Digital Camera pic of the day (1 Viewer)

[biggamer3]

Thought there would be some chicks pics in here

here ya go I need to work on my paparazzi skills

I Need WINNERS!get some better shots or your off the team

Who's Hottest?

Oops! You don't have permission to view this photo.

This work?

If this doesn't work, I give up.

Jugs galore!

 

[Mrs. BSR]

Cannon 75-300mm

Something tells me this isn't quite what she is looking for either.

maybe.. I use my 18-55mm and the 75-300mm. Sure, I'd like to get a "all in one lens" but for now(Read No money ) those two combined give me the range I need.

Oh I hear you, I think if she can tell us what is on her camera right now, we will have a better clue of the zoom range she is looking for. My gut says she is not looking for that much zoom and maybe needs something with the capability for more width than 75.

I just have the lens that came with the camera. I don't take professional pictures or anything. The biggest reason I got the camera that I did was because I take pictures of my daughter's basketball games and that camera was the only one that could take the pics of the girls playing without being blurry. It seems like the lens that Snogger posted might just work and it's cheaper.

 

[CrossEyed]

I'm not as familiar with Canon lenses, but Nikon has two that I would recommend for a person looking for a longer zoom. The first is really expensive. It's a 28-200 VR (vibration reducion) and it runs around $600-$700. The benefit is that you almost never have to change lenses. The other is a 70-300 VR (the higher the number, the longer the zoom). It's a good complement to most kit lenses (my Nikon D50 came with an 18-55 lens). I bought the 70-300 for about $400. For me it has been well worth the investment. I've gotten some great zoom shots that I never could get without a tripod before VR.

Thanks. I'll have to wait on that one if they're that expensive. Thank you for the info though.

One thing to keep in mind is that even when you decide to replace your DSLR down the road, you'll still be able to use the lenses you have purchased (as long as you buy the same brand).

DSLR? Sorry, I'm not sure what that is. :feels dumb:

Digital single-lens reflex camera.. Bet that helped Basically, if you have a digital camera that allows you to change lenses you have a DSLR...

We assumed from the "Rebel" mention above you have the Canon Digital Rebel??

Yep.

Then you could go the route I did (Albeit I got it for *free as my Dad owed me money and didn't use his any more)..Buy this Cannon 75-300mm

sure it isn't "The best" but for under $200 you get a GREAT zoom ability and it works very well..

here is my lens at 300MM in a church.. Low light, no flash

nephew during a Football game last year

I would caution Mrs BSR that if she doesn't have a real steady hand, she might have a hard time getting good pics at 300 without a tripod. I can't recommend VR (or IS for Canon, I think) enough. I missed so many shots with my old cheap 70-300 that are coming out crystal clear with my VR. Saving money is no bargain if you can't get the shot.

 

[snogger]

I'm not as familiar with Canon lenses, but Nikon has two that I would recommend for a person looking for a longer zoom. The first is really expensive. It's a 28-200 VR (vibration reducion) and it runs around $600-$700. The benefit is that you almost never have to change lenses. The other is a 70-300 VR (the higher the number, the longer the zoom). It's a good complement to most kit lenses (my Nikon D50 came with an 18-55 lens). I bought the 70-300 for about $400. For me it has been well worth the investment. I've gotten some great zoom shots that I never could get without a tripod before VR.

Thanks. I'll have to wait on that one if they're that expensive. Thank you for the info though.

One thing to keep in mind is that even when you decide to replace your DSLR down the road, you'll still be able to use the lenses you have purchased (as long as you buy the same brand).

DSLR? Sorry, I'm not sure what that is. :feels dumb:

Digital single-lens reflex camera.. Bet that helped Basically, if you have a digital camera that allows you to change lenses you have a DSLR...

We assumed from the "Rebel" mention above you have the Canon Digital Rebel??

Yep.

