anyone have experience with tamron lenses and liked them? im interested in this lens for  travel.
it has a better zoom range than the competitor nikon lens(18-200mm) and that Vibration Compensation (VC) mechanism fancy pants
what do you think? the Tamron AF18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC lens
http://www.tamron.co.jp/en/news/release_2008/0730.html and the adorama link http://www.adorama.com/Als/ProductPage/ … viewHeader

Last edited by Kimmmmmmmmmmmm (2010-05-10 10:50:51)

Finray
Hup! Dos, Tres, Cuatro
+2,629|6005|Catherine Black
so i herd u liek HDR?

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/5823329/Photographs/HDR/HDR.low.res.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/qwWEP9F.png
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6714

Finray wrote:

so i herd u liek HDR?
why yes, yes i do

https://farm5.static.flickr.com/4054/4524834944_0d2cec621c_b.jpg
Finray
Hup! Dos, Tres, Cuatro
+2,629|6005|Catherine Black
Nice shot burnzz, is that a fish eye or a panorama? (the dark spots in the corners)
https://i.imgur.com/qwWEP9F.png
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6714

Finray wrote:

Nice shot burnzz, is that a fish eye or a panorama? (the dark spots in the corners)
actually, the dark spots is my lens hood.

three exposures, -2, 0, +2 EV tonemapped thru photomatix. cs5 now has HDR pro, that will sharpen and eliminate ghosting. i think photomatix is better, but cs5 gets close.

i posted an HDR panorama a couple of pages ago. if you want to see 'content aware' fill, look at the bottom corners of this picture

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4001/457 … 3843_b.jpg

E; it is 30 exposures - 10 tonemapped, then stitched and filled in cs5

Last edited by burnzz (2010-05-10 13:16:58)

Finray
Hup! Dos, Tres, Cuatro
+2,629|6005|Catherine Black
Changing the exposure in photoshop is cheating
https://i.imgur.com/qwWEP9F.png
Finray
Hup! Dos, Tres, Cuatro
+2,629|6005|Catherine Black
Right now I'm waiting on it getting dark enough to get a night HDR of the same photo.. Got the tripod set up looking out my window right now
https://i.imgur.com/qwWEP9F.png
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6714

Finray wrote:

Changing the exposure in photoshop is cheating
actually, Lightroom. and it's not cheating, it's post-processing.

when i said "exposure" above i meant the actual picture.

i also tweak the white balance, my camera is always on the low side.

i spent five hours on the picture above . . .

Finray wrote:

Right now I'm waiting on it getting dark enough to get a night HDR of the same photo.. Got the tripod set up looking out my window right now
tripod's essential. since you're using one, stop the aperture down to f/11 or f/16, you'll get some nice stars out of the light sources . . .
Finray
Hup! Dos, Tres, Cuatro
+2,629|6005|Catherine Black
It's just better to take three - or more - seperate photographs on the day and work with them. You have so much more detail at your fingertips.

Thanks for the tip, I was just messing with the shutter speed.. gonna give the f stop a go too.
https://i.imgur.com/qwWEP9F.png
Microwave
_
+515|6872|Loughborough Uni / Leeds, UK
FAO: Kmar, burnnnnnnz, wallpaper etc etc...

I have a UV filter for my camera and I have a question!

I've been doing a lot of reading about them being cheap bits of glass infront of your expensive lens and the lens is already coated against UV and there's no need for it (kind of argument).

I've not noticed any difference with one and I agree with the argument so I'm probably going to take it off and never use it again.


What are your opinions on using one?
Finray
Hup! Dos, Tres, Cuatro
+2,629|6005|Catherine Black
Left it too long and it's way too dark now. Bugger.
https://i.imgur.com/qwWEP9F.png
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6714

Microwave wrote:

What are your opinions on using one?
i use a circular polarizer when the suns out. i have a neutral density also. i have the UV on, in front of my expensive glass - it comes off with the lenscap. meaning, i take the time to unscrew it, and put the lens cap back on it. my lens cap is on a tether.

and it's that way for all my lenses.
5 hours? well the results r nice. wouldnt it be impossible to do HDR of night sky??(stars move n stuff)

Microwave wrote:

FAO: Kmar, burnnnnnnz, wallpaper etc etc...

I have a UV filter for my camera and I have a question!

I've been doing a lot of reading about them being cheap bits of glass infront of your expensive lens and the lens is already coated against UV and there's no need for it (kind of argument).

I've not noticed any difference with one and I agree with the argument so I'm probably going to take it off and never use it again.


What are your opinions on using one?
i never use my UV filter, ever.  if outside I use the Polarizing filter. No filters for inside or night shots.

found this on some forum:
WB - night photography:
White balance, of necessity, will be tungsten, of course, to reinforce the blue sky, and to help de-saturate the yellow artificial light, which can be overpowering. Experiment and try using Fluorescent White balance for brilliant color in the sky. Lowest ISO as usual-at least, at first! Aperture depends-F8 to F11 is the sharpest range for your lens, but you may need to forsake the threat of diffraction, and go for F16 or 22, if you are getting lens flare.

