|
Kerrow posted:Will probably take some snapshots at my cousin's wedding party later this month as I promised her and then off the gear goes I guess How much to ship to nz
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2012 09:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 21:28 |
|
|
Kerrow posted:Sorry for this, little bit of e/n Why not sell the expensive body and lenses and buy a much cheaper m4/3 system? You'll get back a big lump of cash (I assume) and the new body+couple of lenses will be perfectly capable of taking excellent, non-sports photos. Some people find that the easy and spontaneity of a smaller body to make for more enjoyable shooting
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2012 15:23
|
|
|
spog posted:Why not sell the expensive body and lenses and buy a much cheaper m4/3 system? I was thinking about buying a second hand 5D or something and keep my 50/1.8 and flash. All the gear I sell should get me aroud 2800$ (7D + sigma 70-200 + Tamron 17-50, etc.). I've seen the 5D being sold for about 800$ around here. That way I will still have a very decent camera to shoot some stuff around without another 2k$ worth of gear on shelf.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2012 16:05
|
|
|
Kerrow posted:I was thinking about buying a second hand 5D or something and keep my 50/1.8 and flash. Seems like a good plan. If you aren't doing sports, or using the camera a lot, the 7D is wasted money and it is best to sell it while it is a current body You could also consider a 50D and that would let you use the 17-50 as it is a versatile lens. The 50D will seem a definite step down compared to the 7D, but the 5D will seem even older - though the big sensor could cancel that out a bit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2012 16:12
|
|
|
spog posted:Seems like a good plan. Well, I bought the 7D specifically because of hockey, If I didn't want the high iso capabilities I would be more than happy with used 40D/50D. But some of that enthusiasm is gone after two years now and I just can't justify having the 7D for shooting beer league hockey and then sitting on the shelf except for some family stuff, but I don't want to end up without the versaitlity of DSLR either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2012 17:21
|
|
|
Kerrow posted:Well, I bought the 7D specifically because of hockey, If I didn't want the high iso capabilities I would be more than happy with used 40D/50D. But some of that enthusiasm is gone after two years now and I just can't justify having the 7D for shooting beer league hockey and then sitting on the shelf except for some family stuff, but I don't want to end up without the versaitlity of DSLR either. Sorry, what I meant was that either of these downgrade options is a good one to take. It's definitely a good idea to cash in that unneeded focus speed/burst rate that the 7D has. You'll end up with a decent camera either way. Personally, I'd consider the 50D+50mm+17-50mm as a very versatile kit, but if you like to shoot at only 50mm and want thin DOF then you won't be unhappy with the 5D+50mm only.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2012 18:07
|
|
|
spog posted:Why not sell the expensive body and lenses and buy a much cheaper m4/3 system? I'll second this, but with a NEX. The sensor quality will be the same or better as your current DSLR and it's fun to use old manual focus lenses with it. With the 16mm pancake lens, it's so small and light, you'll take it everywhere. Bonus points because people won't get all weird when you pull out a small camera with no viewfinder.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2012 18:07
|
|
|
Kerrow posted:Well, I bought the 7D specifically because of hockey, If I didn't want the high iso capabilities I would be more than happy with used 40D/50D. But some of that enthusiasm is gone after two years now and I just can't justify having the 7D for shooting beer league hockey and then sitting on the shelf except for some family stuff, but I don't want to end up without the versaitlity of DSLR either. If you're okay with a bigger body the 1d2 is an amazing value, especially if you might want to shoot sports in the future again after a break from it. It's already been nearly as devalued as it can go for a while yet, and it can shoot pretty clean ISO 1600. You can sell the 7D, pick up the 1d2 and a super nice point and shoot for the difference/m43/nex.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2012 19:48
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:
:unixbeard: Though, that's not a bad idea. I might have to turn some of the old SPARC machines I have hanging around running Minecraft in to storage machines.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2012 21:05
|
|
ZFS data integrity.
|
AceClown posted:Augmented Dickey posted:I know the camera is poo poo but that pancake lens still seems pretty amazing to me.. It's poo poo? Is this opinion or fact, because that is the sexiest camera I've seen in a long time. It reminds me of the old black and orange Nikonos bodies. 8th-samurai posted:It's really too bad, Pentax DSLRs were pretty competitive when the first started making them. I felt similar about Olympus when they had the E1 and E300/330. For about the same price of an original Digital Rebel at the time, you could get a robust, weather resistant metal body, automatic sensor cleaning, live view, etc - except it was on the 4/3rds format and the lenses they offered were too expensive for what they were. That and you were pretty screwed if you wanted a wide angle. While the 4/3rds system has found it's place in the compact market, it just couldn't compete with APS-C offerings. Gravitom posted:Well maybe not for Canon if they keep releasing new versions of their lenses that cost twice as much as their predecessor. Or, you know, not releasing any new version of their piece of poo poo 50 1.4 with its "not-really-USM" motor that breaks if you breathe on it wrong. Or if it's cold out. Or if it's hot. The built-in soft-focus filter is a nice feature though... Seriously Canon - the 50 1.4 was released in 1993. - while it's a popular lens despite its shortcomings, the least you could do is give it decent build quality (such as the fantastic 85/1.8).
