PistonHeads.com Forum

Random Photos : Part 3

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

davidd

5,498 posts

181 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
Classic Cambridge


Pupp

8,373 posts

169 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
davidd said:
Classic Cambridge

Like the shot of Kings... what vantage point was that from?

davidd

5,498 posts

181 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
Pupp said:
Like the shot of Kings... what vantage point was that from?
Thanks, it was from the top of Great St Marys, well worth the £3.50 I spent wink

Pupp

8,373 posts

169 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
davidd said:
Pupp said:
Like the shot of Kings... what vantage point was that from?
Thanks, it was from the top of Great St Marys, well worth the £3.50 I spent wink
Cambridge never fails to present angles smile

Blukoo

3,765 posts

94 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
GetCarter said:
A cunning plan to encourage tourists to use passing places on single track roads. Do you think the police will mind? wink

Haha, that's genius! Please do it...

v15ben

12,468 posts

138 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
One from me with the new 55-250 lens.
Taken in Cambodia.


East Mebon. by v15ben, on Flickr

lloyd h

1,452 posts

70 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all

2slo

1,971 posts

64 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
Waskerley reservoir:


andrwb

175 posts

41 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
Reprocessed some old portraits. Maybe they're too contrasty.


D. by Clwn, on Flickr


D. by Clwn, on Flickr


D. by Clwn, on Flickr

Blukoo

3,765 posts

94 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
I couldn't get the shot I wanted tonight, so I decided to create my own out of a few images...


IMG_0215_composite by Murray 1986, on Flickr

...Mole...

2,738 posts

88 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all

Slioch by ScottAMurray, on Flickr

IWantAVolvo

1,251 posts

56 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
Caught the northern lights last night just purely by chance whilst out with a friend!




paul911

2,703 posts

130 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
andrwb said:

D. by Clwn, on Flickr
This one is ace, and could even take some more contrast boosting. Great shot smile

2slo

1,971 posts

64 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all

Smiddy Shaw reservoir

C2james

4,622 posts

62 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
andrwb said:
Reprocessed some old portraits. Maybe they're too contrasty.


D. by Clwn, on Flickr


D. by Clwn, on Flickr


D. by Clwn, on Flickr
hello!



/jamesmay

RobDickinson

17,236 posts

151 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all

Coru by robjdickinson, on Flickr

Harry Flashman

10,070 posts

139 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
Rob, would you mind sharing the settings you used for that photo?

I'm having real issues with getting shallow depth of field in camera - and think I might need a ned lens, as the maximum aperture of 3.5 at 15mm on my kit lens doesn't seem to want to isolate. At 42mm zoom, max aperture is 5.6, and similarly depth of field is quite high.

There are two lenses I'm considering to rectify this: a 1.7-20mm, and a 1.8-45mm. IO'd sort of like the latter, but have no idea what the minimum focus distance for the two lenses is (am busy finding out) so that I can attempt the sort of close-up work you managed with those ferns!

Any advice, from anyone posting on this thread, greedily assimilated and used, as always...!

nre

358 posts

167 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
Harry Flashman said:
Rob, would you mind sharing the settings you used for that photo?

I'm having real issues with getting shallow depth of field in camera - and think I might need a ned lens, as the maximum aperture of 3.5 at 15mm on my kit lens doesn't seem to want to isolate. At 42mm zoom, max aperture is 5.6, and similarly depth of field is quite high.

There are two lenses I'm considering to rectify this: a 1.7-20mm, and a 1.8-45mm. IO'd sort of like the latter, but have no idea what the minimum focus distance for the two lenses is (am busy finding out) so that I can attempt the sort of close-up work you managed with those ferns!

Any advice, from anyone posting on this thread, greedily assimilated and used, as always...!
A longer focal length will give you shallower depth of field, with everything else remaining the same, mess about with this online calculator to see how different paramters change the dof.

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

the exif from Robs photo above shows he used a 400mm at f5.6

Harry Flashman

10,070 posts

139 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
nre said:
Harry Flashman said:
Rob, would you mind sharing the settings you used for that photo?

I'm having real issues with getting shallow depth of field in camera - and think I might need a ned lens, as the maximum aperture of 3.5 at 15mm on my kit lens doesn't seem to want to isolate. At 42mm zoom, max aperture is 5.6, and similarly depth of field is quite high.

There are two lenses I'm considering to rectify this: a 1.7-20mm, and a 1.8-45mm. IO'd sort of like the latter, but have no idea what the minimum focus distance for the two lenses is (am busy finding out) so that I can attempt the sort of close-up work you managed with those ferns!

Any advice, from anyone posting on this thread, greedily assimilated and used, as always...!
A longer focal length will give you shallower depth of field, with everything else remaining the same, mess about with this online calculator to see how different paramters change the dof.

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

the exif from Robs photo above shows he used a 400mm at f5.6
That's great help: and it shows me that the PEN telephoto at 150mm/5.6 will give a shallower DOF than the 45mm/1.8. Very useful, and makes the 40-150mm 4.0-5.6 more what I seem to be after than the 45 1.8.

Looks like the 45mm lens will probably be good for portrait photography, as at 6 feet it gives a 0.28 ft DOF: the tel It will probably do better action shots at 45mm than the telephoto, due to the ability to get a faster shutter speed in. But I can get depth of field down to 0.08ft at 6 feet away at 150mm zoom on the telephoto, and I'm more interested in getting photos like Rob's fern one above than sport/action shots. I'm just guessing that light will be more of an issue with the telephoto lens.

In reality, I need to try them both before deciding, I guess...

gingerpaul

2,916 posts

140 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
Harry Flashman said:
That's great help: and it shows me that the PEN telephoto at 150mm/5.6 will give a shallower DOF than the 45mm/1.8. Very useful, and makes the 40-150mm 4.0-5.6 more what I seem to be after than the 45 1.8.

Looks like the 45mm lens will probably be good for portrait photography, as at 6 feet it gives a 0.28 ft DOF: the tel It will probably do better action shots at 45mm than the telephoto, due to the ability to get a faster shutter speed in. But I can get depth of field down to 0.08ft at 6 feet away at 150mm zoom on the telephoto, and I'm more interested in getting photos like Rob's fern one above than sport/action shots. I'm just guessing that light will be more of an issue with the telephoto lens.

In reality, I need to try them both before deciding, I guess...
Are you using a micro 4/3rds camera? I used to have the 20mm f/1.7 and it takes really nice pictures. I can pop up a few examples if you're interested. smile
TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED