Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: shutterbob
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 48 next>>
Nov 13, 2020 13:08:29   #
Eric Bornstein wrote:
Spread the word - the z cameras and lenses are really good. If you are a Nikon user, the transition id easy; the menu system is straight forward, unlike those of Sony and Olympus,


I have transitioned to the z line.....z50 and z5. Loving them both. Still using my dslr lenses with ftz adapters. D7500 and D750 spening more time in the safe than over my shoulder. I'll eventually bite the bullet and purchase z lenses.....nothing but good reviews on them. Hope Nikon (and other manufacturers) can make it through this tough time. Plus it seems the younger generation is happy with the camera in their smart phone.
Go to
Nov 7, 2020 12:47:33   #
I'd rather spend the money on a spare battery. For me the most appealing aspect of the z50 is it's very compact size, especially with the 16-50 lens. That portability would be lost with an aftermarket grip.
Go to
Nov 7, 2020 12:41:59   #
I am not able to 'freeze' any fast moving subjects with my z5 or z50 no matter the shutter speed. Hummingbirds look like they are wearing a blurry cape. Never had that problem on a dslr, even in the less expensive D5600. Best way to describe it would be to say the photos are distorted. Have gone back to using a dslr for moving objects.
Go to
Nov 6, 2020 13:03:20   #
Nice pics. So many beautiful spots in that state that one would almost have to work at getting a crummy shot.
Go to
Nov 6, 2020 13:00:00   #
Since most of the time one of my camera backpacks is with me I keep a spare in the battery charger
Go to
Oct 31, 2020 12:12:04   #
My shutter count. com works great for me
Go to
Oct 27, 2020 12:28:57   #
I love mine.....although except for being 1 stop faster I don't think it is any better than the 16-85, which you can still find if you're willing to spend some time looking. The VR in the 16-80 is superb.
Go to
Oct 27, 2020 12:23:14   #
Look for a used Nikon 16-85 f3.5/5.6 VR. Adorama, B&H, Amazon, and mph all have this great lens at times. It spends more time on my D5600 than all other lenses combined. Not quite as fast as the 16-80 on my D7500 but the results from it are just as good.
Go to
Oct 25, 2020 11:19:14   #
Nice painting......but imo not a photograph.
Go to
Oct 23, 2020 11:48:32   #
Living in AZ gives me the opportunity to visit this area at least once a year. I have seen every type of weather they get. Most people's photos don't do the area justice. Yours do. Those really are some of the best I've seen and capture the feel of this magnificent place. Nicely done!
Go to
Oct 21, 2020 13:53:35   #
Labs are the best. Our yellow doesn't get many opportunities to get in the water.....kinda dry in southern AZ. But she loves the kiddy pool !
Go to
Oct 20, 2020 12:13:17   #
Look at the Nikon z50 mirrorless with a 16-50 lens. The combination is not much over 1 pound. The lens (24-75 equivalent in full frame) is a great walk around/street lens. I love mine for hiking......small, lightweight, doesn't require a tripod to hold steady, and has great capabilities.
Go to
Oct 19, 2020 14:30:39   #
Your persistence paid off. Very nice shot! I tend to take these magnificent cacti for granted since I only have to look out the window to see them. Thanks for the reminder of how beautiful the saguaro is.
Go to
Oct 18, 2020 12:30:06   #
I use both, not because I feel one is better than the other but just because they are different. I enjoy the lightweight of my Nikon z50 and it's tiny native 16-50 lens. It goes with me when I am hiking because it doesn't get in the way and it has abilities my cell phone can only dream about. But, being somewhat a traditionalist I still enjoy my DSLRs and use them for most of the photos that I don't feel are rushed.....plus I really don't (at least not yet) want to spend the thousands of dollars for new glass.
Go to
Oct 18, 2020 12:20:58   #
rmalarz wrote:
One of our members, Steve R, posited that technique has disappeared. He was referring to the discussions involving technique. It seems that the technique has been replaced with which camera and software will provide one with the satisfaction of creating a notable photograph. I've observed that trend myself but not really given much thought to that occurrence. Most notably, I've been opposed to Luminar's claim to fame of replacing skies, etc.

Up until recently, I was completely opposed to substituting incredible skies into a landscape photograph, etc. I prefer to capture what's there. If what I want isn't there, I'm not disingenuous to 'fake' it. I liken it to say one is going fishing and upon not catching anything, going to a fresh fish store, and purchasing a large fish to return home and announce oneself as a great fisherman to have brought this wonderful dinner home.

Well, I've had a change of heart. I can see where there is a good cause for substituting skies, or any other background, in a photograph. This change was due to viewing a commercial photographer's work. The subject was shot in a studio and then an incredible and related background was placed in the photograph.

In this photographer's case, these are commercial photographs. They are done for pay, a sizable payment to say the least, and done with a time limit. They would be impossible to accomplish with the deadline given, people's schedules, etc. To say nothing of having nature cooperate with the ideal weather for a backdrop. So, in these cases, it is quite acceptable to produce a product photograph as quickly as possible.

Now, to the average person who wants to be a photographer. There is the knowledge that is needed to produce a successful and pleasing photograph. Today's cameras and associated software remove a great deal of the burden of photographic knowledge and simply reduce a good many to being merely camera operators. Ask yourself, if you didn't take that path, or continue to look for that path. It comes down to whether you wish to be a photographer or a mere button pusher. The choice is yours.

You can't purchase talent. You can, anyone can develop talent if they are willing to invest in learning the necessary skills as a foundation and then continuing to build on those skills. The results will be far more satisfying than just mastering which button to push. Kodak used to have an advertising expression, "You push the button. We do the rest". If photography and photographic art were that simple, why didn't the notable photographers resort to letting Kodak do the rest?

So, it comes down to whether you want to be a photographer or just a button pusher? One will produce photographs. The other will be entangled in a constant search for the "next best thing" that will propel them to the heights of photographic accomplishments they couldn't achieve on their own.
--Bob
One of our members, Steve R, posited that techniqu... (show quote)

Guess I'm an old fart stuck in his ways but to me a photographer 'catches' what is present whether you happen to like the scene or not. If you alter the photo to suit your perceived preferences then you cease being a photographer and become a computer manipulator. Not saying that is wrong, just saying you are basically now a painter, just one who uses a computer instead of an easel and brushes. Just my opinion but that is not the essence of photography. They are both an art and require talent to produce an attractive product, but to me the line is not blurred.......you are one or the other.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 48 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.