The Official Photography Thread - Vol. 3

[benzilla427]

What gigabyte sd memory card do yous think is best to get?

Depends how much you shoot and how often you'll transfer your files to clear up the card.

Personally I work with 2 16GB and a 4GB. I've never had an issue with storage. 

I'd recommend a Class 10 SD card just in case you wanna shoot video too.

 

[Nawzlew]

What gigabyte sd memory card do yous think is best to get?

I shoot in RAW so my files are a little bigger.

1 32 GB and 1 16 GB, Class 10.

 

[buckeyemindst8]

Great photos from everyone in here, been lurking for months at the great work in here. Here are some random pics from the past few months, working with a t3i, 50mm & 10-18 mm lenses. Headed to Chicago/Tokyo in April, excited to see how my photography has improved since I started a few years ago. 

 

[dragicon]

Does anyone know the new release date of the new Nikon D500

Late April. Something like the 20th of April.

 

[romcadoo]

Late April. Something like the 20th of April.

Gives me more time to save now the decision D500 or D750

 

[djyoung08]

Late April. Something like the 20th of April.

Gives me more time to save now the decision D500 or D750

dont you already have a crop sensor camera?

upgrading to full frame will make a huge difference in your portraits

 

[romcadoo]

dont you already have a crop sensor camera?

upgrading to full frame will make a huge difference in your portraits

Yea, I shoot on a crop sensor now.
The reason I'm debating over the two is that besides one being DX and the other FX, they are very similar on paper. The way technology is going there will be a thin line separating the two.

 

[danyosahn]

one of my favorite shots from my stay in Philly this past week.

 

[buckeyemindst8]

^ Nice

 

[jodeva89]

a few from wandering around

 

[timelessflight]

How did you guys find your "style" in photography?

 

[djyoung08]

dont you already have a crop sensor camera?

upgrading to full frame will make a huge difference in your portraits

Yea, I shoot on a crop sensor now.
The reason I'm debating over the two is that besides one being DX and the other FX, they are very similar on paper. The way technology is going there will be a thin line separating the two.

i hear what you're saying but the d750, as far as sensor is superior because its full frame.

for the photography you post, portraits, street and products, upgrading to a full frame is going to make a bigger difference in your images than the tech inside of a better crop sensor camera.

The bigger sensor in the d750 will capture more light and give you a true f/1.8 aperture out of that 50mm 1.8g you have. Rather than an effective f/2.7 due to crop factor.

Now if you were a sports photographer or wild life on a budget, i'd tell you cop the d500 and don't think twice.

My 2 cents.

 

[romcadoo]

i hear what you're saying but the d750, as far as sensor is superior because its full frame.

for the photography you post, portraits, street and products, upgrading to a full frame is going to make a bigger difference in your images than the tech inside of a better crop sensor camera.

The bigger sensor in the d750 will capture more light and give you a true f/1.8 aperture out of that 50mm 1.8g you have. Rather than an effective f/2.7 due to crop factor.

Now if you were a sports photographer or wild life on a budget, i'd tell you cop the d500 and don't think twice.

My 2 cents.

You make a very valid point. I think my main thing is I've never shot with a FX before I'm sure once I do I notice the increase in quality.
The more videos I've been watching I'm leaning towards the D750 they are about the same price.
Now with my 50/35mm 1.8 will there any vignetting or distortion on a FX body?

 

[djyoung08]

i hear what you're saying but the d750, as far as sensor is superior because its full frame.

for the photography you post, portraits, street and products, upgrading to a full frame is going to make a bigger difference in your images than the tech inside of a better crop sensor camera.

The bigger sensor in the d750 will capture more light and give you a true f/1.8 aperture out of that 50mm 1.8g you have. Rather than an effective f/2.7 due to crop factor.

Now if you were a sports photographer or wild life on a budget, i'd tell you cop the d500 and don't think twice.

My 2 cents.