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2012 23:14
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:some of the old SPARC machines I have hanging around running Minecraft
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 00:43
|
|
|
woot fatigue posted:It's poo poo? Is this opinion or fact, because that is the sexiest camera I've seen in a long time. It reminds me of the old black and orange Nikonos bodies. The full review at Pentaxforums is here; yes, they tend to be slightly fanboy-ish regarding all things Pentax, but if you just tone down their numbers by a notch you can probably trust their evaluations. Also keep in mind they strongly uprate the K-mount, since they're reviewing for an audience of people who mostly own a collection of K-mount glass. If you don't already have such a collection, that feature is probably less appealing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 03:11
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:And I'm the :unixbeard:? I was referring to myself, but we can both be :unixbeard:!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 05:34
|
|
|
Amazing what you can unearth at your local Car Boot Sale      Click to embiggen
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2012 19:57
|
|
|
NoneMoreNegative posted:Amazing what you can unearth at your local Car Boot Sale Thats awesome, nice find.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2012 20:04
|
|
|
NoneMoreNegative posted:Amazing what you can unearth at your local Car Boot Sale Fantastic find, I'm jealous.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2012 20:04
|
|
|
I want that book. EDIT: but not £40-want it http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/POSING-PATTERNS-FOR-CREATIVE-PHOTOGRAPHY-WITH-1226-ILLUSTRATIONS-BY-L-E-BROOME-/250923983985
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2012 20:29
|
|
|
spog posted:Why not sell the expensive body and lenses and buy a much cheaper m4/3 system? I'll go one extra. Why not sell your digital gear and go film? I found there was a lot less pressure on me to take LOTS of photos when I was film-bound, and when I did take pictures I found that the limitation subconciously made me think about them a little longer rather than just hitting *snap* and filling an 8GB card to capacity. I know it's cliché, but I actually believe that's how it works. I did mostly street shooting with film and I found that the smaller size of the Pentax ME made me feel less self-concious about invading people's space. That's just me though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2012 21:18
|
|
|
spog posted:I want that book. ABE seems to have one for about a tenner shipped; http://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=3368685622&searchurl=an%3Dl%2Be%2Bbroome
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2012 22:51
|
|
|
NoneMoreNegative posted:ABE seems to have one for about a tenner shipped; Cool, thanks Are there other kinds of poses, not just the soft glamour ones that you illustrated? Such as standard office portraits, family shots, etc?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2012 23:45
|
|
|
http://i.imgur.com/HcBYY.jpg (Linked because its huge) Saw this on reddit titled "Supermodels without makeup" and thought some of you guys might appreciate it. It goes to show how much some make-up (a good MUA) and proper lighting can make anybody look horrible/beautiful. DMV-like flat lighting = eugh.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
Also the importance of using a long focal length!
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2012 01:32
|
|
|
Shmoogy posted:http://i.imgur.com/HcBYY.jpg I think Elle Macpherson is cheating (bottom right).
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2012 00:24
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Also the importance of using a long focal length! Hah, yah that's the first thing I thought of too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2012 04:07
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Also the importance of using a long focal length! Yeah I think most of all this. I occasionally see the picture linked here where a photographer basically tried any focal length he could get his hands on, on a relatively good looking model. As the focal length got wider and wider the model went from hmm she looks good to "eugh!" pretty quickly. Features became distorted she gained a huge forehead and just a generally unflattering appearance. And that was with makeup and good light.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2012 06:29
|
|
|
Yeah, none of it helps with polaroids which are intended to show the model as stripped down as possible. A lot of them are making a shittily lit wide angle shot look passable. Imagine if a normie was photographed in the same condition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2012 12:46
|
|
|
That would be this one: http://stepheneastwood.com/tutorials/lensdistortion/strippage.htm
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2012 13:58
|
|
|
No advice, just fun stuff for Dorkroom Discussion: I wish they'd powdered her face down a little before shooting that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2012 17:39
|
|
|
spog posted:Cool, thanks •posing with a ladder •posing with a ball •posing with a telephone •and more You get the general idea
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2012 23:58
|
|
|
Yahoo Finance posted:Facebook announced Monday that it will buy Instagram, a popular mobile-only photo-sharing app, for $1 billion. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2012 21:42
|
|
|
What the crap is with Facebook photographers being like "Well, I've got 100 likers and a few cool photos, guess I can teach workshops now!" Been so many come up lately, it's crazy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 00:59
|
|
|
There is a huge pressure from a certain side of photography (scott bourne) to push hobbyists to become "pro" which especially is targeting younger photographers. There are some big names that are really pushing the go pro and start your own business side of things. Nobody is really saying "hey it's okay to be a hobbyist and take fun pictars of things" it's about buying dvds, workshops, books etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 01:04
|
|
|
Thought this was pretty neat: Time lapse from the ISS
