• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Digital SLR / DSLR Camera Question / DSLR Thread 2

Baptistro said:
Well, the lens that is on its way will be the first that came with a hood, so I plan on using that.

I have the following other lenses:

EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS
EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
EF 50mm f/1.8 II

Which lenses should I have hoods on? All of them?
Click to expand...

Bap, I think another issue you'll be running into here is light flaring around the internal lens elements and killing your contrast. Its a problem endemic to cheaper glass. The 18-55mm will, as I suspect the 55-250 would also. never used the 28-135mm, it may be culprit as well. Once you start shooting on the 24-70, you should see this effect largely diminished, unless you're shooting nearly into the sun.

Congrats on the purchase, but beware. L-glass is almost as bad as trackdays for addiction and back account damage.
 
The 24-70/2.8 should actually be good even with the sun in the frame. I shoot mine (Nikon's version) that way all the time. They spent a crapload of money in development on the latest generation of lenses...all that nanocoating and stuff really works.
 
Awesome, thanks guys. Although the new lens may fix some issues on its own, I'd also like to be able to fix the same problems with my cheaper glass if I am able, so all of your tips are appreciated. Is there something that I can do to fight the flaring you speak of Tyler?

BTW, for reference, both of the pics I posted were taken with the 18-55/3.5-5.6. I don't actually have the 28-135 at this time, it is on its way with the 24-70. (Why the redundancy? I sniped an auction and got both for the going ebay price of the L :))
 
Baptistro said:
Awesome, thanks guys. Although the new lens may fix some issues on its own, I'd also like to be able to fix the same problems with my cheaper glass if I am able, so all of your tips are appreciated. Is there something that I can do to fight the flaring you speak of Tyler?
Click to expand...

Use lens hoods / Use nicer glass / avoid direct sunlight

The flaring is a product of the excess of light being bounced between multiple lens elements. High quality optics with good coatings diminish and reduce this effect. Cheap glass, including cheap filters, will exacerbate it.
 
TylerW said:
Use lens hoods / Use nicer glass / avoid direct sunlight

The flaring is a product of the excess of light being bounced between multiple lens elements. High quality optics with good coatings diminish and reduce this effect. Cheap glass, including cheap filters, will exacerbate it.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'm a little giddy right now as I just received my lenses. Don't have the body at the office so I can't test them, but I got a nice little surprise in that the 24-70mm came with a B+W clear UV filter attached :teeth

Both lenses look clean and in excellent condition. I can't wait to try them out :banana
 
cycle61 said:
Next :|
Click to expand...

Sorry to hear about your situation braddah! I do wish you were a Canonite though!! :p Best of luck and I'm sure you'll be back posting up pics very soon!!! :thumbup
 
Faaack Nick, that sucks :(

Not really understanding you're selling money-earning gear, but I don't know your situation either :(

Either way, you're welcome to use my strobe stuff, and me and Doug set up a white-seamless in his garage (Willow Glen) and he has a coupla spare bodies (Canon's) if you ever need 'em.
 
Joebar4000 said:
Not really understanding you're selling money-earning gear, but I don't know your situation either :(
Click to expand...

It's not earning very fast. And I need the money pretty much now. Yes, it sucks, but I only have one wedding scheduled still, for which I'm going to rent a body and lens. I'm keeping most of my flashes, remotes, lightstands, and a billion other doodads, so it'll be easy to jump back in sometime in the near future when I'm ready again.
 
Damn, this 24-70 is a hell of a pig, it's freaking huge. Indoors taking baby pics it wasn't as stellar as I had hoped, and I played around with it quite a bit. Considering the amount of experimentation I was doing, I got only about a 20% return of keepers. The light was definitely weird, and in some situations that my other lenses did ok, this one was a bit more crisp. I am just not sure the differences so far were worth the $$$. The AF is definitely quiet, which is nice, but it's not as fast as I had hoped. Is the AF speed a function of lens or of the body?

The 28-135, seemed a bit more versatile, about half the weight, and pretty fast with the USM, just about on par for speed as the 24-70. The IS definitely makes a big difference, and I could barely get a decent pic with it turned off.

What applications will the 24-70 lens really shine on?
 
indoor shooting with a 2.8 will likely mean you'll still be shooting at ISO 8/16/3200, but you should still have the versatility of shooting with natural light. I've had some good luck shooting indoors at daytime with my baby niece with my Tamron 2.8.

Oh, and a 25% keeper rate is still good. And nothing is perfect out of the box - you gotta learn to work with it. Shoot more and practice.
 
The IS and 2.8 will make it easier to shoot indoors/low light. It's also more heavy duty, so it should last you a longggg time compared to lenses made of plastic. More expensive lenses usually also have better bokeh (out of focus area), have better coating on the glass to reduce glare, and im sure a bunch of other little things you probably won't notice right away.
 
Testing the waters

As some of you might know, I had a bit of a saga involving my dog and the City of Sunnyvale a coupla years back.

Well, since then, we got so pissed off and determined, we started our own non-profit, one of whose aims is to provide legal assistance (direct and via funding) for others in a similar position.

We were/are going to be holding a fundraiser as soon as we get our federal exept status (already got state).

I had the idea of auctioning off various friends time, as they are all experts in some useful field or another (lawyers, contractors, web designers, photographers, artists etc.)

Then I ran into this gal on Model Mayhem, who only takes paid work, and then donates it to animal charities.

I pinged her and asked if she'd be at all interested in putting herself up for auction, and to donate all proceeds to Calapr.

Turns out, she'd heard of the Lucy case, and was only too willing.

Now, a model would normally charge ~$100 p/h for a nude shoot. We're actually trying to get more than that, so we were thinking more like 6 photogs at once, with short breaks.

Or, how many people would be willing to pony-up $100 for one hours time, and it's deductible?

Her URL is here, PM me for her more exposed images.

http://www.modelmayhem.com/755019
 
Sounds cool. I'm out, for $$ reasons. Damn...she looks about 15 here. :wtf
 

Attachments

  • Picture 7.jpg
    Picture 7.jpg
    57 KB · Views: 72
Nick, you might be out for $$ reasons, but I could sure do with a hand with lighting equipment/expertize if you're willing to donate that?



This is trippy - this is an ex of mine, taken 12 year ago, obviously NOT Emily the model:
 

Attachments

  • Laura006-01.jpg
    Laura006-01.jpg
    113.1 KB · Views: 65
Joebar4000 said:
Nick, you might be out for $$ reasons, but I could sure do with a hand with lighting equipment/expertize if you're willing to donate that?

This is trippy - this is an ex of mine, taken 12 year ago, obviously NOT Emily the model:
Click to expand...

I could probably spare some time. I'm a lot better with lighting than I am with models anyway. Really have no idea how to direct/pose/etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top