|
Chicago panoramas and other shots (LOTS) (pg. 8)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| delobbo |
| quote: | Originally posted by annar
Wow, somebody that does HDR right. Kudos.
You could've achieved most results with say a 16-35L in the panoramic pictures. |
thanks, when I started doing the panoramas I had considered that myself, why not just use a fish-eye or ultra-wide lens, and get the same effect? And, I arrived at the answer. And, it is megapixels and print size. Some of my panoramas go as big as 80-90MP full-size. The full image, with the same detail and definition as a single shot. That is so appealing to me. |
|
|
| delobbo |
| quote: | Originally posted by gehzumteufel
The 5d that delobo uses is 8k..... |
wow dude where did you get that from.. :) when I got mine the body was 3299. 24-105 and 24-70 are around 1200, battery grip is 300 or so, flash 300.. it kind of adds up but not to 8k. Think you were probably talking about the 1DsMkIII.. |
|
|
| delobbo |
| quote: | Originally posted by gehzumteufel
Yeah I realized I meant the 1ds mkIII |
oh ok :D |
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by delobbo
teh D90 came out last week! :clown: |
i thought it was like 2months old already... cause the 50D isn't even in stores yet. |
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by delobbo
the best walk-around lens imo is the 24-105, which I sold to get the 24-70. Something I regret. It's much lighter than the 24-70 and it has IS, which had been SO helpful to me. Sure the 70 is 2.8, but this was before I got the 50mm 1.4 which takes care of my fast needs... the 24-70 is a brick. A nice brick, though. :) |
the reasons why i got the 24-70 is because its much faster and usable in clubs, at F4 at 24-105 its too slow. |
|
|
| delobbo |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
the reasons why i got the 24-70 is because its much faster and usable in clubs, at F4 at 24-105 its too slow. |
yeah that was my reason for switch to the 24-70 from the 24-105, as well. but, I do not feel the difference to be worth the weight and lack of IS. If I could do it over again I would have kept the 24-105 and bought the 50mm 1.4. Now that is a fast lens and soooo fun to use in the clubs. |
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by delobbo
yeah that was my reason for switch to the 24-70 from the 24-105, as well. but, I do not feel the difference to be worth the weight and lack of IS. If I could do it over again I would have kept the 24-105 and bought the 50mm 1.4. Now that is a fast lens and soooo fun to use in the clubs. |
I rented a 50mm 1.4 for an event a week ago, and it was not that easy to work with, especially with two flashes... I'm sure I could get better results with more practice. |
|
|
| delobbo |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
I rented a 50mm 1.4 for an event a week ago, and it was not that easy to work with, especially with two flashes... I'm sure I could get better results with more practice. |
you want to use very minimal bounce flash (low-power) or no flash at all, to get the best result from the 1.4. here are some of mine if you wanna take a look:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/delobb...57607217087930/
also the DOF is tricky, it takes some getting used to for sure. |
|
|
| epdarks |
| Are you 'Wala' on another forum? |
|
|
| RickyRoma |
Beautiful pictures. I especially I like the night shots overlooking the city.
Great pics...MUCH MUCH better than the rubbish posted by some other so-called "photographers" on TA |
|
|
| delobbo |
| quote: | Originally posted by epdarks
Are you 'Wala' on another forum? |
yea lol |
|
|
| delobbo |
| quote: | Originally posted by RickyRoma
Beautiful pictures. I especially I like the night shots overlooking the city.
Great pics...MUCH MUCH better than the rubbish posted by some other so-called "photographers" on TA |
hey easy now... :clown:
thanks for taking a look. in general I find the night to be just so so so much more interesting than the day.. it helps to be a "night owl" as well.. |
|
|
|
|