You make a very valid point. I think my main thing is I've never shot with a FX before I'm sure once I do I notice the increase in quality.
The more videos I've been watching I'm leaning towards the D750 they are about the same price.
Now with my 50/35mm 1.8 will there any vignetting or distortion on a FX body?

35mm is a dx lens so yeah ur gonna have a harsh vignette because its built for a dx camera.

50mm you wont have any more distortion than you do on dx. Vignette will be there too but as you stop lower than 1.8, it will be less pronounced. Its not bad.

Full frame is the ultimate game changer for a portrait photographer IMO. Assuming you have glass for it.

IMO the best progression is: crop sensor camera w/ a few pieces of good glass, then you upgrade the body to full frame to unlock the full potential of those lenses.

I wish I went with canon first to do that cuz i started with nikon crop then upgraded to canon full frame. :x very painfully expensive process.

 

[romcadoo]

35mm is a dx lens so yeah ur gonna have a harsh vignette because its built for a dx camera.

50mm you wont have any more distortion than you do on dx. Vignette will be there too but as you stop lower than 1.8, it will be less pronounced. Its not bad.

Full frame is the ultimate game changer for a portrait photographer IMO. Assuming you have glass for it.

IMO the best progression is: crop sensor camera w/ a few pieces of good glass, then you upgrade the body to full frame to unlock the full potential of those lenses.

I wish I went with canon first to do that cuz i started with nikon crop then upgraded to canon full frame. :x very painfully expensive process.

35mm is a dx lens so yeah ur gonna have a harsh vignette because its built for a dx camera.

50mm you wont have any more distortion than you do on dx. Vignette will be there too but as you stop lower than 1.8, it will be less pronounced. Its not bad.

Full frame is the ultimate game changer for a portrait photographer IMO. Assuming you have glass for it.

IMO the best progression is: crop sensor camera w/ a few pieces of good glass, then you upgrade the body to full frame to unlock the full potential of those lenses.

I wish I went with canon first to do that cuz i started with nikon crop then upgraded to canon full frame. :x very painfully expensive process.

Man I absolutely love my 35mm 1.8 I never took it off until I got my 50mm. I read an article on what we're talking about it basically stay away from smaller apertures.
Just looking at FX lens prices make me cringe, $1600 for a 35mm 1.4 sheeesh.

But I can only imagine starting with a brand then as you grow switching. I've been looking into Sony a little bit but I'm gonna stay with Nikon

 

[djyoung08]

35mm is a dx lens so yeah ur gonna have a harsh vignette because its built for a dx camera.

50mm you wont have any more distortion than you do on dx. Vignette will be there too but as you stop lower than 1.8, it will be less pronounced. Its not bad.

Full frame is the ultimate game changer for a portrait photographer IMO. Assuming you have glass for it.

IMO the best progression is: crop sensor camera w/ a few pieces of good glass, then you upgrade the body to full frame to unlock the full potential of those lenses.

I wish I went with canon first to do that cuz i started with nikon crop then upgraded to canon full frame. :x very painfully expensive process.

35mm is a dx lens so yeah ur gonna have a harsh vignette because its built for a dx camera.

50mm you wont have any more distortion than you do on dx. Vignette will be there too but as you stop lower than 1.8, it will be less pronounced. Its not bad.

Full frame is the ultimate game changer for a portrait photographer IMO. Assuming you have glass for it.

IMO the best progression is: crop sensor camera w/ a few pieces of good glass, then you upgrade the body to full frame to unlock the full potential of those lenses.

I wish I went with canon first to do that cuz i started with nikon crop then upgraded to canon full frame. :x very painfully expensive process.

Man I absolutely love my 35mm 1.8 I never took it off until I got my 50mm. I read an article on what we're talking about it basically stay away from smaller apertures.
Just looking at FX lens prices make me cringe, $1600 for a 35mm 1.4 sheeesh.