Then you could go the route I did (Albeit I got it for *free as my Dad owed me money and didn't use his any more)..Buy this Cannon 75-300mm

sure it isn't "The best" but for under $200 you get a GREAT zoom ability and it works very well..

here is my lens at 300MM in a church.. Low light, no flash

nephew during a Football game last year

I would caution Mrs BSR that if she doesn't have a real steady hand, she might have a hard time getting good pics at 300 without a tripod. I can't recommend VR (or IS for Canon, I think) enough. I missed so many shots with my old cheap 70-300 that are coming out crystal clear with my VR. Saving money is no bargain if you can't get the shot.

Set TV to 1/400 or higher and you'd be amazed what you can do without "VR".. granted, I'd love to have a stabilized lens, but you can improvise. These shots were taken from a small fishing boat, in 10-15mph winds..very rocky conditions...

What do you want (1/400)

You found me (1/640)

 

[CrossEyed]

I'm not as familiar with Canon lenses, but Nikon has two that I would recommend for a person looking for a longer zoom. The first is really expensive. It's a 28-200 VR (vibration reducion) and it runs around $600-$700. The benefit is that you almost never have to change lenses. The other is a 70-300 VR (the higher the number, the longer the zoom). It's a good complement to most kit lenses (my Nikon D50 came with an 18-55 lens). I bought the 70-300 for about $400. For me it has been well worth the investment. I've gotten some great zoom shots that I never could get without a tripod before VR.

Thanks. I'll have to wait on that one if they're that expensive. Thank you for the info though.

One thing to keep in mind is that even when you decide to replace your DSLR down the road, you'll still be able to use the lenses you have purchased (as long as you buy the same brand).

DSLR? Sorry, I'm not sure what that is. :feels dumb:

Digital single-lens reflex camera.. Bet that helped Basically, if you have a digital camera that allows you to change lenses you have a DSLR...

We assumed from the "Rebel" mention above you have the Canon Digital Rebel??

Yep.

Then you could go the route I did (Albeit I got it for *free as my Dad owed me money and didn't use his any more)..Buy this Cannon 75-300mm

sure it isn't "The best" but for under $200 you get a GREAT zoom ability and it works very well..

here is my lens at 300MM in a church.. Low light, no flash

nephew during a Football game last year

I would caution Mrs BSR that if she doesn't have a real steady hand, she might have a hard time getting good pics at 300 without a tripod. I can't recommend VR (or IS for Canon, I think) enough. I missed so many shots with my old cheap 70-300 that are coming out crystal clear with my VR. Saving money is no bargain if you can't get the shot.

Set TV to 1/400 or higher and you'd be amazed what you can do without "VR".. granted, I'd love to have a stabilized lens, but you can improvise. These shots were taken from a small fishing boat, in 10-15mph winds..very rocky conditions...

What do you want (1/400)

You found me (1/640)

That's great if you have lots of light. If you don't...not so good. And it doesn't sound like Mrs BSR has the knowledge right now to be able to make those adjustments and understand what is necessary.

 

[snogger]

I'm not as familiar with Canon lenses, but Nikon has two that I would recommend for a person looking for a longer zoom. The first is really expensive. It's a 28-200 VR (vibration reducion) and it runs around $600-$700. The benefit is that you almost never have to change lenses. The other is a 70-300 VR (the higher the number, the longer the zoom). It's a good complement to most kit lenses (my Nikon D50 came with an 18-55 lens). I bought the 70-300 for about $400. For me it has been well worth the investment. I've gotten some great zoom shots that I never could get without a tripod before VR.

Thanks. I'll have to wait on that one if they're that expensive. Thank you for the info though.

One thing to keep in mind is that even when you decide to replace your DSLR down the road, you'll still be able to use the lenses you have purchased (as long as you buy the same brand).

DSLR? Sorry, I'm not sure what that is. :feels dumb: :(

Digital single-lens reflex camera.. Bet that helped Basically, if you have a digital camera that allows you to change lenses you have a DSLR...

We assumed from the "Rebel" mention above you have the Canon Digital Rebel??

Yep.

