Must pop bubbles
My dog Marley...
Hahaha, check out those teeth of hers! Do you have any shots of her and the frisbee?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Picture of the day...
- Thread starter iGary
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Hahaha, check out those teeth of hers! Do you have any shots of her and the frisbee?
Wow, very clear shot. I suppose it would be at 1/1000More stuff from work..
I cleared the exif on this one, but it's probably Aperture priority to f/4.5 at around 1/1000, ISO 200, direct sunlight WB on a D200 w/ Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 VR.
Yeah, that's a good shot!
Here's one of a flower. I took it today using my Nikon 105 mm VR macro, f/20, ISO 800, 1/200th of a second, and centre-weighted metering. I took two VERY sharp photos, but the position of the purple bit in the photo was slightly better in this shot. My best shot of the flower wasn't the sharpest.
There was a bit of wind blowing the flowers around slightly. Besides, I did this handheld. Steady hands, man. It's good to be young. It would have been slightly easier with at least my monopod, though. I took around 20 shots of this flower and have now deleted 18 of them.
Here's one of a flower. I took it today using my Nikon 105 mm VR macro, f/20, ISO 800, 1/200th of a second, and centre-weighted metering. I took two VERY sharp photos, but the position of the purple bit in the photo was slightly better in this shot. My best shot of the flower wasn't the sharpest.
There was a bit of wind blowing the flowers around slightly. Besides, I did this handheld.
Steady hands, man. It's good to be young. It would have been slightly easier with at least my monopod, though. I took around 20 shots of this flower and have now deleted 18 of them.Attachments
Yep and one of the bubbles - I'm going to go to the beach and get some better ones. The park is nice, but the bubbles reflect the surroundings - it will be quite cool on a nice sunny day
D
Attachments
Autobracketing is a function that the camera has which allows you to take photos, usually in batches of three, with one photo taken at the settings you have set, plus one picture slightly underexposed, and one picture slightly overexposed, when compared to your settings. This allows you, if you cannot get an accurate meter reading, to choose which picture looks best of the three. This function must have been inadvertantly enabled on your camera, you will need to refer to the manual to switch it off.
Look on the bright side though - on your OP, you mentioned that you thought your highlights were blown - look back through your files and you should have one picture slightly underexposed when compared to this, which means you may have preserved more detail in the highlights.
HANDS DOWN the ugliest thing to ever come out of Coventry! God help Jaguar if anything off that car makes it into production
The new Jag looks like the Ford Mondy JB was driving up to the beach club in Casino Royale
When all these rich guys buy this car for £60K and then the ignorant general public only think they've got a Mondy, they'll just die
This kenyan lion had just eaten his fill of kill, and was slowly walking to his bush to go back to sleep. Another lion was finishing off the carcass nearby, his picture I can post later if not too graphic.
Nice shooting.
Love his expression.
Date/Time: 2007:01:06
Exposure time: 0.033 s (1/30)
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO equiv.: 800
Metering Mode: center weight
Exposure: aperture priority
This kenyan lion had just eaten his fill of kill, and was slowly walking to his bush to go back to sleep. Another lion was finishing off the carcass nearby, his picture I can post later if not too graphic.
please post!
Yeah, that's a good shot!
Here's one of a flower. I took it today using my Nikon 105 mm VR macro, f/20, ISO 800, 1/200th of a second, and centre-weighted metering. I took two VERY sharp photos, but the position of the purple bit in the photo was slightly better in this shot. My best shot of the flower wasn't the sharpest.
There was a bit of wind blowing the flowers around slightly. Besides, I did this handheld.
Thanks, yours too! Ugh I keep telling myself I want that lens, but it's a focal length I already have with the 70-200 - I know it's a macro and stuff, but ugh. For the price I'm not sure if I can justify it, but the thing has provided some awesome shots from what I've seen.
Have you had any problems with it? I've read some poor reviews of it, but couldn't figure out if there was anything to actually back it up.
Here's another random one from this summer - she said she didn't like having her picture taken haha, so I hid it behind my back and said something stupid lol.
All the poor reviews I've read have only had one major bad comment about it: It's too expensive for what you're getting. I'm not sure about that, but that could actually be true.
What the reviewers say is that the VR isn't worth the price because it doesn't work when you're shooting at 1:2 or 1:1, which actually isn't true. The Nikon 105 mm VR can actually shoot at better than 1:1 (I think 1:0.7), and the VR still works at 1:1, albeit not nearly as well. It worked yesterday. Some people might say that even if it works, VR doesn't help in terms of the z-plane (ie: distance). A shallow depth of field is the biggest problem with macro, not lateral movements to the left and right.
The biggest advantage of VR is when I'm shooting portraits under low light, or even under decent light. I have rather steady hands, and at this focal length, I can't imagine shooting people anywhere but outdoors, where it's likely to give me more light. So is it worth it?
The Tamron 90 mm f/2.8 was a much better deal, but shorter than what I wanted. I considered the Sigma 105 mm or the 150 mm f/2.8 (sharp as a tack, they say), but people here convinced me to get the Nikon 105 mm VR. I like the AF-S, size, build quality, and the fact that the lens doesn't extend when you shoot macro (ie: internal focus).
I have gotten great photos out of this lens (in the 4 weeks that I've owned it ), and nobody can look at my photos and say "He definitely took that photo with the crappy Nikon 105 mm VR. I can tell just by looking." How people can judge anything in photography from just looking at graphs and histograms is beyond me. If it looks good, it looks good. However, the price may actually BE too high for the VR. I love the lens, I love the AF-S, I love that VR works (my first VR lens), and that's what matters most.
