I think I'm bored with audio now.

[Audio_ELF]

Back to the topic of photography.

 

I have my eye on the new Batis 18 or 25 mm as most of my current "work" is landscape.

I'm only an amateur and have recently received a Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8 and a Nikon Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8... looking forward to heading out at the weekend if the weather is suitable.

[Priaptor]

Please lecture on - no ego here to be bruised.

 

I think, I like to take photos that remind me - trigger more complete recall - of an event, a place, a person, or something I saw that touched me in some way. Moving my feet is an excellent idea, and one I intend to practice this weekend.

 

Also, I do not think I am too interested in carrying around an actual camera all the time. I need to learn how to get the best pictures I can from the camera I carry around all the time. That would be my iPhone.

 

-Paul

 

Ok the picture sucks. It is uninteresting to anyone but someone like yourself that may relate to it based on a memory. Poorly composed, nothing eye catching and very over saturated. I can go on but it seems you and I suffer from the same malady of just being piss poor photographers regardless of what we shoot with.

 

Now don't take me too seriously please. Just screwing around but don't like the "photograph"

[Priaptor]

I'm only an amateur and have recently received a Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8 and a Nikon Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8... looking forward to heading out at the weekend if the weather is suitable.

 

I used to shoot exclusively with wide angle zooms. I stopped because ( my problem not the lens) because I found myself focusing more on cropping with the zoom rather than using the focal length available to compose and hence why I have kind of moved to fixed primes for landscape.

 

I am now shooting with Sony but really miss Nikon. My buddy just got the 25 mm Batis and his pictures are gorgeous but he is also a very good photographer. I still like Nikon glass more than any other, including Leica, until I saw the Batis which really impressed me. Both of your lenses are excellent.

[semente]

Ok I'm wrong.

 

Back to the topic of photography.

 

I have my eye on the new Batis 18 or 25 mm as most of my current "work" is landscape.

 

Any comments.

I owned the Contax Distagon 25mm back in the film days, might be of similar design.

Soft corners wide open (which won't matter to you) and a bit of barrel distortion. Otherwise quite nice.

 

R

[semente]

Ok the picture sucks. It is uninteresting to anyone but someone like yourself that may relate to it based on a memory. Poorly composed, nothing eye catching and very over saturated. I can go on but it seems you and I suffer from the same malady of just being piss poor photographers regardless of what we shoot with.

 

Now don't take me too seriously please. Just screwing around but don't like the "photograph"

I really enjoy photography and my favourite subject is the street, found moments instead of staged photographs.

 

Sometimes I am drawn by the light or I find an interesting backdrop and wait for something to happen, others I just bump into an interesting subject...

 

Whenever possible I move around the subject approaching it from different angles.

 

I use a single fixed focal length lens.

 

R

[sbgk]

You're the one who knows if you "need" them all.

It's easy to fall for a wide-reaching set of primes but while some may get used often others may not and one can have a fast zoom that can cover the focal length of those.

As an example, I owned a Contax 1,4/85 for a few months but soon found out that it had been an expensive mistake...

I'm talking as an amateur here.

 

I have disciplined myself to avoid collecting gear (of any kind), although one could argue that I collect the images that I capture with my camera.

 

R

 

I bought a load of second hand contax/zeiss lenses on ebay a few years ago, here's a pic using the 1.4/85/5D2 from the weekend, love the zeiss look, a luxury, but nice to have.

 

[Audio_ELF]

I bought a load of second hand contax/zeiss lenses on ebay a few years ago, here's a pic using the 1.4/85/5D2 from the weekend, love the zeiss look, a luxury, but nice to have.

I'm assuming here that 5D2 refers to Canon 5D2? If so, how do you attach a Contex lens? I'm assuming some kind of converter? Does that leave you with a fully manual lens? What about metering? Does the converter not reduce quality?

 

Genuine questions I've wondered about.

[semente]

You only need an adapter ring, but you're stuck with manual focusing and either manual or aperture priority id I'm not mistaken.

And you need to stop down the aperture after you've focused.

 

Great lenses at affordable prices.

 

R

[sbgk]

I'm assuming here that 5D2 refers to Canon 5D2? If so, how do you attach a Contex lens? I'm assuming some kind of converter? Does that leave you with a fully manual lens? What about metering? Does the converter not reduce quality?

 

Genuine questions I've wondered about.

 

£10 per lens for an adapter.The lense is manual focus anyway. For exposure just set the camera to aperture priority at 1.4 and seems to expose ok for whatever the lense aperture is. There's an electrical coupling that allows the camera to indicate when the centre is in focus.

eg AF Confirm Adapter For Contax Yashica CY Lens to Canon EOS EF 7D 60D 600D DC136 | eBay

[Jud]

iPhone snaps, so no great shakes technically:

 

 

[sbgk]

You only need an adapter ring, but you're stuck with manual focusing and either manual or aperture priority id I'm not mistaken.

