what do you think? 20 of my best

The pictures are very cool. Nice work..But..

The real question is: What kind of camera did you take them on? That's just as important.

jet3004 said:

The real question is: What kind of camera did you take them on? That's just as important.

Click to expand...

you can't be serious

revenuee said:

you can't be serious

Click to expand...

Well, what do you mean? I am serious. I was exaggerating on just how "serious" it is but I was curious...Why the comment? Am I dumb and he wrote it in his post or what?

3.jpg is fun, it induces just a touch of vertigo.

i like number 9

I'm impressed
too, bad the man on the right in pic 10 didn't stand still..

my two favorites are 13 because of the contrast of ideas with the cell phone in the wilderness and number 6.

katanna said:

These are 20 of my best pictures. Most were taken by me. I know that #9 was taken by my father, #20 was taken by my brother, and various others I am not sure if I took them or someone else took them.
Past that, these are some of the best pictures I have.
What do you think? Post your thoughts, please!!
I will post a caption for each picture when it is not 2 in the morning.
http://s95220742.onlinehome.us/Fun/Best/Best.html

Matthew

Click to expand...

On shots like #9, you might want to try a slow sync/rear sync flash if your camera can do it (i'm guessing you have a D70 and kit lens. am i right?)

Well, in the flash mode, you scroll throough until you see slow sync flash--it'll freeze the people and allow for a bit of the long exposure trails to go behind them. Looks cool. I'll see if I have any examples anywhere.

M

jet3004 said:

Well, what do you mean? I am serious. I was exaggerating on just how "serious" it is but I was curious...Why the comment? Am I dumb and he wrote it in his post or what?

Click to expand...

Thats my point, perhaps i missed the sarcasm (which is possible in a forum setting) -- but it seems like you emphasized the tool more so then the work -- perhaps my initial response was harsh, excuse me for that

i myself get very angry when people look at my work and ask about the tool as if that was the most important part of the creation process. The question of "how did you create this shot" is as much better question because it encompasses with the tools and the vision - it respects that the artist has control over his work.

i see to many people purchasing the biggest and best simply because it is the biggest and best,

i see this with "SLR" photographers --- they never take it out of the AUTO mode and stick with the kit lens, purchase bargain basement film and take it to the least expensive mini-lab they can find --- all the time complaining about how the compact took better pictures and was lighter to carry.

Meanwhile i see this 15 year old kids name every week as i'm processing his pictures, and who's work just blows me away , pulling out his Nikon FE that was down to him from his uncle or something. And he searches through his pockets to scrape together the money to pay for the higher end kodak portra or experimenting with Fuji Velvia at 20$ a pop.

On the other hand you get Mr.F5 who brings in his bargain discount film once a year and complains that his pictures look terrible after he spent so much money on his camera.

revenuee said:

Thats my point, perhaps i missed the sarcasm (which is possible in a forum setting) -- but it seems like you emphasized the tool more so then the work -- perhaps my initial response was harsh, excuse me for that

i myself get very angry when people look at my work and ask about the tool as if that was the most important part of the creation process. The question of "how did you create this shot" is as much better question because it encompasses with the tools and the vision - it respects that the artist has control over his work.

i see to many people purchasing the biggest and best simply because it is the biggest and best,

i see this with "SLR" photographers --- they never take it out of the AUTO mode and stick with the kit lens, purchase bargain basement film and take it to the least expensive mini-lab they can find --- all the time complaining about how the compact took better pictures and was lighter to carry.

Meanwhile i see this 15 year old kids name every week as i'm processing his pictures, and who's work just blows me away , pulling out his Nikon FE that was down to him from his uncle or something. And he searches through his pockets to scrape together the money to pay for the higher end kodak portra or experimenting with Fuji Velvia at 20$ a pop.

On the other hand you get Mr.F5 who brings in his bargain discount film once a year and complains that his pictures look terrible after he spent so much money on his camera.

Click to expand...

Hey! A nikon FE is nothing to complain about! That's one helluva camera. I have an old FM from the 70s and it's light meter just crapped out on me... i'm pretty bummed about it. I like taking that cam out, loaded with 3200 speed Tmax and shoot away all day. Now, I love my D100... and I love my expensive lenses, but something about that old FM.... The EM is no slouch either!

But you're right about Dr. Photo MD with too much money. My personal fave is this guy at a sports event i was covering who was shooting an 8fps D2h with a CRAPPY toy 28-80 zoom and a whopping 128mb flash card from the top of the bleachers. He asked how my "slow" and "poorly equipped" d100 could capture such nice images (he saw some of my prints on the sideline). I chuckled and said "trade secret. buy some prints from me and leave the D2h at home. YOU'RE the one not well equipped to take shots at a sports event"

Little did he know I was better equipped with a 70-200 f2.8 lens with a 1.4teleconverter, 4 gb of CF and an ipod with belkin card reader. And of course, the best AF system available--the one between my ears.

revenuee said:

you can't be serious

Click to expand...

no, he's just about right... the camera you use is just as important as what other people think of your work.


katanna: btw- nice photos (i like the subway pic... we don't have any here); though, i wouldn't call all of them your best unless you took the shot or did some heavy editing. regaurdless those are some pretty decent photos.


peace.

neut said:

no, he's just about right... the camera you use is just as important as what other people think of your work.


katanna: btw- nice photos (i like the subway pic... we don't have any here); though, i wouldn't call all of them your best unless you took the shot or did some heavy editing.


peace.