What the reviewers say is that the VR isn't worth the price because it doesn't work when you're shooting at 1:2 or 1:1, which actually isn't true. The Nikon 105 mm VR can actually shoot at better than 1:1 (I think 1:0.7), and the VR still works at 1:1, albeit not nearly as well. It worked yesterday.
Some people might say that even if it works, VR doesn't help in terms of the z-plane (ie: distance). A shallow depth of field is the biggest problem with macro, not lateral movements to the left and right.The biggest advantage of VR is when I'm shooting portraits under low light, or even under decent light. I have rather steady hands, and at this focal length, I can't imagine shooting people anywhere but outdoors, where it's likely to give me more light. So is it worth it?
The Tamron 90 mm f/2.8 was a much better deal, but shorter than what I wanted. I considered the Sigma 105 mm or the 150 mm f/2.8 (sharp as a tack, they say), but people here convinced me to get the Nikon 105 mm VR. I like the AF-S, size, build quality, and the fact that the lens doesn't extend when you shoot macro (ie: internal focus).
I have gotten great photos out of this lens (in the 4 weeks that I've owned it
), and nobody can look at my photos and say "He definitely took that photo with the crappy Nikon 105 mm VR. I can tell just by looking." How people can judge anything in photography from just looking at graphs and histograms is beyond me. If it looks good, it looks good. However, the price may actually BE too high for the VR. I love the lens, I love the AF-S, I love that VR works (my first VR lens), and that's what matters most. 
Awesome pic Buschmaster, any chance you can post a link to a higher res vesion that will look clean on my 1900 x 2600 pixel 30" ACD? It would make a great desktop pic.
Volvo XC 60 Concept
Camera Model: Canon EOS 30D
Camera Software: QuickTime 7.1.3
Image Created: 2007:01:11 13:04:52
Exposure Time: 1/250 sec
F-Number: f/5.0
Exposure Program: Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating: 400
Lens Aperture: f/5.0
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Metering Mode: Spot
Flash: No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length: 227.00 mm
Color Space Information: sRGB
Camera Model: Canon EOS 30D
Camera Software: QuickTime 7.1.3
Image Created: 2007:01:11 13:04:52
Exposure Time: 1/250 sec
F-Number: f/5.0
Exposure Program: Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating: 400
Lens Aperture: f/5.0
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Metering Mode: Spot
Flash: No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length: 227.00 mm
Color Space Information: sRGB
Autobracketing is a function that the camera has which allows you to take photos, usually in batches of three, with one photo taken at the settings you have set, plus one picture slightly underexposed, and one picture slightly overexposed, when compared to your settings. This allows you, if you cannot get an accurate meter reading, to choose which picture looks best of the three. This function must have been inadvertantly enabled on your camera, you will need to refer to the manual to switch it off.
Look on the bright side though - on your OP, you mentioned that you thought your highlights were blown - look back through your files and you should have one picture slightly underexposed when compared to this, which means you may have preserved more detail in the highlights.
I use bracketing for when I'm shooting in High Dynamic Range. Lucky for me my Canon Rebel XT came with it, because eventually I discovered HDR, and the bracketing capability was there to help out.
Autobracketing is a function that the camera has which allows you to take photos, usually in batches of three, with one photo taken at the settings you have set, plus one picture slightly underexposed, and one picture slightly overexposed, when compared to your settings. This allows you, if you cannot get an accurate meter reading, to choose which picture looks best of the three. This function must have been inadvertantly enabled on your camera, you will need to refer to the manual to switch it off.
Look on the bright side though - on your OP, you mentioned that you thought your highlights were blown - look back through your files and you should have one picture slightly underexposed when compared to this, which means you may have preserved more detail in the highlights.
Thank you for the responses,
Good to know I have that feature, now I just have to wait a little longer before I can shoot Raw. There isn't a plug-in for cs2 or lightroom, or Aperture yet.
Stand out
NIKON D40
Date/Time: 2007:01:06
Focal length: 48.0mm
Exposure time: 0.033 s (1/30)
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO equiv.: 1600
Metering Mode: center weight
Exposure: aperture priority
NIKON D40
Date/Time: 2007:01:06
Focal length: 48.0mm
Exposure time: 0.033 s (1/30)
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO equiv.: 1600
Metering Mode: center weight
Exposure: aperture priority
Yay!
I was backtracking to find your photo so I could comment. I finally found it.
This is a beautiful photograph! I'm a fan of light and contrast and this fits the bill. The composition is top notch and there is a great use of texture. *high five*
I was backtracking to find your photo so I could comment. I finally found it.
This is a beautiful photograph! I'm a fan of light and contrast and this fits the bill. The composition is top notch and there is a great use of texture. *high five*
That's a great one - so it's 3 exposures or..? I know with a conventional Orton technique you'd take an OOF frame and overlap it with an over-exposed in-focus frame.
It kinda reminds of a totally random shot I got at the National Horse Show in Wellington, FL a little while ago... (like I said this was random that they happened to line up like this, they were warming up watching the person that was showing in the ring next to them.)
I really like this shot. The colours of the horses seem to jump out at you. And that backround effect is different...
This is my first post in here, just thought I'd say hi to everyone (recently converted from pc to a MBP C2D, not sure wtf I was thinking before that but hey, better late than never
This was actually hand-held at probably ~20ft with a ~1/125ish shutter. I guess VR can be worth it sometimes.
wow! great shot!
- Status