But I can only imagine starting with a brand then as you grow switching. I've been looking into Sony a little bit but I'm gonna stay with Nikon

vignetting in real world usage of 1.8 isnt that bad man. also, if its that big of an issue, you can correct it in light room with a click of a checkbox

all are shot on either 85mm 1.8 or 50mm 1.8

 

[romcadoo]

vignetting in real world usage of 1.8 isnt that bad man. also, if its that big of an issue, you can correct it in light room with a click of a checkbox

all are shot on either 85mm 1.8 or 50mm 1.8

In those I can barely see any, I had the values mixed.

 

[dragicon]

All of the dx vs fx stuff is good discussion.  I would say though that if you are just starting out, or worried about prices, the D610 is an extremely capable FX camera.  Camera bodies will depreciate in value much more then lenses, and think about how much you are going to lose on each camera if you decide to sell it.  When I've bought my cameras, I have usually gone in with the mindset that I will get maybe 25%-50% of the price you paid back if you decide to sell it down the road.  

Lenses hold value more then bodies.  I prefer zooms much more then primes to be honest.  I used to have a lot of gear, but have pretty much downsized to a few lenses and one camera body.  It is fun to have a wide variety of lenses, they are cool, but I feel like you will most likely just use a couple consistently.  I shoot many many different types of styles of photography, and I feel like it isn't necessary to get too wrapped up into which lens to buy or which camera to buy until you start shooting, and shooting more often.  I would go cheap with the bodies and lenses until you figure out what type of photos are the bulk of your photography and go from there, with slow upgrades over time.  

 

[djyoung08]

All of the dx vs fx stuff is good discussion.  I would say though that if you are just starting out, or worried about prices, the D610 is an extremely capable FX camera.  Camera bodies will depreciate in value much more then lenses, and think about how much you are going to lose on each camera if you decide to sell it.  When I've bought my cameras, I have usually gone in with the mindset that I will get maybe 25%-50% of the price you paid back if you decide to sell it down the road.  

Lenses hold value more then bodies.  I prefer zooms much more then primes to be honest.  I used to have a lot of gear, but have pretty much downsized to a few lenses and one camera body.  It is fun to have a wide variety of lenses, they are cool, but I feel like you will most likely just use a couple consistently.  I shoot many many different types of styles of photography, and I feel like it isn't necessary to get too wrapped up into which lens to buy or which camera to buy until you start shooting, and shooting more often.  I would go cheap with the bodies and lenses until you figure out what type of photos are the bulk of your photography and go from there, with slow upgrades over time.  

I completely agree with this.

This is exactly why I bought a 5d mark 2 instead of 3 and a 70-200 2.8L version 2 instead of 70-200 2.8L version 1.

85mm 1.8 prime is great to have but to be honest, when im on assignment, i'd rather just shoot my 70-200 at 85mm than switch lenses

now if i had the 85 1.2 that'd be a bit of a different story

 

[Fong$tarr]

Focus on the Mark 3 is way better than the Mark 2. You will notice the difference if you are shooting concerts and sports as I did. It was worth getting the upgrade to the Mark 3 but I wish I just bought that off the bat.


One from last week. Sucks how it's raining in SF. Shooting is literally impossible.

 

[djyoung08]

Focus on the Mark 3 is way better than the Mark 2. You will notice the difference if you are shooting concerts and sports as I did. It was worth getting the upgrade to the Mark 3 but I wish I just bought that off the bat.


One from last week. Sucks how it's raining in SF. Shooting is literally impossible.

yeah the mk 3 has so many more to pick from too!!

Since i do portraits and weddings, i usually have more than enough time make sure focus is perfect.

It was important for me to be able to afford lenses and a camera instead of just a camera. If budget was out of the question I would have just gotten a 5D S.

Once I have all the glass I want, there will probably be a new 5d version out. Probably the rumored 5d mark 3 replacement the 5d X.

At which point, I will check off my bucket list purchasing a new camera.

Almost every piece of gear i've purchases is used

 

[mylesp]

Yall I just copped the perfect school and camera bag. Some of you might not like the price but I thought it was worth it and copped. It hasn't come in yet as I just ordered today, but from what I see this is what I need.

