The Big Photography Thread

[RichieP_MechE]

There are some that adapt very well.

 

This page has a chart that I reference all the time.

 

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/manual_focus_EOS.html

 

Specifically you want to look at the ones that do not require optics to focus properly. I have a Pentax 135mm Prime K mount that I've adapted and it works well.

 

I just picked up a Super Takumar 55mm f/1.8 M42 mount for just a few dollars that is mint and by all accounts should deliver incredible results. Whether it is better than the Canon nifty 50mm f/1.8 or worth the hassle remains to be seen.

 

This thread on has nothing but sample pictures from MF adapted lenses:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=644277

 

 

If you're doing video, some of these old lenses are very desirable because of image quality and the quality/size of the focus ring.

Cool Mike, Thanks! Good resources there. Wikipedia has a good list too.

 

Goodbye, Cameras - The New Yorker

For the average point and shoot photographer, an iPhone is a good camera.

 

But you can't set aperture or shutter speed, which are two settings I would want to set manually if I desired. I won't be getting rid of my DSLR any time soon.

[Joe Muscara]

I agree, Richie, but it's an interesting perspective. I wonder if there will be real cameras with some sort of immediate connectivity.

[KenElevenShadows]

Goodbye, Cameras - The New Yorker

 

Another I-cannot-think-of-anything-useful-to-say-so-I'll-write-a-sensationalistic-headline/article-using-only-my-limited-experience-as-an-example-because-I'll-get-lots-of-hits-and-my-boss-will-be-happy-regardless-of-whether-I-look-like-a-nitwit article.

 

Guys like this actually get paid to write crap like that?

 

In a world that this idiot imagines, let's play out a few scenarios, shall we?

 

You're a photographer. A couple pays you $5000 to photograph their wedding. You pull out your iPhone and exclaim loudly, "Not to worry, even though in ideal light it's virtually indistinguishable from a modest Panasonic GX1 point and shoot, doesn't handle low light well, is unable to control depth of field because there's no way to control aperture, and it cannot withstand intense editing, it's networked! The world no longer needs cameras!"

 

You're a photographer. Sports Illustrated wants you to take some photos of an important playoff game. Showing up at the game, you pull out your iPhone and exclaim loudly, "Not to worry, even though in ideal light it's virtually indistinguishable from a modest Panasonic GX1 point and shoot, can't control depth of field because there's no aperture control, doesn't handle low light well, or withstand intense editing, blurs like anything, doesn't focus quickly, has serious lag time so I'll miss all the action shots, can't use a flash or fire speedlights, it's networked! The world no longer needs cameras!"

 

You're a photographer. The newspaper wants you to cover a riot. Showing up at the scene, you pull out your iPhone and exclaim loudly, "Not to worry, even though in ideal light it's virtually indistinguishable from a modest Panasonic GX1 point and shoot, doesn't handle low light well, or withstand intense editing, blurs like anything, doesn't focus quickly, has serious lag time so I'll miss all the action shots, can't use a flash or fire speedlights, it's networked! The world no longer needs cameras!"

 

You're a photographer. Your fashion editor wants you to shoot some photos of some hot new fashions with supermodels. Showing up for the fashion shoot, you pull out your iPhone and exclaim loudly, "Not to worry, even though in ideal light it's virtually indistinguishable from a modest Panasonic GX1 point and shoot, doesn't handle low light well, or withstand intense editing, blurs like anything, doesn't focus quickly, has serious lag time, can't use a flash or fire speedlights, has no detail, is too dark, and has such low resolution that it cannot be blown up into the magazine spread, poster, or billboard ad that you want, it's networked! The world no longer needs cameras!"

 

You're a photographer. Reuters wants you to capture a civil war in Somalia. Showing up in the war zone, you pull out your iPhone and exclaim loudly, "Not to worry, even though in ideal light it's virtually indistinguishable from a modest Panasonic GX1 point and shoot, I won't be able to capture anything because there's camera lag and doesn't zoom and doesn't have much detail, it's networked! The world no longer needs cameras! Wait, what? There's no coverage here in Somalia?"