Then you could go the route I did (Albeit I got it for *free as my Dad owed me money and didn't use his any more)..Buy this Cannon 75-300mm

sure it isn't "The best" but for under $200 you get a GREAT zoom ability and it works very well..

here is my lens at 300MM in a church.. Low light, no flash

nephew during a Football game last year

I would caution Mrs BSR that if she doesn't have a real steady hand, she might have a hard time getting good pics at 300 without a tripod. I can't recommend VR (or IS for Canon, I think) enough. I missed so many shots with my old cheap 70-300 that are coming out crystal clear with my VR. Saving money is no bargain if you can't get the shot.

Set TV to 1/400 or higher and you'd be amazed what you can do without "VR".. granted, I'd love to have a stabilized lens, but you can improvise. These shots were taken from a small fishing boat, in 10-15mph winds..very rocky conditions...

What do you want (1/400)

You found me (1/640)

That's great if you have lots of light. If you don't...not so good. And it doesn't sound like Mrs BSR has the knowledge right now to be able to make those adjustments and understand what is necessary.

She's working on flying me out to teach her

 

[Jefferson the Caregiver]

I just have the lens that came with the camera.

Look on the lens there should be some kind of measurement in MM.

 

[The Flying Turtle]

If you are looking for a good Canon zoom on the cheap, look no further than the 55-250 with IS (image stabilization)

Canon 55-250

I was going to spend a lot more, but then this lens came out and got great reviews.

I will look for some pics I took using it

 

[The Flying Turtle]

I just have the lens that came with the camera.

Look on the lens there should be some kind of measurement in MM.

Most likely an 18-55

 

[Mrs. BSR]

I just have the lens that came with the camera.

Look on the lens there should be some kind of measurement in MM.

Ok, I'll have to do that when I get home.

 

[Alias]

I have the D90 with the kit lens (18-105mm DX VR Lens)

I also picked up the 35MM f/2 prime lens, I am going to see AC/DC in a few weeks and my seats are up high. I wanted to get a telephoto for it, was looking at this:

Tamron AF28-300mm VC (VC is their vibration control technology). Any good?

 

[Jefferson the Caregiver]

:

Tamron AF28-300mm VC (VC is their vibration control technology). Any good?

I don't know how their VC compares to Nikon's VR, so I have no opinion on that part.The only thing that I could see being a problem for you is the light situation. Being that its a concert and the stage will be super lit up, I think you MIGHT be okay a lot of the time but that lens typically wouldn't be very good indoors.

 

[Alias]

Can I bring a DSLR into MSG for a concert? My buddy said no professional camera equipment (he guessed that tho), I am going to be way up in the nosebleed.

 

[CrossEyed]

I have the D90 with the kit lens (18-105mm DX VR Lens)

I also picked up the 35MM f/2 prime lens, I am going to see AC/DC in a few weeks and my seats are up high. I wanted to get a telephoto for it, was looking at this:

Tamron AF28-300mm VC (VC is their vibration control technology). Any good?

Personally, I'd rather have Nikkor glass. I found the 70-300 VR for about $400.

 

[Alias]

:

Tamron AF28-300mm VC (VC is their vibration control technology). Any good?

I don't know how their VC compares to Nikon's VR, so I have no opinion on that part.The only thing that I could see being a problem for you is the light situation. Being that its a concert and the stage will be super lit up, I think you MIGHT be okay a lot of the time but that lens typically wouldn't be very good indoors.

I assume this lens would be worse:http://www.jr.com/nikon/pe/NKN_70_hy_300/

You don't find many fast telephoto lenses I imagine, so you take what you can get.

 

[Jefferson the Caregiver]

You don't find many fast telephoto lenses I imagine, so you take what you can get.

I agree with you on the first part, as far as the second part, it doesn't do you a hell of a lot of good, if you spend the cash and don't get the shot.Those lenses are not great for indoors, they are meant for outdoors when you have good light.

 

[CrossEyed]

:

Tamron AF28-300mm VC (VC is their vibration control technology). Any good?