They need more customers. They did a kick-starter and were successful so now they have a site where they sell it. I'm order #093 or something which means they don't have many customers. This is like the perfect bag for cameras/everyday use. They need more customers so that's why I'm sharing


Here's a link to buy it

http://www.brevite.co/brevite-bag/7jb47gruntt722jlrt9ndayfagvn64


Here's a review someone did with more pictures

http://www.newhopephotography.com/blog/2016/2/25/brevite-camera-bag-review

 

[timelessflight]

70-200 arrived safe and sound.

Big day for me!

So excited I dont have to borrow one any more.

once i buy this lens (Nikon version) i will be done with buying lens lol.

my set would end up being: 50mm 1.4, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8

no wide angles as i don't shoot landscapes

 

[khankussionz]

My 2 cents on the D500 vs. D750 subject:

I agree with the FX over DX suggestion for portraits. I've shot portraits on both, and there is just something about that FX look that makes my work so much better. I feel like even when shooting natural light the shots have so much more character. A true 50mm on FX is one of the sweetest looks you will get. I had a 35mm and 50mm, but didn't like the 35mm on the DX camera for some reason. I sold it and got the 28mm FX lens. There was a suggestion of the D610, and even though it can perform I would stay away from it because the focus system is pretty small in the viewfinder which would make me lean towards the D750. When I was switching to FX I wanted the D610 but that focus system and the fact that you can't change aperture while recording video was a deal breaker so I went with the D810. If autofocus support was more available/reliable for Nikon glass, I would have probably suggested getting a Sony A7 over the Nikon D610 because it opens you up to a ton of lens options.

 

[tokes99]

70-200 arrived safe and sound.

Big day for me!

So excited I dont have to borrow one any more.

once i buy this lens (Nikon version) i will be done with buying lens lol.

my set would end up being: 50mm 1.4, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8

no wide angles as i don't shoot landscapes

wide angles aren't for everybody, but they aren't only for landscapes...you can also use them to place a subject in a larger context in a way that it might be harder to do with a longer focal length...

these were all shot with a 21mm on full frame:

Untitled by a0, on Flickr

Untitled by a0, on Flickr

Untitled by a0, on Flickr

Untitled by a0, on Flickr

how could you know? by a0, on Flickr

these with a 35mm

Untitled by a0, on Flickr

Untitled by a0, on Flickr

Untitled by a0, on Flickr

not saying these are the most successful or even good uses of wide angle lenses but maybe gives an idea of how a subject can sit in a wide angle frame; you can imagine with longer focal lengths you'd have to be farther way to fit as much in the frame...similarly many like to use longer lenses for landscapes because of the compression; the focal length doesn't necessary have to dictate how you use it...

My 2 cents on the D500 vs. D750 subject:

I agree with the FX over DX suggestion for portraits. I've shot portraits on both, and there is just something about that FX look that makes my work so much better. I feel like even when shooting natural light the shots have so much more character. A true 50mm on FX is one of the sweetest looks you will get. I had a 35mm and 50mm, but didn't like the 35mm on the DX camera for some reason. I sold it and got the 28mm FX lens. There was a suggestion of the D610, and even though it can perform I would stay away from it because the focus system is pretty small in the viewfinder which would make me lean towards the D750. When I was switching to FX I wanted the D610 but that focus system and the fact that you can't change aperture while recording video was a deal breaker so I went with the D810. If autofocus support was more available/reliable for Nikon glass, I would have probably suggested getting a Sony A7 over the Nikon D610 because it opens you up to a ton of lens options.

well the difference is basically how much light the each is able to absorb, there are other things like a shallower depth of field, wider field of view(s), & maybe better noise performance/slightly cleaner images (genearally & at high iso especially) for full frame but if you can get more light onto a crop sensor, it can come pretty close to that 'full frame' look...each has their advantages, but those differences are really difficult to see for just about everyone