Click to expand...

The camera surely is important. Just ask any mega-pixel junkie. Hehe. THis coming from the guy who's buying a 12mp camera but... I have reasons and excuses.

But i'd just as soon settle for a pinhole. But my clients wouldn't like that. hehe

Moxiemike said:

The camera surely is important. Just ask any mega-pixel junkie. Hehe. THis coming from the guy who's buying a 12mp camera but... I have reasons and excuses.

But i'd just as soon settle for a pinhole. But my clients wouldn't like that. hehe

Click to expand...

and might i comment on your photos.... they are very impressive! perhaps i should pull out my credit card...

jackieonasses said:

and might i comment on your photos.... they are very impressive! perhaps i should pull out my credit card...

Click to expand...

You should buy one of 'em.

I have to figure out shipping and such, but i'd be honored if ANYONE bought some of my shots.

Thanks for the compliment.

EDIT: Figured out shipping. $5 USPS priority anywhere in continental US. Will add international soon. Kinda like iTMS

m

I was perhaps being slightly sarcastic in my tone but yeah, I think the camera is important. I mean, you are not going to get pictures like that on a disposable Kodak, are you?

jet3004 said:

I was perhaps being slightly sarcastic in my tone but yeah, I think the camera is important. I mean, you are not going to get pictures like that on a disposable Kodak, are you?

Click to expand...

My friends mom did travel photos in scotland on a disposable kodak that got into an art gallery and sold lots of prints.

That said, you're half right. A 85mm 1.4 lens is gonna render better than a small 85 mm zoom setting at 4.5 on a point and shoot. for sure.

But you casn do good stuff with both.

katanna said:

These are 20 of my best pictures. Most were taken by me. I know that #9 was taken by my father, #20 was taken by my brother, and various others I am not sure if I took them or someone else took them.
Past that, these are some of the best pictures I have.
What do you think? Post your thoughts, please!!
I will post a caption for each picture when it is not 2 in the morning.
http://s95220742.onlinehome.us/Fun/Best/Best.html

Matthew

Click to expand...

Had a look at the photos and liked quite a few of them (of note # 4, 7, and 17). When were you in Vegas / Grand Canyon? I was there at the start of September and have a few pics that are very similar to yours... not going to bother posting them though... don't want to start up a pic war or anything.

Moxiemike said:

My friends mom did travel photos in scotland on a disposable kodak that got into an art gallery and sold lots of prints.

That said, you're half right. A 85mm 1.4 lens is gonna render better than a small 85 mm zoom setting at 4.5 on a point and shoot. for sure.

But you casn do good stuff with both.

Click to expand...

lol...You got me. You know I almost put in that if you were a great photographer you could use any medium, including a disposable, but I didn't...Oh well, you are right. Everything's art.

I like #9. Would be nicer without the McDonald's cup though - still a very cool pic

These are some great shots katanna, i'm a sucker for the flowing water shot -- nice pic

hey Moxiemike -- knew i could count on you to come in and pick up the slack of my argument when i'm not around ... LOL

and yes, the FE is a great camera - but as you already mentioned Dr. Photo MD i see no sense in beating a dead horse.

Waiting patiently for the D2X eh? -- i've got some MP envy --- however, i don't have the kinda work flow that can allow me to spend that kinda money --- however the D70 will be mine as of tomorrow -- nikon finally decided that 2 months was long enough for me to wait ... LOL

i need to buy a new flash though --- stupid lack of back compatibility -- i was hoping to get some better glass first.

revenuee said:

These are some great shots katanna, i'm a sucker for the flowing water shot -- nice pic

hey Moxiemike -- knew i could count on you to come in and pick up the slack of my argument when i'm not around ... LOL

and yes, the FE is a great camera - but as you already mentioned Dr. Photo MD i see no sense in beating a dead horse.

Waiting patiently for the D2X eh? -- i've got some MP envy --- however, i don't have the kinda work flow that can allow me to spend that kinda money --- however the D70 will be mine as of tomorrow -- nikon finally decided that 2 months was long enough for me to wait ... LOL

i need to buy a new flash though --- stupid lack of back compatibility -- i was hoping to get some better glass first.

Click to expand...

Congrats on the D70. I actually spent a week with one (my friend loaned me his) and i'm thinking of adding one as well. It'll play nice with the D2x! As far as a flash goes... the sb-600 is a KILLER unit for $200 give or take. I got the sb-800, and it's amazing, the 600 is just a little less powerful, which for general purpose shooting should be enough. If you decided to move up, you can get an 800, and the 600 + 800 play nice as far as a two light, wireless strobe system with you D70. That's pretty insane. So definitely buy either one.

What lenses are you looking at?