I don't know how their VC compares to Nikon's VR, so I have no opinion on that part.The only thing that I could see being a problem for you is the light situation. Being that its a concert and the stage will be super lit up, I think you MIGHT be okay a lot of the time but that lens typically wouldn't be very good indoors.

I assume this lens would be worse:http://www.jr.com/nikon/pe/NKN_70_hy_300/

You don't find many fast telephoto lenses I imagine, so you take what you can get.

I don't know about an indoor concert, but I can tell you that this lens takes great pictures. I would (and have) highly recommend it.

 

[Alias]

Can I bring a DSLR into MSG for a concert? My buddy said no professional camera equipment (he guessed that tho), I am going to be way up in the nosebleed.

Doesn't look good...

CamerasVideo cameras, monopods, tripods, audio recording devices and cameras with telephoto or zoom lenses are not permitted inside Madison Square Garden at any time. This policy will be strictly enforced. You may bring in a disposable or 35mm camera (with no zoom or telephoto lens), however, for some events, cameras of any type and/or flash photography may be prohibited.

 

[Jefferson the Caregiver]

:

Tamron AF28-300mm VC (VC is their vibration control technology). Any good?

I don't know how their VC compares to Nikon's VR, so I have no opinion on that part.The only thing that I could see being a problem for you is the light situation. Being that its a concert and the stage will be super lit up, I think you MIGHT be okay a lot of the time but that lens typically wouldn't be very good indoors.

I assume this lens would be worse:http://www.jr.com/nikon/pe/NKN_70_hy_300/

You don't find many fast telephoto lenses I imagine, so you take what you can get.

I have the Nikon lens you posted as well, I haven't tried any concert photos yet. I am hopeful its going to work okay but I can't be sure. You should probably ask around at Flickr (join the group with that lens) and see if anyone can give you some samples.

 

[cactus]

You guys might enjoy this photo blog Daily Dose of Imagery. I've been following it for about a year and there's some great stuff. Pantagrapher will likely enjoy the focus on urban compositions.

 

[goonsquad]

Finally took some shots with my new XSi. Nothing great, just trying to figure this thing out. It's been a long while since I've used an SLR. These are all right off the camera, no retouching or color correction.

Here's a few shots from my backyard. I was really just experimenting, trying to figure out shooting with a narrow depth of field:

Fall Flowers 1

Autumn Rose Bush

And of course, a couple of my dog, who is recuperating from her surgery:

Sleepy Girl

Fresh Air

 

[pantagrapher]

The Cranberries

 

[HellToupee]

Finally took some shots with my new XSi. Nothing great, just trying to figure this thing out. It's been a long while since I've used an SLR. These are all right off the camera, no retouching or color correction.

Here's a few shots from my backyard. I was really just experimenting, trying to figure out shooting with a narrow depth of field:

Autumn Rose Bush

And of course, a couple of my dog, who is recuperating from her surgery:

Sleepy Girl

i really like these two shots. How do you like the XSi? Its on my shortlist of dslr's I'm looking at along with the Sony a300,Oly e-520,Nikon d60 and pentax k200d . Haven't used a slr since the Nikon 4004 I had ages ago

 

[Joe_Mama]

Giant balls

Can you imagine how disappointed I was?

 

[goonsquad]

Finally took some shots with my new XSi. Nothing great, just trying to figure this thing out. It's been a long while since I've used an SLR. These are all right off the camera, no retouching or color correction.

Here's a few shots from my backyard. I was really just experimenting, trying to figure out shooting with a narrow depth of field:

Autumn Rose Bush

And of course, a couple of my dog, who is recuperating from her surgery:

Sleepy Girl

i really like these two shots. How do you like the XSi? Its on my shortlist of dslr's I'm looking at along with the Sony a300,Oly e-520,Nikon d60 and pentax k200d . Haven't used a slr since the Nikon 4004 I had ages ago

Thanks! So far I like the XSi quite a bit, but keep in mind today is the first time I've used it. The image quality seems to be great and the UI pretty straight forward. The button layout on the camera body seems well thought out, everything is in proper finger reach even when looking through the viewfinder. I do have to refresh myself on the ins and outs of SLR shooting, though. I haven't done any serious shooting since college. I spent some time taking the same shots with different aperture/speed settings. The preset modes (portrait, landscape... etc) all seem to work really well, but I really want to learn to customize my shots. The kit lens (18-55 IS) seems to work well enough. I plan to put some into using it exclusively before buying other lenses.