 

You're a nature photographer. You pull out your iPhone because you're going to take a beautiful long exposure photo of a waterfall. Oh, whooopsie, this looks like complete shit and looks awful as a gallery print. No one's going to buy this because it looks like everyone else's snapshot. But hey, it's networked! The world no longer needs cameras!

 

You're a night sky photographer. You pull out your iPhone because you're going to take a beautiful long exposure star trails photo at night. After trying desperately to figure out how to mount your iPhone to something stable, you give up, No matter, hey, it's networked! That's all that's important in a camera. You focus. Oh, wait...you can't. See, the damned thing won't focus because it's too dark and doesn't have infra-red like those "dinosaur" DSLRs used to have. But hey, no matter, it's networked...and if it were ideal light, it'd be virtually indistinguishable from a modest Panasonic GX1 point and shoot, which wouldn't be able to take a decent night sky shot either. Okay, well, we can't focus, but surely we can open the aperture and let in the miniscule amount of light that the stars in the sky give off...but oh wait...no, what aperture control? You can't see anything. You can't focus. You can't see any stars. But hey, you can take a blurry selfie in which my face looks as white as a ghost out here in the desert. Oh, but there's no cellphone service in the middle of the desert. No connectivity. You're outta luck...

 

You're a photographer. You and Steve McCurry are working on assignment for National Geographic. As the African sun is dipping below the horizon, you see a number of bushmen walking home with their catch. It looks gorgeous. Hopping off the jeep, you pull an iPhone out of your pocket and start taking snapshots of blown-out skies and very dark bushmen. Steve doubles over in laughter.

 

Yeah. That'll work.

 

By the way, does this "writer" even know that most modern DSLRs can be easily networked and many have wifi?

[Theo Verelst]

I would be interested to know what the natural resolution of a normal negative is, if you develop it "analog", with no digitizations in the develop machine. Bit of a trick question.

[Mike Martin]

So what photo editing software are you guys using? I switched to Lightroom about 6 months after getting my camera and can't imagine using anything else. This combined with shooting in RAW format you're able to pull so much more out of a photo.

 

As an example, I was driving several weeks ago and happened to have my camera with me. I looked out my window and the sky was gorgeous as the sun was setting. So I stopped and took a few pictures. The left picture is what the camera captured. The right is what Lightroom was able to do with it - which is what I saw that day.

 

[Joe Muscara]

By the way, does this "writer" even know that most modern DSLRs can be easily networked and many have wifi?

That, I did not know. Unfortunately, I don't have the budget to replace my Digital Rebel XT, so I'm stuck doing it the old way for now.

So what photo editing software are you guys using? I switched to Lightroom about 6 months after getting my camera and can't imagine using anything else. This combined with shooting in RAW format you're able to pull so much more out of a photo.

 

As an example, I was driving several weeks ago and happened to have my camera with me. I looked out my window and the sky was gorgeous as the sun was setting. So I stopped and took a few pictures. The left picture is what the camera captured. The right is what Lightroom was able to do with it - which is what I saw that day.

Wow - that's terrific, Mike. Aperture is really great, I use it with RAW all the time. I may even be able to do something similar. But, I'm still trying to figure out the issue that I'm currently having.

[KenElevenShadows]

So what photo editing software are you guys using? I switched to Lightroom about 6 months after getting my camera and can't imagine using anything else. This combined with shooting in RAW format you're able to pull so much more out of a photo.

 

 

Absolutely.

 

I use Photoshop CS4. Lightroom is excellent, and I'd use that if I weren't already so used to using Photoshop. If I were just starting, I would probably gravitate toward Lightroom because I think it's more intuitive than Photoshop. Either way, you're all good.

 

I shoot in RAW too and won't shoot any other way. But RAW files need massaging just as any good film negative needs massaging (in processing). I've never seen a RAW file that could not be improved by simple processing.

[RichieP_MechE]

I would be interested to know what the natural resolution of a normal negative is, if you develop it "analog", with no digitizations in the develop machine. Bit of a trick question.

