Photography Thread v 2.0

[narwhal]

Hating the first but I like the second.

[Jaleez]

You're so Post-Modern.

hahahaha

[nasolovesyou]

I love it!

[Jaleez]

Thanks thats nice

[Blak_skimmer220]

this is pretty much the entire front entry



and the halls

this is kind of random, but i just realized that this place is featured in CSI Miami (watching it now).

[Duffskim]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/36401794@N06/3357643709/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36401794@N06/3357648161/

[DT]

Hahaha, holy shit, I grenaded my 18-55mm Nikon kit lens. Should I replace it with another of the same, an 18-55mm, or the VR version for a little more, or something like a 50mm prime?

FWIW, I'm shooting on a D40 body, and I also have a 55-200mm VR (so I'm trying to cover "under" that lens).

Thanks!

[Zach]

I went out the other week and took a few pics. I wished I would have waited a little longer, there's too much light in the 1st one... Opinions?
D50 and 18-55mm

[RUM_RUNNER]

Sweet mother tell me that is your car.

[jesse]

I like the second one alot

[narwhal]

I really hate automobile photography. A few tools ruined the entire genre. But I do like first and second ones.

[narwhal]

I feel you always got to step it up a notch like this:

http://www.arsprojecta.com/tools/decluttr/3349961761

http://www.flickr.com/photos/anselol...7605516866984/

[Zach]

Yeah thanks, it's my car. Had it since I was 14 (19 now) and have been restoring it with my dad over the years. I've only been playing with photography for a few months, so I have a lot to learn!

More pics/info:

http://www.fquick.com/garages/viewvehicle.php?id=25468

[nasolovesyou]

Hahaha, holy shit, I grenaded my 18-55mm Nikon kit lens. Should I replace it with another of the same, an 18-55mm, or the VR version for a little more, or something like a 50mm prime?

FWIW, I'm shooting on a D40 body, and I also have a 55-200mm VR (so I'm trying to cover "under" that lens).

Thanks!

My opinion (not a photography expert): I'd go with another of the same. I have a d40x with the same two lenses you had, and i love the versatility of having them both. The kit lens is great for covering the range under the 55-200, as I'm sure you've realized. I wouldn't change it out for anything. It's perfect for everything I need it for. And I'd say unless you didn't like it, there's no need to get something different. Go with necessity first (which in this case is covering that range) and then get extra lenses. And no need to spend more money on a vr for that short of a range, unless you've got shaky hands

[Walruz996]

18-135 or 18-200 FTW.

[nasolovesyou]

Zach, nice car you lucky son of a bitch! You and your dad know whats up That seems like such a fun restoration project. Do you have any pictures from when you first started?

[Zach]

Zach, nice car you lucky son of a bitch! You and your dad know whats up That seems like such a fun restoration project. Do you have any pictures from when you first started?

Thanks man. It wasn't all that bad when I got it body wise, but the drivetrain was shot. We did all of the work on it except paint and body. It took some time and still empties my pockets, but it's worth it to me lol.

Some old ones...

[nasolovesyou]

I love seeing before and after pics. Good choice of color, and the stripes are a nice touch. That's cool you did everything yourselves. That's how a long term restoration project should work, in my opinion. Go you and your dad

[DT]

My opinion (not a photography expert): I'd go with another of the same.

Yeah, it's definitely cheap and handy.

18-135 or 18-200 FTW.

Well, I have the 55-200VR and honestly for 95% of our "home" type pics, the smaller lense is handy, lighter and easier to lug around.

Honestly, I've considered selling the 200 and buying a 55-300VR (but still having the 18-55 "cheapy" for general use).

[Kirtap]

Snapped a pic while walking to our "secret" spot last year..




Edit: Zach, I'm loving both the car and the pics. Good stuff!

[nasolovesyou]

Alright, so I'd like to watermark my better pictures before posting them places, but I don't know how. What are some programs that give you the ability to watermark? I have a mac btw, so they might be different... idk

[narwhal]

First before you watermark...is there seriously a reason to do it?

I think a simple corner tag covers the "Hey this is my photo"

But watermarking for the most part is crazy for amateur photographers.

[blob]

the first carpic is my wallpaper now (:

[Seanaldinho10]

My opinion (not a photography expert): I'd go with another of the same. I have a d40x with the same two lenses you had, and i love the versatility of having them both. The kit lens is great for covering the range under the 55-200, as I'm sure you've realized. I wouldn't change it out for anything. It's perfect for everything I need it for. And I'd say unless you didn't like it, there's no need to get something different. Go with necessity first (which in this case is covering that range) and then get extra lenses. And no need to spend more money on a vr for that short of a range, unless you've got shaky hands

17-55 f/2.8

[nasolovesyou]

First before you watermark...is there seriously a reason to do it?

I think a simple corner tag covers the "Hey this is my photo"

But watermarking for the most part is crazy for amateur photographers.

A corner tag is all i need for most of my "good" photos, but i don't know how to do that either

[Duffskim]

does anyone have any suggestions as far as my lighting, or just in general. Today was quite gloomy out and i had some trouble getting good shots because of it.

[Seanaldinho10]

number 2 is really good but the horizon is crooked

[GnarKill1029]

yee number 2 is sick and that skim looks like fun

[narwhal]

Yeah 2 is a m a z i ng

[Czerepka]

Zach I will give you $10 to restore my mustang.
Please & Thank you.


PS: The pictures are good too, but that is less important right now.

[tails]

dt, i'd get the 18-55 dx again. if you read around youll find most reviews are really impressed with the quality of the lens for such a tiny price tag. id love a 50 2.8 for low light (concerts etc) but remember because the d40 is a dx sensor you'll have a slightly longer telephoto effect because of the cropped sensor. personally i'd miss not having a wide angle lense

[DT]

dt, i'd get the 18-55 dx again. if you read around youll find most reviews are really impressed with the quality of the lens for such a tiny price tag. id love a 50 2.8 for low light (concerts etc) but remember because the d40 is a dx sensor you'll have a slightly longer telephoto effect because of the cropped sensor. personally i'd miss not having a wide angle lense

Also keep in mind my little D40 (the 40X, 60) need motored lenses for AF.

I'm very tempted to get a 18-105mm VR. It almost the same size as the 18-55, gives you a nice bit of extra range on the same lens, apparently is built a little beefier, etc.

If I do that, I might sell my 55-200 and pick up something int the 300mm range as a replacement down the road.

[Walruz996]

I will do it for $5, Sam. The restoration will involve running it through a car wash(you pay for that too).

[tails]

yeah im probably moving to the d300 soon. that sounds like a pretty good idea with lense choices. ive got the 18-200 and 70-300. i wish i had of just got the 18-105 haha. the 70-300 is my favourite by far and has a really nice AF tracking system. its pretty good value for money and i have no trouble shooting surfing from the shoreline with a pretty tight crop of my local beach

[Jaleez]

So basically I did a little shoot with a friend of mine today, I have never really shot people this way so let me know yer opinionz!

ps. there should be 6 pics in here but I guess some people can only see the worst one hha