The Photography Thread

[Malc]

Nice depth of field in that shot HaHa.

[MartyG]

Well, I did as Marty suggested, and I'm in this week's edition of the magazine !!

Cracking stuff, well done - I have that issue of the mag as I subscribe, hadn't realised they were your pics

[TommyG]

Say hello to the G11...

Pre-IFA 2009: Canon has announced a handful of compact cameras including models aimed squarely at keen photographers. Top of the line is the PowerShot G11, successor to its flagship PowerShot G10 compact released last year. The G11 replaces the G10's 14.7MP sensor with what it describes as a high sensitivity 10 MP CCD though it still uses the same 28-140mm equivalent stabilized lens. The camera also gains a tilt and swivel LCD, though the size drops to 2.8 inches. Flash sync speed increases to 1/2000th of a second and HDMI output is also added. Other features include Dual Anti-Noise System (more sensitive sensor and Digic 4 offering a claimed 2-stop improvement over the G10), RAW shooting and P/A/S/M shooting modes.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0908/09081908canong11.asp

Canon G11 Specs
Effective: 10.4MP, Recorded: 10.0MP
1/1.7″ CCD
RAW, JPEG, QuickTime
Image Stabilization
6.1-30.5mm f/2.8-4.5 (35mm film equivalent: 28-140mm)
Optical: 5x, Digital: 5x
Normal: 1.6′ (50cm) – infinity<br>
Macro: 0.4″ (1cm) – 1.6′ (50cm)
Integrated Mount for the LA-DC58K Lens Adapter
ISO 80-3200
Evaluative, Center Weighted, Spot
Auto, Daylight, Cloudy, Tungsten, Fluorescent, Fluorescent H, Flash, Underwater, Custom 1, Custom 2
Effective Flash Range: 1.6′ (50cm) – 23′ (7m)
SD/SDHC
Still Images per GB: RAW: 67<br>
JPEG: High Res: 374 – Low Res: 7,684
Video: 640 x 480 @ 30fps, 320 x 240 @ 30fps
Viewfinder Coverage: 77&#37;
2.8″ LCD Vari-Angle
USB 2.0, Dedicated A/V Out, mini-HDMI (Type C)
Windows XP, Vista
Mac OS X (10.4 or later)
12.5 oz (355g)
NB-7L Rechargeable Lithium-ion Battery
CR’s Take *UPDATE*
CCD? and no HD Video?

[TommyG]

I've just found this image which I think is absolutely incredible!

What a shot! Apparently done using manual focus as AF won't track the ball fast enough.

Amazing.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/harleypugs/3457957396/

[funkydan]

Wow Tommy, I think they must have downloaded that from the umpire's brain (if he has one, chuckle chuckle )!

I started going through my Big Chill Festival shots last night and decided to give one some special treatment using photoshop. I haven't really done anything like this before but I must say that I am very pleased with the results:



Your thoughts?

I will definitely be doing more of this sort of stuff in future, not all fisheye, but just experimenting and seeing what I can do

[stevie vip 99]

Hi folks, i have a nixon D40 with 2 lenses, 35-55 and 55-200, instead of buying another expensive lens i was thinking of getting a 2x tele converter(i think thats right!) to get longer shots.

Are these any good?? Also would someone know where to get, price, model etc as i'm not really sure what i'm looking for. Any other accessories i should look out for?

Thanks.

Also without sounding dumb how do i put pictures on here, can't seen to work it out ha ha, maybe i am just dumb though lol

[funkydan]

Also without sounding dumb how do i put pictures on here, can't seen to work it out ha ha, maybe i am just dumb though lol

Sorry, no idea about tele-converters (Are they like cash converters?! ).

But if you refer to the first ever post of this very photography thread, full explanation is given on how to put your photos on here (provided you have a Flickr account - which you can get for free, but the Pro account is very good and is US$24.95 I think).

Hope that helps

Dan

[Garf]

Stevie - Nikon don't recommend using a teleconverter with the 55-200, and from what I have heard, it becomes unusable at 200mm with a converter anyway - it affects the usable aperture apparently. You'll likely need a tripod in lower light

That said, some people seem happy with using one, so who knows..

How you thought about the Sigma 70-300 ? Need to make sure you get the right version that will AF on the D40, and you won't have any VR, but I think they go for about 150 quid..

[Garf]

Also, just found this which might help - someone else asked the same question and was told:

I would suggest NONE. The AF-S 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR lens is just not a good candidate for a teleconverter. Been there, done that (with similar lenses). It's too slow on the long end where you'll want to use it with a TC, which means an effective viewing aperture of f/8 with a 1.4x converter. That means spotty and erratic autofocus (or none at all), and very difficult manual focus because of the dim viewfinder image.

If you are determined to use a TC on this lens, then the Kenko Pro 300 1.4X or identical Tamron SP-AF 1.4X are probably your best option. Forget about trying a 2X - it will be virtually unusable on this lens.

[Garf]

Whoa - 3 posts in a row..

Cracking stuff, well done - I have that issue of the mag as I subscribe, hadn't realised they were your pics

Cheers Marty, and thanks for the tip..

Dan, nice gig photograpy - like the first one best.

Haha - great macro - what lens was that with ?

[stevie vip 99]

Cheers Garf, i'll look into the sigma lens.

I'm new to all this so wasn't sure what lens etc i could or should be using.
Sounds like the converter is a no go then, don't wanna have unstable pics.

Thanks for your help mate

[Ginger Tosser]

What a shot! Apparently done using manual focus as AF won't track the ball fast enough.

Probably set a predetermined distance and just firing the trigger. At 10fps on the 1D MkIII you'd get one in focus eventually. Still a nice shot though

[HaHaUK]

Haha - great macro - what lens was that with ?

Cheers mate, it was using the Sigma 70-300mm Macro. Fantastic lens!!

Here are a few from around the Capital:

[funkydan]

So guys, I know there's a lot going on on here at the mo, but does anyone have any constructive feedback for my fisheye shot on the previous page? Here's a smaller version of it:



Thanks

[Garf]

HaHa - good stuff. How do you find the longer end of the 70-300 ? I am interested in getting a 70-300 in addition to my 55-200, but don't really want to splash out 400 quid for the Nikon one - the Sigma is quite a bit cheaper as far as I can tell..

Dan - It's a clever effect, and I find myself looking all around the photo for little details. It's not something I've ever tried before. I find the black outline around it a little off putting, but I guess it needs something around it.