And you need to stop down the aperture after you've focused.

 

Great lenses at affordable prices.

 

R

 

I just focus at the aperture I'm taking the picture at otherwise the focus seems to shift.

[semente]

That's strange because AFAIK all reflex cameras stop down automatically...

 

R

[gmgraves]

I think it was XP series - XP1 then XP2 and finally XP2 Super (iirc).

 

I believe that you are correct. it was called the XP series. It made some gorgeous B&W images. Thanks for the clarification.

[semente]

Here's an interesting talk on composition :

 

[thebeck]

I mean, really, what are we getting all worked up over?

 

In my 55 years of being an audiophile, the bug comes and goes. There is no cure for audioplilia nervosa, so you'll be back.

[Audio_ELF]

I just focus at the aperture I'm taking the picture at otherwise the focus seems to shift.

If you focus at the aperture you're taking the picture at, surely you end up with a very dark image in the view finder to focus with?

[gmgraves]

The main things wrong (IMO) is the light and you are standing in the wrong place. If you'd have moved left then the line of bushed would have lead your eye into the picture more ... it would have been interesting too to have tried a portrait imagine (again IMO though its hard to tell) the moon in the top third. If you were taking a picture of the moon, then make the moon more a focal point. The light is very uninteresting too; especially the sky. As for editing the picture you took, I'm not sure there is much you can do except learn for next time. The best editing you can do is move your feet.

 

One interesting challenge if you want to learn and improve ... go out sometime with just a 50mm lens (or equivalent - if you use a crop frame camera something like 35mm on Nikon or Canon or 25mm on a 4/3 camera). Learn to move your feet. Treat the camera like a film camera, don't think "oh I cam fix it later in Lightroom / Photoshop).

 

Sorry I'm likely lecturing here ... but look at other people's photos. Try to stand back and ask yourself - what makes this photo good.

 

 

I agree. You are basically making the same criticism that I made. The photographer ignored the two basic "laws" of composition:

The rule of thirds

The golden mean

You cannot have interesting art, paintings or photos, without both of those rules being followed.

[mansr]

If you focus at the aperture you're taking the picture at, surely you end up with a very dark image in the view finder to focus with?

And a non-functional split prism.

[sbgk]

That's strange because AFAIK all reflex cameras stop down automatically...

 

R

not without electrical or mechanical means of actuating the aperture.

[semente]

I agree. You are basically making the same criticism that I made. The photographer ignored the two basic "laws" of composition:

The rule of thirds

The golden mean

You cannot have interesting art, paintings or photos, without both of those rules being followed.

That's it really : light, composition and subject.

 

R

[sbgk]

If you focus at the aperture you're taking the picture at, surely you end up with a very dark image in the view finder to focus with?

 

with these lens the aim is to shoot them wide open to get the bokeh effect, so mostly 5.6 and wider. Even stopped down there is plenty of light getting through, unless it's dark and then you'd be using it wide open. A full frame camera helps in this respect too.

[sbgk]

And a non-functional split prism.

 

don't have a split prism, there's a red light at the centre point when it's in focus.

[gmgraves]

iPhone snaps, so no great shakes technically:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]30204[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]30205[/ATTACH]

 

 

I really like the top one. All the interest in the picture is on the right edge of the frame and the bottom third of the frame The second one has the compositional error of the bulk of the aspen (I assume its an aspen) being dead-center. The picture would have been much more interesting had the yellow foliage occupied either the left or the right edge of the picture.

 

 

Notice that in this picture, the pagoda is in the top-left third of the picture and the falling stream and pool in the lower third provides foreground interest. BTW, I took this with Kodak Lumier color negative film. Notice the wide dynamic range, with good details in the highlights as well as in the shadows...

[accwai]

If you focus at the aperture you're taking the picture at, surely you end up with a very dark image in the view finder to focus with?

 

The idea of large aperture short tele is that you shoot them (almost) wide open--they are designed to be used like that. Screen brightness shouldn't be a problem, but the depth of field is so thin that you pretty much have to have autofocus in continuous mode to have a reasonable chance of having the focus plane at exactly where you want it. And if the focus is not dead on, the whole thing will fall apart. So I don't understand how this type of lens can be focused by hand.

 

Below is from a Canon 85/1.2 stopped down to f/1.4. Lucked out and got it in one shot, which seldom happens:

 

[semente]

I really like the top one. All the interest in the picture is on the right edge of the frame and the bottom third of the frame The second one has the compositional error of the bulk of the aspen (I assume its an aspen) being dead-center. The picture would have been much more interesting had the yellow foliage occupied either the left or the right edge of the picture.

 

In my opinion one can break the rules as long as the composition is (subjectively) balanced.

 

This can be done by organising the different elements, tones or textures hierarchically or using them to lead the eye to the main subject.

 

R