Last edited by Kimmmmmmmmmmmm (2010-05-10 14:58:37)

Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6687
hey kimm post a picture of yourself please

ty
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Microwave
_
+515|6872|Loughborough Uni / Leeds, UK

burnzz wrote:

Microwave wrote:

What are your opinions on using one?
i use a circular polarizer when the suns out. i have a neutral density also. i have the UV on, in front of my expensive glass - it comes off with the lenscap. meaning, i take the time to unscrew it, and put the lens cap back on it. my lens cap is on a tether.

and it's that way for all my lenses.
Thanks burnzz. I use a circular polarizer for sun too. I need to get my hands on a neutral density too for some nice long exposure day shots

Definitely going to stop using the UV.
hmm stacking lenses...
burnzz what does the neutral density filter do? take out blinding orange off the rocks? Im about to hit the grand canyon n stuff.
Microwave
_
+515|6872|Loughborough Uni / Leeds, UK
From what I know a neutral density filter basically darkens the image. Enabling you to have a longer shutter/larger aperture than you would normally in those light conditions.
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6714

Microwave wrote:

From what I know a neutral density filter basically darkens the image. Enabling you to have a longer shutter/larger aperture than you would normally in those light conditions.
pretty much, the neutral means you won't lose saturation/hue and can go wide open for DoF effects.

going to the Grand Canyon eh? lucky you - we've been all over the plateau, and back to MOAB Memorial Day weekend. Zion is awesome, but we're saving GC for last - meaning we are hoping to spend some serious time there.

Kimmmms, you need to share moar pix . . .
Wallpaper
+303|6211|The pool

Microwave wrote:

I've been doing a lot of reading about them being cheap bits of glass infront of your expensive lens and the lens is already coated against UV and there's no need for it (kind of argument).

I've not noticed any difference with one and I agree with the argument so I'm probably going to take it off and never use it again.


What are your opinions on using one?
I personally dont use UV filters, although I should for normal shooting (a big hell no for macros). Its a good idea since it will lessen the chance of you destroying your lens should it ever be dropped, but image wise it changes nothing. I do use a CPL when its sunny though

Kimmmmmmmmmmmm wrote:

anyone have experience with tamron lenses and liked them? im interested in this lens for  travel.
it has a better zoom range than the competitor nikon lens(18-200mm) and that Vibration Compensation (VC) mechanism fancy pants
what do you think? the Tamron AF18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC lens
http://www.tamron.co.jp/en/news/release_2008/0730.html and the adorama link http://www.adorama.com/Als/ProductPage/ … viewHeader
It sounds nice to have, but DONT DO IT. Extreme zooms have terrible performance in terms of aperture, bokeh, and sharpness. Plus, they make you lazy. Granted, if youre only doing snaps for 4x6 prints it really wouldnt matter, but you most likely will be very disappointed by its performance

Last edited by Wallpaper (2010-05-10 20:06:48)

Finray
Hup! Dos, Tres, Cuatro
+2,629|6005|Catherine Black
https://farm3.static.flickr.com/2566/4134943834_914176a8fe_o.jpg

Something from my sensei (Pops).
https://i.imgur.com/qwWEP9F.png
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6714

what software, finray?
Finray
Hup! Dos, Tres, Cuatro
+2,629|6005|Catherine Black
Photomatix iirc.
https://i.imgur.com/qwWEP9F.png
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6714

Finray wrote:

Photomatix iirc.
cs5 will merge, and being photoshop, will clean up the image very well. but i'm going to keep photomatix, because cs5 won't tone map like it;

https://farm5.static.flickr.com/4022/4550070476_03f727b48b_b.jpg
Finray
Hup! Dos, Tres, Cuatro
+2,629|6005|Catherine Black
Wow, that looks great.

Anyway, here's my dad's Flickr, have a look through if you want.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kertesz/
https://i.imgur.com/qwWEP9F.png

Wallpaper wrote:

Kimmmmmmmmmmmm wrote:

anyone have experience with tamron lenses and liked them? im interested in this lens for  travel.
it has a better zoom range than the competitor nikon lens(18-200mm) and that Vibration Compensation (VC) mechanism fancy pants
what do you think? the Tamron AF18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC lens
http://www.tamron.co.jp/en/news/release_2008/0730.html and the adorama link http://www.adorama.com/Als/ProductPage/ … viewHeader
It sounds nice to have, but DONT DO IT. Extreme zooms have terrible performance in terms of aperture, bokeh, and sharpness. Plus, they make you lazy. Granted, if youre only doing snaps for 4x6 prints it really wouldnt matter, but you most likely will be very disappointed by its performance
lazy? i just dont want to bring a slew of lenses down the river with me. my 'go to' for wide to tele right now is a quantaray 18-200 3.5-6.3. What would you recommened then instead?

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard