Nikon motors are there for convenience in their non-pro bodies that have the feature.

I have no focusing issues with the Tamron. I've noticed it being slightly slow, but I'm shooting at home in the dark dungeon I call a home right now. The VC and focus is nearly silent where my Nikon and Sigma lenses are both loud when VR/IS engages and the motors rattle inside and the focus on the sigma was loud.

Yeah Tamron doesn't put VC on their Pentax lenses and I think the price is reduced as well.

The Tamron I got rates VERY high at DxOmark coupled with the D600, it's actually the #1 rated zoom coupled on the d800. beating out the Nikon 24-70.

Damn you Tamron. They make the 70-200 for Pentax, but not the 24-70. What kind of sense does that make!? I'm kind of liking the Tamron 70-200 now, but I am out of luck for the 24-70. Back to the Sigma boat.

An old one I found that I thought was kind of interesting.



https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1388529373

So I'm tinkering, trying to get an HDR look from a single exposure, just without that overcooked, fake look. I got quite a few bracketed shots today, but I honestly like these highly adjusted single exposures more. I think it looks alright... I don't think it be like it is, but it do.

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1390088553

You dont need multiple exposures to get a lot of range in a photograph. The whole idea of HDR was to create images with the feel of those created by the old masters shooting super long exposures.

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1390091501

Well, I'm no Ansel Adams. I actually think that image of his has been edited. Looks like someone got crazy with the contrast slider. The one I've seen, the shadows aren't so dark.

Heavily edited in the darkroom. Ansel Adams was very skilled when it came to burning and dodging.
In this way he could create an image that had full range but was also contrasty, unlike most of the so-called "HDR" photography that is flat as shit.

And that reminds me, I need to buy something to calibrate my monitor. I have the suspicion that it is probably way off. So who knows what my images actually look like.

here's my last, got bored last night, just doing lighting exercises:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1390603048
Blue Champagne Flute by The Braineack, on Flickr

Looks good. Lighting glass properly is really tough. I think a little more edge lighting would have been nice. Is that texture on the glass, or is that liquid splashing inside? I was actually doing the same thing last night, playing around with light and stock photography, but nothing came out worth sharing. I was quite disappointed in my attempt.

I watching this a few nights ago and it got me wanting to try something like you did. I'm lacking in proper lighting though, and other materials for doing such shots. As cheap as materials are, I may go pick some up and play around.

I need to try it again with white cards on the sides. but i was happy with this.

I have finally gotten around to processing some pictures I've taken over the last 5 years. Here's one of the ones I took back in college. What do you guys think?

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1390619715
Environment1 by skidude108, on Flickr

Not bad at all. I do feel it's missing something, but can't quite pin it down. Maybe something on the right side of the tracks to balance things a bit. I also think the tracks would look better centered and the vanishing point center frame as well, though that is usually a no no in most cases. Overall, good picture though. How did a house end up abandoned next to the rails like that?

In my quest to be more like the Brain, I attempted something similar to his champagne glass. Just basic product photography. All I had was a flashlight and some tracing paper to soften the light, my computer desk and a $3 box of gaming dice. Not bad considering. Self criticism, I wish the light wasn't reflecting off the face of the 4 sided die so much, its a bit distracting.

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1390638325

yeah. photographing things with reflections is hard.

in the setup above for mine: the glass was on the black velvet BG, and the flash behind it pointing back and up close against the wall. So the flash was bouncing up to the ceiling and back around the glass/bg.


second attempt, went for a different lighting setup:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1390669781
Blue Champagne Flute 2 by The Braineack, on Flickr

I found a cleaner glass, much better result:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1390672876
Champagne Flute by The Braineack, on Flickr


I thought the cracked glass finish of the other would be more interesting, but I like how elegant this one turned out.

Love this shot! Just as I think I am getting decent at this whole photography thing I see a shot like this.

Not sure which I like more. What is that hard edge? Velvet board edge? Is that poster board or a wall as the backdrop? I like it.

Brain in particular has some really sharp clean photos. Do you have any tips for these:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1390678201
Canon T3i, Canon 50mm 1.8 at 1/100 sec f2.2 ISO1600, no flash

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1390678201
Same Camera and lens, at 1/80th at f1.8 ISO800, no flash

I have a flash, but didn't have it on the camera and wanted to try and capture the moment with him playing. I feared I would miss it if I took the time to run and get the flash, install it, turn it on and set it up...

I wonder is my ISO too high? my depth of field too shallow? Is it the crop sensor versus a full frame?

I am pretty pleased with my results I just wish they were a touch sharper.

You might get better results shooting at an aperture more like 2.8 vs 1.8 or 2.2. Typically those nifty fifties are pretty soft under f/2.8 or f/3.2. Might also look better with a little bounce flash off the window wall, since the light looks a little dull to me, and a slightly higher shutter speed to freeze motion a little more. Not sure how much he was moving around, but 1/80 and 1/100 is at about the bottom of the range you would want to capture a moving child and freeze the motion. ISO is probably fine, but lower is always better. With a flash, you could drop the ISO a stop and capture more detail and better color. Also looks like focus might be slightly off, probably because of the shallow dof.