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 04:39
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:There is a huge pressure from a certain side of photography (scott bourne) to push hobbyists to become "pro" which especially is targeting younger photographers. There are some big names that are really pushing the go pro and start your own business side of things. Pretty much. Check out Fong's take on it: http://garyfong1.xanga.com/760307713/to-teach-and-guide-is-the-second-highest-calling-in-life/ People really don't wanna pay for someone to tell them that they are average and will always be. Attractive people promising our success is what's in demand  A passion for the craft has to come first. Dollars might come after.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 05:39
|
|
|
NoneMoreNegative posted:For your ten pounds you get: I understand what you are saying, but now I kinda want it even more.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 10:36
|
|
|
Elite Taco posted:Pretty much. Check out Fong's take on it: It's not as much that people are average, it's that there is a pressure to force people to go pro to justify their hobby. It's an incredibly disingenuous tactic that really poisons the well - the industry isn't doing so great which is why a lot of people are pushing workshops and dvds - which ironically push the 1, buy camera 2, ??? 3, be a pro! mentality. I think that there's a lack of acceptance for people who just have fun with their hobby. Like if you like slapping on an action to some flowers and posting in flickr that's great and fun for you. It's when those people get exploited by someone peddling a system to become a wedding or portrait photographer in 10 easy steps that bothers me. There seems to be a growing perception that if you have a camera you need to make money from it. You don't see Scuba divers feel like they have to become underwater welders because they lay out for some wetsuits, it's a very strange facet from photography being so broad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 12:52
|
|
|
Shmoogy posted:http://i.imgur.com/HcBYY.jpg Long lenses help, too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 16:52
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:It's not as much that people are average, it's that there is a pressure to force people to go pro to justify their hobby. It's an incredibly disingenuous tactic that really poisons the well - the industry isn't doing so great which is why a lot of people are pushing workshops and dvds - which ironically push the 1, buy camera 2, ??? 3, be a pro! mentality. I agree with that so much. I started a photography course earlier this year. I dropped out of it because I got a job just after it started, and anyway I had transferred into this course because I was the only person signed up the their film/printing course which they didn't run it. The instructor gave a spiel about what his background was. He had spent years messing about, a further 15 years as a serious amateur, then he went into wedding photography. He asked people in the class what their experience was (two thirds of them had gently caress all) and asked what they intended to get out of the course. About half of them (all people who had never taken photography seriously before) said they intended going pro, or make money on the side with it. It was ridiculous: me and two elderly gentlemen looked flabbergasted at each other. Here was people who didn't know which end of lens to attach to a body and they were talking about going pro after a four month, one night-class a week photography course. Never mind that they were basically saying to the instructor, "You may have spent 20 years developing your skills, but I'm going to replace you in six months time." He went on a little mild-mannered spiel about how being a pro-photographer takes a lot more than pointing a camera and pressing a button, but it went right over their heads. I've been reading for photography for years, and done a small bit of the actual taking pictures side, although most seriously in the past few months. I'd never presume I'm good enough to make money from this. My biggest hope is that some day I produce photographs good enough that someone will want to trade prints with me. And that just on the pure photographic skill side, never mind the legal ramifications of going pro. I don't know why everyone is out to make money from photography. I think it's pretty horrible, anyway. I'd prefer to save my money and have fun taking pictures with my hobby, than having to worry about getting what a client wants in the bag. And I think the "money over everything" bit is reflected in the second hand sales market here. One the biggest sales site I mostly see cameras going second hand at at least the cost a camera shop would charge for a second hand camera, that had been fully serviced, and came with a six month store guarantee. I've even seen discontinued second hand cameras tried to be sold at more than what a shop would sell their left over stock at, and that's new stock. It's like SLRs have some weird mystique attached to them. That they're fancy and expensive looking, so they hold the key to a good image, and therefore they're only to be sold at horrendous prices. And contrary to that, all the best deals on second hand cameras and equipment I see is through photography forums. Where you're getting the equipment from another photographer, who is either upgrading his equipment, or changing it out and who knows the value of a piece of glass, plastic and electronics: people who haven't invested some weird, powerful voodoo into camera.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 17:11
|
|
|
It's kind of like a beginners guitar class where everyone wants to be the next Yngwie Malmsteen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 17:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 21:28 |
|
|
HPL posted:It's kind of like a beginners guitar class where everyone wants to be the next Yngwie Malmsteen. Yeah, but most normal guitar beginners can hear themselves and know they sound pretty bad. They accept this, they might get elated that they can play the Smoke on the Water riff without loving up. But ultimately, they know they're beginners. These people were convinced they were the second coming of Ansel Adams.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 17:24
|
|