|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
06-01-2007, 04:05 PM
|
| |
Is it some sort of mollusc reproduction?
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
05-26-2007, 11:19 PM
|
| |
If you are photographing people's animals, for example, their horse, should or must you obtain any sort of written or verbal permission first before using the images to promote stuff and get rich?
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
05-26-2007, 10:54 PM
|
| |
Is it possible to get decent macro shots with ambient light? Even in sunlight, I've had to use ISO 800 to get fast enough shutter speeds with a depth of field at f16 or so. I just haven't been able to get the flash to give me that reasonably natural look that you've accomplished.
Does the flash you use direct the light up, and the bouncer redirects it, like the setup this guy has here:
jr-worldwi.de: Photography: Technic
or what?
Robert.
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
05-21-2007, 05:00 PM
|
| |
Pardon my Norwegian (which is limited to online translation tools and might mean something totally different than what I mean)
It's a spiral staircase!
Your go!
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
05-21-2007, 04:57 AM
|
| |
That's what's in the crop, I'm looking for the larger red structure as a whole?
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
05-20-2007, 05:17 PM
|
| |
(above is not a hint)
 |
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
05-19-2007, 06:39 PM
|
| |
What do you think?
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
05-17-2007, 08:04 PM
|
| |
Yup, a fishing lure. A popper to be precise. Here's the original.
Congratulations, Alvin! Your go.
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
05-17-2007, 03:01 PM
|
| |
Whats the policy on giving up? Do we give up?
Another crop, brightness adjusted:
Metallic material you see here is the same stuff as in the last crop.
 |
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
05-17-2007, 04:16 AM
|
| |
The guy who thought it was a floating decoy has been closest. Another hint, in the last crop to be posted, the ring-like part is about 1/8 inch in diameter.
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
05-16-2007, 07:01 PM
|
| |
Read the rhyme, I tell ya's.
Nother crop, this one at higher magnification.
 |
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
05-13-2007, 08:01 PM
|
| |
not a dragon.
Perhaps another crop, if the riddle is of no help:
 |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-13-2007, 08:39 AM
|
| |
One thing to consider is whether you really need or want autofocus. I am a neophyte photographer, and find that I prefer to manually focus just because it is quieter and less obtrusive
Also, don't disregard the older M and K lenses. Although you have to use the "green button" (AE-L on my DS) to stop them down, the build quality is superior to the newer lenses. And you can buy a lot of these for the price of the FA 77 I'd suggest a set like this:
28 f2.8
50 f1.4
Pentax SMC-A 70-210mm f4 or tamron 80-210mm f3.8-4 (model 103A) w/ adapter
135 f2.8 or 3.5
1.4x teleconverter
The 50 1.4 with the 1.4x teleconverter is equivalent to a 70mm f/2, pretty close to your FA 77 f 1.8.
I have an M 120mm f2.8 and find that it is my favorite walking around lens, light, long enough for the occasional critter, unobtrusive enough for the occasional human. You can crop a fair amount to zoom after the fact, so don't rule out a 135mm f2.8 prime. If you can crop and enlarge 2x and still get the same image quality as your zoom at 300 f5.6, then you've come out ahead, and two stops faster.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
05-12-2007, 06:09 PM
|
| |
I have seen foam kits on ebay.
I was thinking of buying a Super Program that has crummy foam.
How hard is it to replace the light seal foam and the mirror pad foam? I've seen it referred to as a do-it-yourself type procedure. With this camera, the price is good enought that it would make sense to buy it and replace the foam myself if one of the ebay $10 foam kits would do the trick. Otherwise, I'd just wait until one in better shape came around.
Any ideas?
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
05-11-2007, 02:48 PM
|
| |
I swim in the water,
and fly in the air,
Eternally tethered,
above leviathan's lair.
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
05-09-2007, 06:46 PM
|
| |
Nope, no clay figure. Definitely has a purpose in non-living life.
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
05-07-2007, 06:54 PM
|
| |
This one should go fast. Not as fast as a cheetah, but maybe a corned beast.
Corned beast?! Thats irrelephant!!
 |
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
04-28-2007, 08:31 PM
|
| |
A pastoral mountain scene with clouds as seen from behind a *&%$ camera strap?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-28-2007, 07:32 PM
|
| |
Also, what would be a fair price for a used Sigma 100-300mm f4 non-DG lens in good shape?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-28-2007, 04:36 PM
|
| |
I want a reasonably quick long telephoto lens. I currently have a SMC-A 70-210mm f/4, that, while nice, is not long enough for shots of things that are a little way off, and with a 2x converter, its too slow, and in poor light is difficult to focus.
I prefer a lens that is manual focus or is comfortable to manually focus. I would at some point, I am sure, use a 1.4x teleconverter. The alternatives I've come up with so far:
Pentax M* or A* 300mm f/4 weight ~850g
Pentax K 300mm f/4 weight ~1020g
Tamron adaptall 300mm f/2.8 weight ~2000g
The Tamron wouldn't be particularly convenient, but is the 1 stop advantage worth it? Would the * 300mm be so much better than the K lens as to make it worthwhile to spend the extra money? It certainly looks more compact and is lighter by not an insignificant amount.
And are there other 300mm f/4 primes of decent quality less than a kg that are available for ~$500 or less?
On the other hand, I could get one of the big consumer zooms that go from ~70 to ~300 and f4 to 5.6 and blow the rest of my money on pizza and beer.
Any ideas?
Robert.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
04-19-2007, 09:29 PM
|
| |
I see what you all mean about the busy foreground in the bridge picture. It seems that photography is almost always either a picture of something (bird, car, tree, etc) or "nothing" (landscapes, patterns, wide-field astrophotography). Maybe my picture has too many objects that compete. The two ends of the bridge and the tree all mutually interfere maybe?
The second one, I was trying for a picture of "nothing" but with the angler to catch interest. Do you think that if I had captured the picture with a polarizer to darken the sky or at a smaller aperature or even at a different time that it would've enhanced the picture? As is, its a bit flat because it was afternoon with bright uniform light. To catch casting or other detail of the fisherman, I'd have to sacrifice my goal of a landscape, and it'd become a picture maybe like this:
The lighting for the cat was dim incandescent from the right of the frame and diffused daylight/shade from the left side. I set white balance for the incandescent and as a result the side lit by the natural light received a cooler tone. I haven't tried flash much, but I could've done it with flash, but might not have taken the picture as wide open and maybe it would've made the background overly obnoxious.
Hopefully with warmer weather coming I'll get some more chances to get out and fool around.
Robert.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
04-18-2007, 09:28 PM
|
| |
Has kinda goofy lighting:
What does the internet think of my neophyte photography?
|
