| Author |
Message
|
JLW |
 Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 2:43 am Post subject: Hello from Phoenix |
 |
|
Addict
Joined: 12 Aug 2007
Posts: 145
|
Just wanted to share a photo (one of many) I got while on Canyon Lake near Phoenix AZ this last Wed.
Comments are welcome.
_________________
Orville Wright didn’t have a pilot's license. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
| chieflong |
| Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 2:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fanatic
Joined: 06 Jan 2007
Posts: 175
Location: Renfrew, Ontario
|
Nice capture Jim!! Very good detail. What lens were you using?
Guy
_________________
There's only one YOU so make it count!
Amatures built the Arc, Professionals built the Titanic! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLW |
| Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Addict
Joined: 12 Aug 2007
Posts: 145
|
I shot this with a nikor 18-135. This paticular shot was at 135.
_________________
Orville Wright didn’t have a pilot's license. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ckurz7000 |
| Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Devotee
Joined: 02 Jan 2008
Posts: 49
|
I like it! The colors of the water and the reflexes are beautiful. Well cropped, and all.
Were you using the Nikor 18-135/3.5-5.6 kit lens? I didn't like that one particularly, because it's too slow. I needed to bump up the ISO sensitivity (graininess), shoot with wide open aperture (no DOF) or choose slower shutter speeds (noticable camera shake) in situations like the one you are showing. It seems to me that graininess and a bit of shake are also noticable in this picture.
-- Chris. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLW |
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Addict
Joined: 12 Aug 2007
Posts: 145
|
I'd have to agree with you about the kit lens. It has been particularly frustrating trying to get tight focus and the desired DOF with the nikon Kit lens. Since this is a hobby and not a profession and most people who look at the shots judge them more on subject than quality I don't see any need to go spend a bunch of bucks trying to get better lenses.
JLW
_________________
Orville Wright didn’t have a pilot's license. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| prof1120 |
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 3:31 am Post subject: Equipment Costs |
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 11
Location: Bensalem, Pennsylvania
|
| Jim, I agree with your perspective on cost/benefit of expensive photographic equipment. However, there are several variables determining equipment purchases. If you find yourself doing primarily wildlife photography, the kit lens will continually frustrate you. Similarly, if you find macro photography is what you do most of, the kit lens will also prove highly unsatisfactory over time. The same is true, by the way, with Canon, where the kit lens is not even as good as the Nikor. For general photography, the kit lens serves well; and, yes, the content of a photo is more important than a technically refined image. The law of diminishing returns applies to photography, too. A more expensive lens may offer some greater level of polish to an image, but this contribution seldom approaches the importance of a creative perspective and a good sense of composition. .... By the way, nice to be in Arizona. Lots to photograph there! Enjoy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ckurz7000 |
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 7:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Devotee
Joined: 02 Jan 2008
Posts: 49
|
The alternative I found to the Nikon 18-135mm kit lens is the Sigma 18-50mm/2.8 Macro zoom. It is fast, crisp, has low aberration, a quick and silent auto focus and is relatively inexpensive.
This is a great allround lense for my purposes since it does a good job as a macro lens and extends my range to a mild tele (75mm equivalent to 35mm format SLRs)
You might want to look at Sigma and Tamron lenses for Canon and Nikon cameras. They are generally significantly cheaper and offer still high quality. There are also numerous independent reviews available if you want a 2nd opinion on a specific lens.
-- Chris. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| nana17 |
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fanatic
Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 178
|
| all i have to add is, nice shot. nice colors and lighting |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLW |
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Addict
Joined: 12 Aug 2007
Posts: 145
|
Thx Nana for the comment... Sometimes mom provides all the right elements and all you have to do is point and shoot. Of course the people throwing popcorn from the boat helped to motovate the ducks into a flight path that brought them within a few yards of my camera.
JLW
_________________
Orville Wright didn’t have a pilot's license. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLW |
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Addict
Joined: 12 Aug 2007
Posts: 145
|
| ckurz7000 wrote: |
The alternative I found to the Nikon 18-135mm kit lens is the Sigma 18-50mm/2.8 Macro zoom. It is fast, crisp, has low aberration, a quick and silent auto focus and is relatively inexpensive.
This is a great allround lense for my purposes since it does a good job as a macro lens and extends my range to a mild tele (75mm equivalent to 35mm format SLRs)
You might want to look at Sigma and Tamron lenses for Canon and Nikon cameras. They are generally significantly cheaper and offer still high quality. There are also numerous independent reviews available if you want a 2nd opinion on a specific lens.
-- Chris. |
Thanks for the info.. I'll look into a couple of these lenses. Especially as they relate to macro.
JLW
_________________
Orville Wright didn’t have a pilot's license. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Live Chat
