FA+
Shop
704
Views
Views
76
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Photography / Portraits
Species Dog (Other)
Size 1024 x 712
File Size 740.1 kB
Report this content
More from kaanah
Taken at Anthrocon 2009
( this one using an ultra-wide lens )
( this one using an ultra-wide lens )
Category Photography / Portraits
Species Dog (Other)
Size 1024 x 712px
File Size 740.1 kB
*laughs!* Yeah, it was great to see them togather like that. *^^*~ Had to pop in between the other photographers to snap this with the wide angle...and get 'em to pose.
I don't know which one is more "band-ish", this one or http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2491677/ . *^^*
Actually, I really wish they -were- in a band...that'd be a kick-ass album cover, hehehe.
I don't know which one is more "band-ish", this one or http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2491677/ . *^^*
Actually, I really wish they -were- in a band...that'd be a kick-ass album cover, hehehe.
I adore this picture. You grabbed some really good shots. Do you have to battle with a lot of barrel distortion when using the ultra-wide lens? I first found that to be a problem with a Nikon point-and-shoot that shipped with a standard wide angle lens. I could never get my panoramic shots to line up right because of it.
You, though, have quite the knack for good picture taking. I don't see a lick of over-exposure here, regardless of what you're saying. :)
You, though, have quite the knack for good picture taking. I don't see a lick of over-exposure here, regardless of what you're saying. :)
Thanks! *^^* Awwwr, I'm really glad that people like these photos. Especially since, when I'm taking them, what's going through my head is "Is this going to be worth taking, or will it be crap? Pro'lly crap."
As far as the barrel distortion - that happens with just about every wide angle lens. If you look at the bottom line on the ledge they're sitting on - its curved down vs the one right beneath their legs. It really depends on what look you're going for in your shots whether or not this is a problem. *^^*~
Although, there is a program that really does help smooth out the distortion: DxO Optics. If you've got a bit of money to spend, its definitely worth it. It takes a camera profile + lens profile, and auto-corrects for distortion. Definitely nice.
Hehehe. And...yeah. That -was- really over-exposed. Fixed it in post-processing, though. <.< >.> As long as nobody notices...yeaaaah.
As far as the barrel distortion - that happens with just about every wide angle lens. If you look at the bottom line on the ledge they're sitting on - its curved down vs the one right beneath their legs. It really depends on what look you're going for in your shots whether or not this is a problem. *^^*~
Although, there is a program that really does help smooth out the distortion: DxO Optics. If you've got a bit of money to spend, its definitely worth it. It takes a camera profile + lens profile, and auto-corrects for distortion. Definitely nice.
Hehehe. And...yeah. That -was- really over-exposed. Fixed it in post-processing, though. <.< >.> As long as nobody notices...yeaaaah.
I might have to get DxO Optics. As for right now, I'm still shopping around for a camera. I'm waffling between the Canon EOS/Rebel series and the Nikon D-series. I'm a casual photog, and I still need to go through both camera specific training and general photo balancing training to get the kinds of shots that I'm aiming for.
I'll have to get a closer look at the lens on the old Nikon to see what it looks like in reference to what you mentioned here. Just for kicks, what is your opinion on the EOS line? You mention using a Zeiss lens in a few previous postings. Worth the hype?
Also...post-processing wise are you using PS or some other piece of software?
Sorry for all the millions of questions. See these kindsa photos, and you wanna learn from someone better.
-Bliz
I'll have to get a closer look at the lens on the old Nikon to see what it looks like in reference to what you mentioned here. Just for kicks, what is your opinion on the EOS line? You mention using a Zeiss lens in a few previous postings. Worth the hype?
Also...post-processing wise are you using PS or some other piece of software?
Sorry for all the millions of questions. See these kindsa photos, and you wanna learn from someone better.
-Bliz
Hey, don't worry about the questions. I'll try to answer 'em here (may have to do two replies, at work atm). Hehehe.
Honestly, as far as camera systems go: Do you have any lenses for either system? If they work with the current cameras, that's something to consider. If not: I'd say to head down to a camera store and look around. Personally, when considering a new camera system - I wouldn't listen to the salesman, or the hype of "Canon vs Nikon vs Sony vs...." Every system has its high points and its weak points, but they're all very capable cameras.
With that being said, go down and physically hold the cameras. See how they feel, see if you can work your way through the setting of the cameras. Are the menus easy to navigate, functions easy to change, are they in a place where you can easily find them, that sorta thing? See how it fits in your hand...is the camera too big/too small? Take a couple shots, and see how the camera "feels".
Personally? I shoot Canon, and their EOS line. I had film lenses that were compatible with the new digital cameras. Plus, they kept many of the same controls...so everything was familiar. *^^*~ Nowadays, I pick up a digital Nikon, and I'm like "Where the hell is X at?" Hehehe. Confuses the bejeezus out of me. But, to each their own, they're all good systems to shoot off of. And...they all have very loyal followers.