Moxiemike said:

Congrats on the D70. I actually spent a week with one (my friend loaned me his) and i'm thinking of adding one as well. It'll play nice with the D2x! As far as a flash goes... the sb-600 is a KILLER unit for $200 give or take. I got the sb-800, and it's amazing, the 600 is just a little less powerful, which for general purpose shooting should be enough. If you decided to move up, you can get an 800, and the 600 + 800 play nice as far as a two light, wireless strobe system with you D70. That's pretty insane. So definitely buy either one.

What lenses are you looking at?

Click to expand...

ya i spent a few days with one and loved it --- got some nice prints from it


and yes i've looked at the SB-600 and will probably get it

as far as glass -- sigma EX 12 - 24 (i really like this lens i got some shots of with it and a D70), either sigma EX or nikon 28mm 1.8, nikon 50mm either 1.4 or 1.8 -- price wise they are quite different but i would love the extra half stop, i have the sigma EX 105mm, and then i'm looking at the Sigma EX 50 - 500mm -- but i've been wondering if i wouldn't be better off with the Sigma 70 - 200mm plus a 2x tele-converter

i have the nikon 35 - 80 and Tamron 100 - 300 aswell but these are just not very nice lenses so i very much wish to replace with the list above

see, i'm trying to get into some light photojournalism while i'm still in University, and i feel that the D70 is powerful enough even in sports with it's 3fps but huge buffer to do the job, i mean you shoot with the D100 where the specs in that respect are pretty similar and you seem very happy. However, i am very much a wildlife photographer so huge focal lengths are key for me so that 500mm will be 750mm on the D70 (drools) where as the 200mm + 2x converter will be 600mm

revenuee said:

ya i spent a few days with one and loved it --- got some nice prints from it


and yes i've looked at the SB-600 and will probably get it

as far as glass -- sigma EX 12 - 24 (i really like this lens i got some shots of with it and a D70), either sigma EX or nikon 28mm 1.8, nikon 50mm either 1.4 or 1.8 -- price wise they are quite different but i would love the extra half stop, i have the sigma EX 105mm, and then i'm looking at the Sigma EX 50 - 500mm -- but i've been wondering if i wouldn't be better off with the Sigma 70 - 200mm plus a 2x tele-converter

i have the nikon 35 - 80 and Tamron 100 - 300 aswell but these are just not very nice lenses so i very much wish to replace with the list above

see, i'm trying to get into some light photojournalism while i'm still in University, and i feel that the D70 is powerful enough even in sports with it's 3fps but huge buffer to do the job, i mean you shoot with the D100 where the specs in that respect are pretty similar and you seem very happy. However, i am very much a wildlife photographer so huge focal lengths are key for me so that 500mm will be 750mm on the D70 (drools) where as the 200mm + 2x converter will be 600mm

Click to expand...

You've done a lot of good research. I hate to hijack this thread but I'm gonna do it because i'm sure you can appreciate the info (as can any other DSLR owners).

The Sigma 12-24 is a nice bet. It's pretty comparable to Nikon's 12-24 (which i have and LOVE) but it's half the price. The speed of the lens shouldn't be an issue since you're dealing with mostly landscapey stuff and architecture with this lens.

In your middle ground you mentioned liking the Nikon or Sigma 28mm lens. I'd avoid these, as they come to about a 42mm on a DSLR which is a weird focal length. I have the 35mm f2.0 Nikkor and believe me, at $259 (after rebate) it's a STEAL. It's sharp, and I use it for PJ work for this magazine. I also just got (coming in today) the Sigma 24-70. I'll let you know how this works. But It'll NEVER replace the 35 for alot of work. The 35 becomes a 52-ish lens, and is closest to a normal lens on digital. I'd recommend the 35 over either 28 anyday.

As far as 50's go...get the 1.8. It's a $100 and will free up some of your budget. Maybe add an 85 1.8 which is a stellar portrait lens.

As far as tele goes... the Sigma 70-200 will get you a faster aperture with TC than the 50-500. Their TC's are VERY good optically so you won't see image degeneration from using the TC. I have the 1.4 with my 70-200 and it's brilliant.

I dunno if you'll need the 12-24 Sigma... if you can, i'd get the 18-70DX kit lens. It's sharp and a nice carry around and goes to 28-105 on your D70. That plus the 50mm, 35 and/or 85 is a nice wide to mid-tele kit, combined with the 70-200 gives you a pretty impressive range.

My current lens setup, FYI, is the Nikkor 12-24, Sigma 24-70, 35mm, 50mm, 50mm macro, 70-200 + 1.4TC. The sigma 24-70, if you want that as an option, can be found on ebay for about $250 USD. For an f2.8 lens... that's pretty good.

For your wildlife kit, I'd go with:

The Nikkor 18-70 or Sigma 24-70 + 70-200 with 2.0TC for mostly wildlife and general portraiture and some architecture (interiors? you need th 12-24)

OR

Sigma 12-24, Nikon 35, 50, 85 and 70-200 with 2.0 TC if you plan on doing architecture and portraiture.

Does any of that make sense? Also, macmall has NICE deals on 1.0gb CF cards (80x WA which would suit your wildlife needs VERY well) for appx $120. I bought two. They ROCK.

Here's a 70-200 shot with 1.4tc at f5.6 I think: