Page 22 of 23

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 16 Oct 2009, 17:30
by GT3x24x7
Yep, well I could certainly be wrong, but it sure looks like sensor trouble.

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 16 Oct 2009, 22:33
by Stereo
Yeah, I don't get things like that at 30" with a high ISO... Faulty sensor as GT mentioned probably.

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 17 Oct 2009, 02:24
by GT3x24x7
Well, as he pointed out, it was with low ISO. Weird.

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 17 Oct 2009, 03:35
by Stereo
I've shot low ISO before as well, no sensor strangeness occured..

Well, my K20D came back from repairs! :D Time to shewt moar.

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 18 Oct 2009, 07:11
by xHaZxMaTx
Wee, I got to go up in the control tower and get some bitchin' fly-bys. :3 Unfortunately, you got sun from three directions, up there (sun, reflecting off the ground and reflecting off the glass behind you), so I got scorched pretty good. :(

Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

Image Image Image

A longer lens would be nice, though; almost all of these were cropped.

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 18 Oct 2009, 09:26
by boganbusman
Amazing shots! Much better than trains anyway :P

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 18 Oct 2009, 11:43
by Zero260
Wow, you got some great shots. "B-2" and "Display" are my favorites.

Did you add a tilt-shift effect for "Display", or is that photo pretty much untouched?

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 18 Oct 2009, 11:45
by boganbusman
I really like "Chevron Stunt", and also "B-2".

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 18 Oct 2009, 14:33
by Stereo
Zero260 wrote:Wow, you got some great shots. "B-2" and "Display" are my favorites.

Did you add a tilt-shift effect for "Display", or is that photo pretty much untouched?
When you're shooting telephoto at max zoom with what looks like a wide aperature, you'll probably get some DoF in there.

Or am I wrong about the max zoom?

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 18 Oct 2009, 20:23
by xHaZxMaTx
Yeah, that's at 250mm, but I'm not sure if the blurring is limited depth of field or unintended selective focusing. I had accidentally dropped my camera (thankfully it landed on the battery grip), but the plastic camera mount on the lens had cracked, causing a piece to protrude, keeping it from lining up properly with the lens. I've fixed it, though, and everything still works peachy.

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 19 Oct 2009, 04:54
by Stereo
Wait... a telephoto with a plastic mount? Let's back that up... A lens with a plastic mount?

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 19 Oct 2009, 08:56
by xHaZxMaTx
Yeah, that's most of Canon's EF-S lineup, for you. :B My 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS (kit lens, currently going for a little over $100) also has a plastic mount, and the 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS (~$200) is, for all intents and purposes, the sibling lens. My 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM has a metal mount, as it should, being over $1,000. :P (Glad that didn't break when I dropped it the second time. : .)

Edit:
Actually, my EF 50mm f/1.8 also has a plastic mount, which is possibly evident by the price (~$100), but I'm certainly not complaining, as it's fast and sharp (though the AF is noisy and hardly works well).

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 19 Oct 2009, 12:48
by Stereo
I know I'd expect the 50mm 1.8 to have one, I've read about its poor construction a lot. xD But it's got great sharpness.

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 30 Oct 2009, 18:33
by xHaZxMaTx
Took some photos for a friend's band, last night (they were actually pretty good o: ). Lighting conditions were horrible - ended up having to shoot at ISO 1600, f/2.8 and 1/25", but I think most of the shots turned out okay.

Image Image Image
Image Image Image
Image Image Image
Image

Image Image
Image Image

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 05 Nov 2009, 06:06
by xHaZxMaTx
Canon EOS 7D

Hoooly shiznit. Do want. =P~

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 05 Nov 2009, 13:45
by Stereo
xHaZxMaTx wrote:Canon EOS 7D

Hoooly shiznit. Do want. =P~
Me too. :D

It's one hell of a camera. I'm drooling over the 1080p video, 63 metering zones, and 100% coverage... :mrgreen:

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 05 Nov 2009, 14:23
by GT3x24x7
Stereo wrote:1080p video, 63 metering zones, and 100% coverage...
Holy crap, where's my credit cardzz.. :shock:

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 05 Nov 2009, 18:41
by xHaZxMaTx
1080p with variable frame rates up to 30fps (29.97) and 720p up to 60fps (59.94) and full manual control, so you can adjust shutter speed, aperture and ISO for video. :D

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 05 Nov 2009, 19:33
by GT3x24x7
It also does 24fps for that old school cinematic effect.. :D

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 08 Nov 2009, 13:27
by Koenigsegg_Rox
http://tinypic.com/usermedia.php?uo=fVo ... h4l5k2TGxc

Try and guess where the Photoshop implementation was :D

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 08 Nov 2009, 15:07
by Stereo
Smoke or vynil.

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 11 Nov 2009, 17:15
by TheStig
To obvious... think it's something completely different.

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 12 Nov 2009, 10:53
by Zero260
Ohhh, I see it... It says "Win." in the bottom right.

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 22 Nov 2009, 23:12
by xHaZxMaTx
Yeah... I don't see it. :B

Anywho, was in San Jose, Thursday and Friday, visiting some friends. While they were at work, I decided to go for a walk with my camera and to keep it set to M. I almost always shoot in Av, but I haven't been taking many photos, lately, and wondered if, maybe, that was the reason. So I went on my walk, took not a lot of photos, but most of them turned out good, and I had a lot more fun in M than pointing and clicking in Av, letting the camera do all the work. :)

Image Image Image
Image Image Image

Re: Digital Photography

Posted: 07 Dec 2009, 20:19
by xHaZxMaTx
It's dead. :(

Image

Turns out it's been broken since the air show, when I dropped it; the auto-focus, specifically, but I never tried turning AF on until just the other day, but the switch wouldn't flip. Ended up taking it apart to see if I could fix it and found that it was in much worse shape than I had anticipated, with broken electrical contacts and the mount wasn't in such great shape, either. I could reassemble it and ship it off for repairs, but I'm guessing that would cost more than the lens is worth, so I'm just gonna retire it and start saving up for another long lens. Maybe a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM... =P~