When I was developing film in college, the general rule was that a print made from a frame of 35mm film should not exceed 8x10 inches (~200 x 250 mm) otherwise the film grain would be noticeable.

 

With the 20.2 MP full frame sensor (36x24mm) on my Canon 6D, I have printed images as large as 16x24 inches (~400x600mm) with no noticeable digital grain.

 

By the way, does this "writer" even know that most modern DSLRs can be easily networked and many have wifi?

That, I did not know. Unfortunately, I don't have the budget to replace my Digital Rebel XT, so I'm stuck doing it the old way for now.

My 6D has built in wifi. It's pretty cool; I can connect to my phone and use it to control the camera. It's nice sometimes to be able to inspect images on a larger screen. I was at a friend's wedding this summer, and caught a nice image of them heading down the aisle. Once I was at the reception, I downloaded the image from my camera to my phone over wifi, cropped it a bit then uploaded it to facebook. Pretty slick!

 

So what photo editing software are you guys using?

I too am a Lightroom user. When I got my first DSLR, I was using the photo editing software that's bundled with Windows 7. I wanted something more powerful and had heard good things about Lightroom, so I pulled the trigger on it. I find that it works very well for my needs and editing style.

 

For those not familiar with Lightroom, it's basically the Adobe Camera Raw plug-in from Photoshop adapted as a standalone program with a slew of additional features.

[KenElevenShadows]

By the way, does this "writer" even know that most modern DSLRs can be easily networked and many have wifi?

That, I did not know. Unfortunately, I don't have the budget to replace my Digital Rebel XT, so I'm stuck doing it the old way for now.

 

Actually, you may be able to connect your Canon anyway. This is just off the top of my head. There's probably other options as well:

 

The Eye-Fi is an SD card that wirelessly transmits your photos to a smartphone, laptop, tablet, or other device. http://www.eye.fi/

 

I know Nikon has a WU-1b Wireless Mobile Adapter, which is a USB dongle that lets you establish a wireless connection between specific Nikon digital cameras and a smart mobile device, both iOS and Android, so perhaps there's something similar for Canon? With this dongle, you can send your images directly to your smartphone wirelessly.

 

There are also numerous wired options via USB, and you can simply mount the iPhone to the hot shoe of your DSLR if you wish. And while you can obviously easily transmit your photos to your smartphone for connectivity, that's just the beginning. You can use your smartphone as a controller for your camera as well, which is particularly effective when running apps for facial recognition, triggering your camera via sound, doing time-lapse of varying sorts, or various other things.

 

[RichieP_MechE]

I shoot in RAW too and won't shoot any other way. But RAW files need massaging just as any good film negative needs massaging (in processing). I've never seen a RAW file that could not be improved by simple processing.

I too shoot in RAW. Mainly because RAW captures all the white balance information, so you can adjust to any color temperature after the picture's been taken. Also, RAW files have more dynamic range so they allow for a wider range of exposure adjustments than JPEG.

[KenElevenShadows]

I would be interested to know what the natural resolution of a normal negative is, if you develop it "analog", with no digitizations in the develop machine. Bit of a trick question.

When I was developing film in college, the general rule was that a print made from a frame of 35mm film should not exceed 8x10 inches (~200 x 250 mm) otherwise the film grain would be noticeable.

 

With the 20.2 MP full frame sensor (36x24mm) on my Canon 6D, I have printed images as large as 16x24 inches (~400x600mm) with no noticeable digital grain.

 

...and I think you should be able to go larger - and probably quite a bit larger - than that with a 20.2 MP full frame sensor.

[KenElevenShadows]

Further proof that I shoot in the day time.

 

These are long exposure photos of the California coast.

 

http://elevenshadows.com/travels/mendocino-santacruz2012/images/611davenport4sf11iso1002-051813-gradfil-flat.jpg

 

http://elevenshadows.com/travels/miscellaneous/secretcoast/images/1643mysterycave4-10sf10iso400.jpg

 

http://elevenshadows.com/travels/miscellaneous/secretcoast/images/1670secretcoast2-6sf14iso400.jpg

[RichieP_MechE]

Further proof that I shoot in the day time.