Overall I'm really happy with my purchase. After a single afternoon of use, I'd recommend it.

 

[skrzycki]

Here's a shot I got today Tractor

 

[pantagrapher]

Changers

I got a bunch of photos at yesterday's rally. I'll post more later.

 

[arrow1]

:

Tamron AF28-300mm VC (VC is their vibration control technology). Any good?

I don't know how their VC compares to Nikon's VR, so I have no opinion on that part.The only thing that I could see being a problem for you is the light situation. Being that its a concert and the stage will be super lit up, I think you MIGHT be okay a lot of the time but that lens typically wouldn't be very good indoors.

I assume this lens would be worse:http://www.jr.com/nikon/pe/NKN_70_hy_300/

You don't find many fast telephoto lenses I imagine, so you take what you can get.

I have the Nikon lens you posted as well, I haven't tried any concert photos yet. I am hopeful its going to work okay but I can't be sure. You should probably ask around at Flickr (join the group with that lens) and see if anyone can give you some samples.

If you go to the 2.8, it will help

 

[pantagrapher]

Troops

 

[CrossEyed]

Troops

Is the army dude carrying a purse?

 

[CrossEyed]

Had a visitor this morning.

Prett gray day, so the lighting wasn't great. But it turned out OK.

 

[Wild Young Billy]

My 11 year old son was able to catch our puppy sitting still for a second while she romped through the leaves.

Layla

 

[goonsquad]

Had a visitor this morning.

Prett gray day, so the lighting wasn't great. But it turned out OK.

Lots of noise in that pic. I'm assuming it was due to a high ISO. What settings did you take the shot at?Cool shot, BTW.

 

[scottybo]

Had a visitor this morning.

Prett gray day, so the lighting wasn't great. But it turned out OK.

Lots of noise in that pic. I'm assuming it was due to a high ISO. What settings did you take the shot at?Cool shot, BTW.

Looks misty to me.

 

[snogger]

My 11 year old son was able to catch our puppy sitting still for a second while she romped through the leaves.

Layla

Awesome capture!

 

[CrossEyed]

Had a visitor this morning.

Prett gray day, so the lighting wasn't great. But it turned out OK.

Lots of noise in that pic. I'm assuming it was due to a high ISO. What settings did you take the shot at?Cool shot, BTW.

Looks misty to me.

It was a gray, misty kind of morning. It's also a little noisy because I had to crop the image a bit. He was a good distance away, so even with my 300 zoom I wasn't close enough to get a real good shot.

 

[goonsquad]

Had a visitor this morning.

Prett gray day, so the lighting wasn't great. But it turned out OK.

Lots of noise in that pic. I'm assuming it was due to a high ISO. What settings did you take the shot at?Cool shot, BTW.

Looks misty to me.

It was a gray, misty kind of morning. It's also a little noisy because I had to crop the image a bit. He was a good distance away, so even with my 300 zoom I wasn't close enough to get a real good shot.

Gotcha. Didn't mean it as criticism, BTW. I'm trying to re-learn the ins-and-outs of manual camera settings. Do you guys use the auto settings or do you manually adjust speed and aperture?

 

[snogger]

Had a visitor this morning.

Prett gray day, so the lighting wasn't great. But it turned out OK.

Lots of noise in that pic. I'm assuming it was due to a high ISO. What settings did you take the shot at?Cool shot, BTW.

Looks misty to me.

It was a gray, misty kind of morning. It's also a little noisy because I had to crop the image a bit. He was a good distance away, so even with my 300 zoom I wasn't close enough to get a real good shot.

Gotcha. Didn't mean it as criticism, BTW. I'm trying to re-learn the ins-and-outs of manual camera settings. Do you guys use the auto settings or do you manually adjust speed and aperture?