Zeiss lenses -vs- hype : Actually, I kinda like my lil' Zeiss. Its cheaper than the 50mm f/1.2L, and has a (much, much, much!) better build quality than the Canon 50mm f/1.4. The only problem that I occasionally find is that its manual focus only. I knew this when I got it...but there's sometimes when I really wish it wasn't just MF. Like...action shots. *^^* Other than that, build quality is top notch (hell, even the lens hood is metal!), the focus is fluid and smooth, image quality is great stopped down. Wide @ f/1.4, the bokeh is so-so (circular highlights just look...strange on this lens). Otherwise, the color saturation is phenomenal - its hard to get that amount of color from any other lens. Just....yeah, that lens still surprises me with every shot.
And, post processing wise: I use quite a bit of software. Basically, the breakdown of my software is:
65% - Lightroom
30% - Adobe Photoshop
05% - DxO
I also use a couple of noise reduction programs (Noise Ninja for the win!), and a couple specialty photo editors / effects plugins. Hehe. All depends on what look I'm goin' for in the photos.
Honestly, as far as camera systems go: Do you have any lenses for either system? If they work with the current cameras, that's something to consider. If not: I'd say to head down to a camera store and look around. Personally, when considering a new camera system - I wouldn't listen to the salesman, or the hype of "Canon vs Nikon vs Sony vs...." Every system has its high points and its weak points, but they're all very capable cameras.
With that being said, go down and physically hold the cameras. See how they feel, see if you can work your way through the setting of the cameras. Are the menus easy to navigate, functions easy to change, are they in a place where you can easily find them, that sorta thing? See how it fits in your hand...is the camera too big/too small? Take a couple shots, and see how the camera "feels".
Personally? I shoot Canon, and their EOS line. I had film lenses that were compatible with the new digital cameras. Plus, they kept many of the same controls...so everything was familiar. *^^*~ Nowadays, I pick up a digital Nikon, and I'm like "Where the hell is X at?" Hehehe. Confuses the bejeezus out of me. But, to each their own, they're all good systems to shoot off of. And...they all have very loyal followers.
Zeiss lenses -vs- hype : Actually, I kinda like my lil' Zeiss. Its cheaper than the 50mm f/1.2L, and has a (much, much, much!) better build quality than the Canon 50mm f/1.4. The only problem that I occasionally find is that its manual focus only. I knew this when I got it...but there's sometimes when I really wish it wasn't just MF. Like...action shots. *^^* Other than that, build quality is top notch (hell, even the lens hood is metal!), the focus is fluid and smooth, image quality is great stopped down. Wide @ f/1.4, the bokeh is so-so (circular highlights just look...strange on this lens). Otherwise, the color saturation is phenomenal - its hard to get that amount of color from any other lens. Just....yeah, that lens still surprises me with every shot.
And, post processing wise: I use quite a bit of software. Basically, the breakdown of my software is:
65% - Lightroom
30% - Adobe Photoshop
05% - DxO
I also use a couple of noise reduction programs (Noise Ninja for the win!), and a couple specialty photo editors / effects plugins. Hehe. All depends on what look I'm goin' for in the photos.
Surprisingly, no lenses on hand. My extended family were always the ones with the neat goodies when I was young, and I'm just now catching up. Got the car, getting the pinball, then gonna plunk some serious cash down on getting a good camera setup for myself. As I said, I'm as aspiring photographer, but not one that could dare justify getting anything over about $1400, lens inclusive.
Ultimately, I feel like I'm going to end up going with either the Canon system, or the Nikon. I've had a good amount of time on both, and I find that both are easy to navigate around menu wise, and I've found that changing out lenses on the Nikon is fairly quick and easy. Being that I'm a lazy fox, I want a good auto-focus lens that's also self cleaning. I don't mind cleaning the optics so much, mirrors and all. but the lenses bother me to dismantle when dust gets in there (ewwwwww!).
I'm going to have in invest in a training program for Lightroom. I figure I can pick back up with Photoshop after a little bit, even if it has been some time since I used it last. It can't have changed too terribly much since 9.0. We're up to what now, CS2, right? Lightroom, however, I've never had a chance to lay paws on. Never really had much of a reason, to be honest. Most of the vacation photos that I take I end up using autobalance on and calling it a day.
The one downside that I note with the larger digital SLR's is the fact that they can make off the hip shooting cumbersome unless you wear it around. If you case it, you have to either remove it and mount the lens, or get a case that allows a mounted lens and then you have to wrestle it out. Do you carry a point-and-shoot for vacations and whatnot, or is the SLR all that you carry about? Mind you, I must repeat that I don't have much time on the SLR's as I don't own one, but I've used them and my observations are based upon that. :P
One last thing: Did anyone ever fess up to who's suits those are?
-Bliz
Ultimately, I feel like I'm going to end up going with either the Canon system, or the Nikon. I've had a good amount of time on both, and I find that both are easy to navigate around menu wise, and I've found that changing out lenses on the Nikon is fairly quick and easy. Being that I'm a lazy fox, I want a good auto-focus lens that's also self cleaning. I don't mind cleaning the optics so much, mirrors and all. but the lenses bother me to dismantle when dust gets in there (ewwwwww!).