Beautiful, Ken! What ND filters are you using?

[KenElevenShadows]

I like B+W ND filters, and shoot with a six-stop filter. They're brass so they don't bind and they're solidly made. As you can tell, I like to get down low to the water and get the rush of the tide. And if I'm being pelted by offshore winds, sea spray, and sand and need to contend with shifting sand and tides and seaweed wrapping around the legs of my tripod, the last thing I need is for my ND filters to bind, which in my experience, some many non-brass filters have done in the past, such as Tiffen, which both bind and have slightly jiggling glass because the frame has loosened slightly.

[wjwilcox]

Spectacular photos, Ken! Here's a few more for your amusement:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8044/8092465248_a735311fd1_c.jpg

Weather vane and lightning rod by wjw0608, on Flickr, Amana, Iowa.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8184/8092456505_b3bab536da_c.jpg

Wheel and shadow by wjw0608, on Flickr. Amana, Iowa.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7314/8733241367_261d57b5b8_c.jpg

Sunset on the Father of Waters by wjw0608, on Flickr. Riverview Park, Alton, Illinois.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8534/8646731074_9ab8d45dd5_c.jpg

Entry gate arch by wjw0608, on Flickr. Chinese Garden, Missouri Botanical Gardens, St. Louis, Missouri.

[KenElevenShadows]

Nice!!!

[RichieP_MechE]

I like B+W ND filters, and shoot with a six-stop filter. They're brass so they don't bind and they're solidly made. As you can tell, I like to get down low to the water and get the rush of the tide. And if I'm being pelted by offshore winds, sea spray, and sand and need to contend with shifting sand and tides and seaweed wrapping around the legs of my tripod, the last thing I need is for my ND filters to bind, which in my experience, some many non-brass filters have done in the past, such as Tiffen, which both bind and have slightly jiggling glass because the frame has loosened slightly.

I recently bought my first ND filters. I got two 3 stop Tiffen filters since they are pretty cheap. I know what mean about the binding! I'll probably get some nicer ones at some point, but for the time being they'll do. So far, I've been using them so I can shoot at bigger apertures in bright sunlight, but I'd like to do some daytime long exposures too.

[RichieP_MechE]

Ok, here's my latest shot. My friends Scott and Rosanna, who sing and play guitar with me in a soul band, also perform as an acoustic duo. They had a feature show at a music club in Pittsburgh, so I brought my camera along to capture a few shots for them.

 

Canon 6D, 24-105mm f/4L, 105mm, 1/60, f/4, ISO 3200

 

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5542/11911970393_2378b21bb3_b.jpg

Tenderly by rpantaleo, on Flickr

[KenElevenShadows]

Hell yeah.

[KenElevenShadows]

I like B+W ND filters, and shoot with a six-stop filter. They're brass so they don't bind and they're solidly made. As you can tell, I like to get down low to the water and get the rush of the tide. And if I'm being pelted by offshore winds, sea spray, and sand and need to contend with shifting sand and tides and seaweed wrapping around the legs of my tripod, the last thing I need is for my ND filters to bind, which in my experience, some many non-brass filters have done in the past, such as Tiffen, which both bind and have slightly jiggling glass because the frame has loosened slightly.

I recently bought my first ND filters. I got two 3 stop Tiffen filters since they are pretty cheap. I know what mean about the binding! I'll probably get some nicer ones at some point, but for the time being they'll do. So far, I've been using them so I can shoot at bigger apertures in bright sunlight, but I'd like to do some daytime long exposures too.

 

And the thing is that Tiffens aren't cheap enough to be that cheap.

 

I purchased three of them a while back, thinking they would be a good "mid-range" filter. I babied these things by keeping them in a padded pouch, and despite this, the glass simply popped out on one of them, and the other two jiggle within the metal casing, and all of them binded since they're not brass. No more. I didn't think they would be cheap enough to do this, but maybe with these things, either the thing to do is get those godawful cheap ones and buy several of them so when they bust you just take out a new one, or get high quality ones and just be done with it.