Depends on the situation. I never use Full Auto, but do use Program where you can change settings if you like. Than I look at the image and check the Histogram. Than adjust accordingly. If I'm at a football game or something where I'm using my 75-300mm Lens and know I'll be zooming in, than I'll switch to TV mode so I can adjust the shutter speed.

If I'm using a tripod for nature shots I'll setup a shot, switch to Manual Mode and than adjust both settings to my liking. That is the great thing with digital, I can take 20 of the exact same thing and than go home and see which setting I liked the best for future reference.

 

[CrossEyed]

Had a visitor this morning.

Prett gray day, so the lighting wasn't great. But it turned out OK.

Lots of noise in that pic. I'm assuming it was due to a high ISO. What settings did you take the shot at?Cool shot, BTW.

Looks misty to me.

It was a gray, misty kind of morning. It's also a little noisy because I had to crop the image a bit. He was a good distance away, so even with my 300 zoom I wasn't close enough to get a real good shot.

Gotcha. Didn't mean it as criticism, BTW. I'm trying to re-learn the ins-and-outs of manual camera settings. Do you guys use the auto settings or do you manually adjust speed and aperture?

Completely understand. I'm still learning too. When I have time to play with the settings and take multiple shots I will. But I'm not good enough yet to try that on a shot like this. I knew I'd only get a shot or two before he flew off, so it was on auto.Here's the same shot cropped differently and I played a little more with curves. Hawk

Not sure if that's any better or not.

 

[skrzycki]

Had a visitor this morning.

Prett gray day, so the lighting wasn't great. But it turned out OK.

Lots of noise in that pic. I'm assuming it was due to a high ISO. What settings did you take the shot at?Cool shot, BTW.

Looks misty to me.

It was a gray, misty kind of morning. It's also a little noisy because I had to crop the image a bit. He was a good distance away, so even with my 300 zoom I wasn't close enough to get a real good shot.

Gotcha. Didn't mean it as criticism, BTW. I'm trying to re-learn the ins-and-outs of manual camera settings. Do you guys use the auto settings or do you manually adjust speed and aperture?

Depends on the situation. I never use Full Auto, but do use Program where you can change settings if you like. Than I look at the image and check the Histogram. Than adjust accordingly. If I'm using a tripod for nature shots I'll setup a shot, switch to Manual Mode and than adjust both settings to my liking. That is the great thing with digital, I can take 20 of the exact same thing and than go home and see which setting I liked the best for future reference.

I'm not good enough to shoot exclusivly manual, but I'll try when I'm playing and have time.I generally use Program Mode, A or S.....and take a lot just like snogger does....then try to adjust accordingly for next time out.

 

[Jefferson the Caregiver]

I always shoot the manual settings. Never full auto but sometimes will use Aperture Priority or Shutter Priority. One thing about the D80 though, the meter is far from perfect, I often have to make adjustments.

 

[pantagrapher]

Guidance (Shot near Grant Park before the Obama Rally. They look posed, but I shot this from the hip as I walked by.)

Pink Lemonade

 

[snogger]

Pink Lemonade

Nice colors.

 

[pantagrapher]

Spy

 

[pantagrapher]

The Hours

 

[snogger]

The Hours

Very interesting..

 

[goonsquad]

The Hours

Very interesting..

I agree, very interesting shot. Did you crop with the camera or afterwards? If you have more of the shot I'd love to see you play with the crop a bit differently. Good stuff, man.

 

[Jefferson the Caregiver]

The Hours

Looks shady. What kind of business is in there?I'll guess car mechanic.

 

[pantagrapher]

The Hours

Very interesting..

I agree, very interesting shot. Did you crop with the camera or afterwards? If you have more of the shot I'd love to see you play with the crop a bit differently. Good stuff, man.

Thanks. I didn't crop this one. I like to focus on specific details and geometry more than entire objects (here's another recent example). I have another shot from this building that I'll probably post later today.

 

[pantagrapher]

Territorial