Posts for: Larry L56
Dec 28, 2016 14:36:00 #
Lets not forget manual metering. I use this for flying birds a lot since once you establish the right setting you can forget it. So when a bird or plane say in an air show, is flying by with different backgrounds changing, your subject always gets the right setting without the camera being fooled by the background. Only if clouds come in going back and forth from sun to clouds do you have to change things. My first setting to set the camera up would be metering the grass or a green tree getting the full light. In these situations with ever changing bright backgrounds, the auto settings never work as well for me.
Dec 27, 2016 18:40:34 #
Jules Karney wrote:
Larry these are beautiful.
Thanks, I had a lot of shots using my 300 f4D with my Df Nikon this last vacation. I like the color, contrast and sharpness, even wide open, I get with it. The bottom shot was with my 28-105D.
Dec 27, 2016 18:34:21 #
I like that nice small lens, I shoot above f2 or smaller to get more contrast and sharpness. I makes a nice portrait lens on a DX body.
Dec 27, 2016 17:37:07 #
I like ex tubes & my micro 60mm, but you can run out of working distance really fast with just using a prime 55mm. Not perhaps a good match up.
Dec 27, 2016 17:22:44 #
Larry L56 wrote:
I saw that the Canon 100-400 was sharper cropped, ... (show quote)
Dec 27, 2016 17:14:49 #
I saw that the Canon 100-400 was sharper cropped, then blown up to the same size than the Sigma's at 600mm, I thought that was interesting.
I just did an exhaustive study and so far I found the the 200- 500 Nikkor has a bit of an edge over both Sigma's and Tamron in sharpness and performance. It seems however the QC with all these lenses could be better with some softer than others of the same make. Perhaps this is why some show one better in one test, the other in another as far as sharpness?
I think Camera Labs review finally sold me on getting the 200-500mm.
see -Nikon 200-500 review Cameralabs
I just did an exhaustive study and so far I found the the 200- 500 Nikkor has a bit of an edge over both Sigma's and Tamron in sharpness and performance. It seems however the QC with all these lenses could be better with some softer than others of the same make. Perhaps this is why some show one better in one test, the other in another as far as sharpness?
I think Camera Labs review finally sold me on getting the 200-500mm.
see -Nikon 200-500 review Cameralabs
Dec 27, 2016 16:01:43 #
I had some fun doing sunsets on my Thanksgiving vacation in Florida.
Dec 26, 2016 13:53:59 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
Madame P looks stunning!
Glad you created this topic, Randy. Will be fun and interesting to view the entries!
Regarding your request, "what moves you the most," I can't decide between these two:
1. the glorious color, the silence and forest scents of Cascade Mountains in autumn
2. Mt Rainier, inspiring at all times, giving us a hint of her awesome beauty and presence in the early morning
Glad you created this topic, Randy. Will be fun and interesting to view the entries!
Regarding your request, "what moves you the most," I can't decide between these two:
1. the glorious color, the silence and forest scents of Cascade Mountains in autumn
2. Mt Rainier, inspiring at all times, giving us a hint of her awesome beauty and presence in the early morning
I like them both, very nice.
Dec 26, 2016 13:35:03 #
Cwilson341 wrote:
It's really hard to pick a favorite but here are a couple of fairly recent shots that I really liked. Since I do a lot of nature I always have favorites in that category and I have really developed a fondness for architectural type shots as well.
I shot this in '07 with my D70s. Just a straight jpeg no post editing. I knew I saw that shot before, it took some digging.
Dec 24, 2016 12:01:01 #
If I am shooting flying birds, I get the best results setting my exposure manually by metering a green tree or grass where the light is hitting in the same direction as what hits the bird. The auto settings ends up jumping all over the place because of the background is changing while panning the shot. I have tried to set a 1 stop -2 stops over, that sometimes is OK with a bright sky on auto, full or center metered.
If you think about it, if you get a good grass reading (zone 5 in the old 10 EV range, now it is better) hopefully your dynamic range will be wide enough not to burn out the whites in a bird and you end up with very constant shots. If scattered clouds, I will bump it open an extra stop when needed.
If you think about it, if you get a good grass reading (zone 5 in the old 10 EV range, now it is better) hopefully your dynamic range will be wide enough not to burn out the whites in a bird and you end up with very constant shots. If scattered clouds, I will bump it open an extra stop when needed.
Dec 23, 2016 22:01:19 #
An amazing close up. I would guess much closer than 125 ft. What post processing do you do and use?
Dec 23, 2016 17:52:07 #
I had a 16-85 lens a while back. It was nice and sharp, light, but did not hold up with it's plastic build getting soft on one side, being a consumer lens. The 17-55 however that replaced it is a real pro lens in every way and sharp at f 2.8 with good contrast. If you can live with a little less reach, it is built like the 24-70 tank.
Dec 23, 2016 17:37:12 #
Some really great shots! I have shot some eagles that way since getting out of the car would have spooked them.
Dec 23, 2016 17:07:15 #
I have Light Room 5 but never saw / used a HDR feature in it. With photomatrix you can get some wild effects, then I'll add the finishing touches in LR with noise reduction and other tweaks including the brush to change the white balance and exposure in some areas.
Dec 23, 2016 15:45:17 #
blackest wrote:
#7 Brighter viewfinder br This article seems good ... (show quote)
Good points. I need a larger finder when using long primes for finding the subject like a flying bird fast and being able to focus manually easier.
I have counted 6 rows of pixels going from white to black on a vertical black line on a white background with a 24MP DX body and a kit lens. So much for the density helping anything.
It is a marking scheme to me to have so many crammed pixels they advertise, unless you have really good glass. Just a waste of file space in most cases, when you could have had better ISO performance with a less dense sensor.