikkor 35mm 1.8 and a Nikkor 50mm 1.4 . Which one should I use as my walk about or all the time lens? Tell me the difference other than the obvious (35/50) and why one would be chosen over the other. Or does it make that much difference period?


I think they are both much of a muchness and would just go with whatever lens your hand lands on when you reach into the bag... Darryl
Go to
May 13, 2012 09:38:14   #
birdpix wrote:
Darryl88 wrote:
Nikonian72 wrote:
The colored-lines aperture scale on older lenses is used to set lens focus to the "hyper-focal distance", which is the lens position that captures "infinity" to near-focus in DOF, depending on the aperture selected. The smaller the aperture (larger number) the greater the DOF. Auto-focus will not achieve maximum hyper-focal DOF.

Basically, you manually set focus by positioning the infinity sign at the farthest colored line that corresponds to your chosen aperture. Every distance to the matching colored line will also be in focus.
The colored-lines aperture scale on older lenses i... (show quote)


Hi Nikonian, thank you for the answer - I am aware of my aperture settings as regards my DOF. My problem is the lens doesn't have any of the coloured lines that represented your focal range (on the older lenses) - it only has one single white line in the middle of the window (the book refers to this as the 'Focus Index Line'). I am thinking maybe you use the window itself as your upper and lower focus points ie: whatever distance is in the window is all in focus. This window is probably only suitable for close up work because the range is only from .8ft~3ft and infinity. If I want to focus on something 30 feet away the whole window seems superfluous.
I wasn't aware that 'auto-focus' wont achieve maximum Hyper-focal DOF. Thanks for your help. Darryl
quote=Nikonian72 The colored-lines aperture scale... (show quote)


No, you can't use the edge of the window itself as the range for determining the depth of field. With that wide angle lens, the gradations between 3 ft and infinity become progressively so small as to be meaningless.

Depth of field, as you know, also varies with focal length. this creates problems with, let's say a 50-300 mm zoom. How do you display that range? With old film era zooms the scale was fan shaped and more or less of the scale was visible because the lens barrel moved in and out with the zoom function. How do yu do that with some of these internal zoom lenses?

The real solution is for the camera manufacturers to make determining Hyperfocal Distance a software function. A calculator could be built in and displayed on the LCD screen. In fact, that wouldn't even be necessary. A simple press of a button would set the focus at the HFD for that lens at the selected zoom and f/stop all based on a generous print size. The camera body already knows what focal length lens is on the camera and can focus the lens to a predetermined distance as these are already a part of the Exif data.

Simple, huh!
quote=Darryl88 quote=Nikonian72 The colored-line... (show quote)


Thanks birdpix - don't you just sometimes miss the old days with the fan shaped lines - no computers - just lines you could easily see....unfortunately I am still at a loss as to what the window is telling me.... :? Darryl
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.