official photography thread

**Wells** · 08-30-2009 10:36 PM

**Buddywolfe** · 08-30-2009 11:10 PM

That is honestly the only sensible way to do a head stand. The whole tripod thing kills your neck.

**VulgarDisplayCFH** · 08-30-2009 11:15 PM

Velez... SAFE

Pickle

Panda

Bengie

**Buddywolfe** · 08-30-2009 11:46 PM

I have not been overly impressed by the kit lens on my camera (ef-s 18-55mm f3.5-5.6).
I was thinking of getting the canon 50mm 1.8. I highly doubt my photography skills could justify the $400 dollars for the f1.4. But i was also thinking of swinging by the local pawnshop and just seeing if any of the lens' will work with my camera. I doubt any of them will auto focus but it would still be fun to pick up a semi decent lens for pretty cheap. Is there any sense in that?

**Team RBN** · 08-31-2009 12:34 AM

I have heard nothing but great things about the 1.4. I bought a 70-200 2.8L IS used, I tried it out for
six months and sold it for the same price I bought it for. Quality lenses really hold value well so if you decide you don't like it you can always resell for very minimal loss especially if you buy it used.

**Wells** · 08-31-2009 12:56 AM

Originally Posted by Buddywolfe

I have not been overly impressed by the kit lens on my camera (ef-s 18-55mm f3.5-5.6).
I was thinking of getting the canon 50mm 1.8. I highly doubt my photography skills could justify the $400 dollars for the f1.4. But i was also thinking of swinging by the local pawnshop and just seeing if any of the lens' will work with my camera. I doubt any of them will auto focus but it would still be fun to pick up a semi decent lens for pretty cheap. Is there any sense in that?

I've got the 1.8 and pretty much never open it up that wide. Take the $300 you'd save and buy a flash or another lens or whatever.

**Blix** · 08-31-2009 01:42 AM

Originally Posted by Buddywolfe

I have not been overly impressed by the kit lens on my camera (ef-s 18-55mm f3.5-5.6).
I was thinking of getting the canon 50mm 1.8. I highly doubt my photography skills could justify the $400 dollars for the f1.4. But i was also thinking of swinging by the local pawnshop and just seeing if any of the lens' will work with my camera. I doubt any of them will auto focus but it would still be fun to pick up a semi decent lens for pretty cheap. Is there any sense in that?

The cheap 50mm f/1.8 is great value for little money, the f/1.4 isn't that much better really.. Your old 18-55mm is crap, but the newer version with IS is surprisingly good. Enormous difference from the old.

There's no older Canon lenses without AF that'll fit on your camera, the MF Canon lenses is a different system which needs an adapter to fit an EOS, and that adapter ruins image quality.

**lexx** · 08-31-2009 02:44 PM

I was sent out to take 'postcard' photos to go on the wall of our new "Digital-photography training room" and my boss was a bit bemused when this is what I came back with -

Needless to say I'm quite pleased, though I doubt they get to the stage of being printed on the 30" canvases the area manager was talking about - I doubt they'll find the humor in the irony of displaying cross processed film taken on a 20 year old camera....

**Blix** · 08-31-2009 03:05 PM

Haha, way to go Lexx!

**Kal** · 08-31-2009 05:28 PM

Eastern AK. McClaren Glacier, mostly

- Denalis back there.

**budds51** · 08-31-2009 05:55 PM

<3

**Buddywolfe** · 08-31-2009 06:12 PM

I'm going with the 1.8 for sure ten, Thanks Blix.

**VertigoJ** · 08-31-2009 09:58 PM

Hadn't shot with the Canonet in a while and had a roll of film wasting away in it so I took it to wander around with some friends in another town.

Such a pain to focus that thing.

**dcphotos** · 09-01-2009 07:28 AM

Originally Posted by Blix

The cheap 50mm f/1.8 is great value for little money, the f/1.4 isn't that much better really.. Your old 18-55mm is crap, but the newer version with IS is surprisingly good. Enormous difference from the old.

I'd get the 1.4, I am a Nikon shooter but having a brighter image in the viewfinder, better low-light capability, less depth when you want it makes it worthwhile. But if you're shooting Canon they make a 1.2 that is amazing, that's what I'd really get.

**VulgarDisplayCFH** · 09-01-2009 08:24 AM

I'm notorious for shooting the train route to school and I caught this little gem yesterday morning.

It says "Flick this Donald M!"

Donald M is my flickr name haha.

**Scrappy85** · 09-03-2009 08:58 PM

Set up my camera and for this shot of me spraying my snowboard.

**Team RBN** · 09-03-2009 11:25 PM

Originally Posted by dcphotos

I'd get the 1.4, I am a Nikon shooter but having a brighter image in the viewfinder, better low-light capability, less depth when you want it makes it worthwhile. But if you're shooting Canon they make a 1.2 that is amazing, that's what I'd really get.

The biggest reason in choosing the 1.4 over the 1.8 for me, is construction and quality of build. The 1.8 is called plastic fantastic for a reason. The 1.2L is amazing, it is also$1200.00.

**dcphotos** · 09-04-2009 06:13 AM

Originally Posted by Team RBN

The biggest reason in choosing the 1.4 over the 1.8 for me, is construction and quality of build. The 1.8 is called plastic fantastic for a reason. The 1.2L is amazing, it is also$1200.00.

I understand that! I don't own a 50 at all except my old manual focus one, which I do use every once in a while but rarely. I don't spend my own money on major equipment either, it's all up to my employer and they give me a budget to work with. It's been tight the past couple years also, I think I get get $4500 next year but a small chunk goes to repair work I need desperately and I have to buy a bunch of other things like batteries, etc. D300s is coming as soon as I get the budget though, fiscal year starts Oct. 1. I use my money to buy things like flash triggers and various accessories.

I'm shooting aerial photos today! That's always fun.

**billyevryteen** · 09-04-2009 02:41 PM

any body have any recomendations for an inexpensive flash? or is that one of those things where im not going to really be able to find one for too cheap.