[wjwilcox]

Nice!!!

Thanks, Ken! And RichieP, I faved that one when I saw it on Flickr...very nice indeed!

[KenElevenShadows]

Yeah, it's an appealing shot because of the sense of depth, how the woman looks and her expression and how well it looks in B&W, which was the perfect decision for this image, in my opinion.

[RichieP_MechE]

Thanks guys! I was able to get up really close to the stage for this one, which is good because bokeh at f/4 is harder to come by.

 

I did use a bit of noise reduction in Lightroom to clean up the black areas a bit. I've also been on a kick of editing photos to have a film-like color profile, so shadows aren't true black and the highlights aren't true white. I like how everything came out.

 

Here's a nice little tutorial on getting a film look in Lightroom.

[KenElevenShadows]

I definitely use noise reduction to clean up stuff, both in photography and music. The thing is that it's an appealing composition that has a lot of depth.

 

When I'm photographing gigs at clubs, I like to get right up on the person, sometimes even using a wide angle and getting right on them. I really like that connection and immediacy that I get from that which I don't get with a zoom. A lot of times for gig photography, I use a Nikkor 50mm f/1.4, which is good and fast.

 

I guess I don't have this on another website, but this is a link of a photo I took with that lens:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=342966579126965&set=a.179430968813861.42733.131540163602942&type=3&theater

[KenElevenShadows]

And this is a shot of Pharoah Sanders, one of my favorite jazz guys, that I took at the Catalina in 2011 with a Nikkor 18-200mm VR lens and a Nikon D90 camera:

 

http://www.elevenshadows.com/travels/miscellaneous/pharoahsanders-march2011/images/518pharoahsanders.jpg

 

 

[RABid]

Some really nice shots in the thread. Photography is one of the main reasons I want to retire. Between the 8-5 daily, music and family there is not much time left for photography. Been doing a lot of studying on composition and trying to get the family involved. My sister and great nephew get my hand-me-downs as I step up through the Canon line. Sadly, most of my favorite shots have been taken with phones.

[linwood]

Ken, your are a talent!! I've always admired your work. I'm not much with a camera, but my wife is. I was wondering....that photo of Pharoah. Was Nat on that gig and did you get any shots of him. Nat plays bass. I talked to him last week and he was in LA with Pharoah some place.

[KenElevenShadows]

Linwood, thank you so much for your kind words!!!

 

I don't know or remember the answer to your question. This photo was taken in March 2011 at the Catalina Bar and Grill.

 

As an aside, while I was listening to Pharoah playing, I suddenly realized that I had this enormous smile, this big giant grin. His music is so alive and vibrant and makes me feel so good that...well, that was my reaction. I think I was doing it for a while before I took note of it.

[KenElevenShadows]

Some really nice shots in the thread. Photography is one of the main reasons I want to retire. Between the 8-5 daily, music and family there is not much time left for photography. Been doing a lot of studying on composition and trying to get the family involved. My sister and great nephew get my hand-me-downs as I step up through the Canon line. Sadly, most of my favorite shots have been taken with phones.

 

I hear that. I work and do a lot of music and all that also.

 

I specifically block out time for photography, just as I do music. I put it on my calendar and tell people I've got plans that day.

 

Or evening, as it often is with me.

 

If I can't do music or photography after a while, I get cranky.

[Mike Martin]

So is anyone here making money with photography? Here why I'm asking. My son is involved in lots of school music and theater events. When available I'm there taking tons of pictures. Of course I end up with dozens of pictures of all of my sons friends and more. I usually spend a decent amount of time cleaning them up in Lightroom...etc and then I post an album on Facebook. More often than not, I'm getting requests from parents for full sized files of particular photos. Up to now I've just been handing them out - in most cases its my neighbors asking. But at what point do I start asking for a few bucks? I'm tempted to start watermarking all the photos I take.