I'm going to have in invest in a training program for Lightroom. I figure I can pick back up with Photoshop after a little bit, even if it has been some time since I used it last. It can't have changed too terribly much since 9.0. We're up to what now, CS2, right? Lightroom, however, I've never had a chance to lay paws on. Never really had much of a reason, to be honest. Most of the vacation photos that I take I end up using autobalance on and calling it a day.
The one downside that I note with the larger digital SLR's is the fact that they can make off the hip shooting cumbersome unless you wear it around. If you case it, you have to either remove it and mount the lens, or get a case that allows a mounted lens and then you have to wrestle it out. Do you carry a point-and-shoot for vacations and whatnot, or is the SLR all that you carry about? Mind you, I must repeat that I don't have much time on the SLR's as I don't own one, but I've used them and my observations are based upon that. :P
One last thing: Did anyone ever fess up to who's suits those are?
-Bliz
Hehehe. I hear ya - same here. Just getting started in the great shiny race. *^^* Too many things that we all want, though...and so little monies. u.u;
Hmm. Auto-focus is a standard on most systems, both Canon's and Nikon's systems work fairly well. I'm only on the Canon side, so I don't know too much about the other end. Hmm, trying to figure out how to put this, though:
Autofocus. The physical mechanisms that control the movements in the lens are located in the lens itself. However, what controls all of that is in the camera body. Basically, equate it to a computer controlling a robot arm. The camera senses the contrast between two different areas, and sends electrical (or sonic vibration) pulses to the lens to re-arrange the elements. All cameras are different in their AF speeds, though. However, for most uses, most dSLR's within the past 3-5 years are more than sufficient. *^^* Especially if you're used to film.
Hmm. On the subject of cleaning - I've actually never heard of a self-cleaning lens. Sensors, yes...lenses, no. I would recommend 100% against trying to disassemble a lens - there's roughly 10+ glass elements inside a new auto-focus lens, as well as a metric ton of moving parts. Hehehe. That thought frightens me.
Self-cleaning sensors - the short and easy explanation is that they don't work. The internet can explain it better than I can:
http://pixinfo.com/en/articles/ccd-dust-removal/
That's a good review of the major self-cleaning sensors.
Only thing I'll caution on cleaning your sensor - if its your first time, find somebody who's done it before and have them show you the right way. The CCD Sensor (which sits behind the mirror) has a filter over it which is --extremely-- fragile on some cameras. As in, (I can't find it at the moment) I've seen a post where somebody tried cleaning the sensor on a Canon EOS 1Ds MKIII ($8000 retail)...and completely shattered the filter on it by putting very light pressure on it.
What would have been a $100 cleaning turned out to be a $2000 mistake. BIG oops.
Hehehe. MMmmm, vacations. Honestly, I only carry my SLRs around when I want to shoot. I had a fairly decent point & shoot (Canon S5 IS), but sold it because I really never used it. Shooting off the hip isn't really that hard. If I need to put the camera away, I usually just carry a backpack and stick it in that. Otherwise, I use a camera strap that lets the camera hang down on my hip (instead of having it in the middle of my chest).
And...no, I have no clue who those three are, still. x.x;;
Hmm. Auto-focus is a standard on most systems, both Canon's and Nikon's systems work fairly well. I'm only on the Canon side, so I don't know too much about the other end. Hmm, trying to figure out how to put this, though:
Autofocus. The physical mechanisms that control the movements in the lens are located in the lens itself. However, what controls all of that is in the camera body. Basically, equate it to a computer controlling a robot arm. The camera senses the contrast between two different areas, and sends electrical (or sonic vibration) pulses to the lens to re-arrange the elements. All cameras are different in their AF speeds, though. However, for most uses, most dSLR's within the past 3-5 years are more than sufficient. *^^* Especially if you're used to film.
Hmm. On the subject of cleaning - I've actually never heard of a self-cleaning lens. Sensors, yes...lenses, no. I would recommend 100% against trying to disassemble a lens - there's roughly 10+ glass elements inside a new auto-focus lens, as well as a metric ton of moving parts. Hehehe. That thought frightens me.
Self-cleaning sensors - the short and easy explanation is that they don't work. The internet can explain it better than I can:
http://pixinfo.com/en/articles/ccd-dust-removal/
That's a good review of the major self-cleaning sensors.
Only thing I'll caution on cleaning your sensor - if its your first time, find somebody who's done it before and have them show you the right way. The CCD Sensor (which sits behind the mirror) has a filter over it which is --extremely-- fragile on some cameras. As in, (I can't find it at the moment) I've seen a post where somebody tried cleaning the sensor on a Canon EOS 1Ds MKIII ($8000 retail)...and completely shattered the filter on it by putting very light pressure on it.
What would have been a $100 cleaning turned out to be a $2000 mistake. BIG oops.
Hehehe. MMmmm, vacations. Honestly, I only carry my SLRs around when I want to shoot. I had a fairly decent point & shoot (Canon S5 IS), but sold it because I really never used it. Shooting off the hip isn't really that hard. If I need to put the camera away, I usually just carry a backpack and stick it in that. Otherwise, I use a camera strap that lets the camera hang down on my hip (instead of having it in the middle of my chest).
And...no, I have no clue who those three are, still. x.x;;
Comments