Jump to content

zepps_apprentice

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    808

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by zepps_apprentice

    Photography

    in Ramble On

    Posted · Edited by zepps_apprentice

    I'm only going from the reviews I'v read since I'v stuck to only Canon lenses myself but it depends what you mean by "better". If you mean who produces overall the higher quality range of of lenses then I'd say Sigma is better than Tamron. However Tamron lenses are generally cheaper than Sigma and some of them like the 17-50 2.8(£270 last time I checked which is cheap for a constant 2.8 appature zoom, the Canon 17-55 2.8 with IS costs over £700) are both cheaper AND as good or better than Sigma.

    What I learnt pretty quickly was that there is no "best lens", they all have compromises and you have to pickout the one that best suits your shooting style(and budget :D ). A large appature(the lower the number the larger the appature) for example is good for taking pics of moving people in low light since it lets to keep a fast shutter speed aswell as having a narrow depth of field so the subject is isolated by casting the background a bit out of focus. If your taking landscape shots though you generally want to use a small appature for maximum depth of field so image stabalisation is more useful for the longer shutter speeds that creates.

    I normally take landscape shots and pictures of my music equipment. When I go to concerts I want really good quality pictures to remember by, so depending on where I am in the concert room would depend on the lens. Mostly for concerts I would use a zoom.

    For now I'm buying a DT 50MM f/1.8 fixed focal length lens and the zoom lens that comes with the camera. I would choose a DT 30mm f/2.8 macro over the fixed focal length but that's a little bit more money, and I'll probably get that for Christmas anyways.

    And I'm not buying it for about a week or so; so I got plenty of time to decide.

    Thanks for all of your information, helped a lot! :D

    Photography

    in Ramble On

    Posted

    Zeiss do a few of the more expensive lenses(mostly aimed at the full frame alpha system not that crop camera though) but most of them are either Sony in house designs, or rebranded versions of Tamron or old Minota lenses, Sony bought out the latter and used their lens mount for the new alpha system.

    All the 18-55 kit lenses are actually pretty sharp these days although the build quality/focusing isnt great(espeically hard to use filters like a polarizer of a grad since the front rotates) and the appature isnt that small. The 50mm 1.8 does look like good value for money aswell, the reviews I'v seen say its pretty sharp at 1.8.

    You can get Sony versions of most Tamron and Sigma lenses aswell, the Tamron 17-50 2.8(not the VC stabalised version) has a very good rep for sharpness and a large constant max appature at a relatively low price, plus you can use filters on it.

    So would you agree that Tamron is overall better than Sigma?

    Photography

    in Ramble On

    Posted · Edited by zepps_apprentice

    The main thing difference to other SLR style(it isnt one really) is that the Sony's viewfinder is electronic not real as you'll get from Canon, Nikon or Pentax. Whether thats a disadvanatge or an adbvanatge depends on personal prefference I spose but personally I like the option of both composing electronically on the back screen and normally though the veiwfinder.

    The biggest choice with any camera these days though is IMHO not the body itself(all the big makers produce quality ones) but the lenses your going to buy to go with it, Sony does offer a decent selection but not nearly as much depth as Canon or Nikon. Not too much of a problem is you don't want more specalized lenses but it does mean its harder to pick up stuff used, less of it around and prices are higher because demand outstrips supply.

    I agree, but it's not too much of a deal breaker for me.

    Sony's lenses are provided by Carl Zeiss mostly. This particular camera comes with a 18-55 zoom lens and I'm probably gonna buy either a macro or fixed focus point lens after buying as well. Thanks for the info though! :D

    Thanks! :)

    I wonder if that Sony camera has a boom mic connection for movies?

    It does have a mic connection jack :D

    Photography

    in Ramble On

    Posted

    Shot these at work this evening.

    Once a month they host Morale Call for active duty and employees - 3 hours of free finger food, music, dancing and door prizes.

    No admission charge, but they have to pay for their own drinks.

    Camera:

    Canon 5D Mk II

    ISO 3200

    1/100 sec

    with Flash

    Decent shot...

    but much better after darkening the background and adding faux depth of field.

    IMG_4523_EDIT.jpg

    Did you do that with your camera or Photoshop?

    Photography

    in Ramble On

    Posted · Edited by zepps_apprentice

    A recent one from the Carbon River Rain Forest at the entrance to Mt. Rainier.

    My friend Judy takes a pic.

    post-503-0-56708300-1314227593_thumb.jpg

    I like that.

    I'm about to buy this camera.

    SLTA35K.png

    16.2 Megapixels

    1080i/p Video Quality

    AutoHDR

    3D Panorama

    7 FPS

    Post A Picture Of Yourself!

    in Meet & Greet

    Posted

    Here's a more recent one of zepps_apprentice:

    dazed03.jpg

    "Let me tell you what Melba Toast is packin' right here, all right. We got 4:11 Positrac outback, 750 double pumper, Edelbrock intake, bored over 30, 11 to 1 pop-up pistons, turbo-jet 390 horsepower. We're talkin' some fuckin' muscle."

    "The older you get, the more rules they are going to try and get you to follow. You just gotta keep on livin', man. L.I.V.I.N."

LEDZEPPELIN.com

Site Navigation

  • LedZeppelin.com Home
  • News
  • Discography
  • Merchandise
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy

    • Led Zeppelin Timeline

  • Concert Timeline / Database
  • Events
  • Photos
  • Video
    • ×
    ×
    • Create New...