Official Misc Photography Crew, Part IV "You're not close enough."

[Dominik]

Recently got this sexy thing
[img]http://i.imgur.com/35LAv7J.jpg[img]

The 24-70 2.8 is a real workhorse. Got mine over 6 years ago and have used it in some demanding conditions.

If I could only take one lens with me for landscapes, travel, weddings, events, etc., it would be that one. Mine is ridiculously sharp wide open and focuses quickly.

I rarely shoot landscapes any wider than 24mm and for portraits if you back up and crop a little the long end (70mm) is fine.

Here's a shot I took with it in a dust storm back in 2009. Still good as new.

[Smithers115]

Stellar. But pic of old shed...or is that a trailer? We know you can do better than that.

haha its one of my work trucks



Im standing on the beach of one of our bushcamp's I lived at for a month this summer, beautiful place. Doesnt get dark till like 11pm so you have 4 hour sunsets every night

heres a pic I took on top of Mt. Pope




and my tent!


[img][/img]

The 24-70 2.8 is a real workhorse. Got mine over 6 years ago and have used it in some demanding conditions.

If I could only take one lens with me for landscapes, travel, weddings, events, etc., it would be that one. Mine is ridiculously sharp wide open and focuses quickly.

I rarely shoot landscapes any wider than 24mm and for portraits if you back up and crop a little the long end (70mm) is fine.

Here's a shot I took with it in a dust storm back in 2009. Still good as new.

I bought it because I wanted a single lens for backacking (getting work visa's to new zealand and australia for 6 months this winter and escaping the Canadian cold...)

Plan on hiking the top half of the te araroa then getting jobs in rural Australia on a farm or something

[tunafishriot]

Resize to 2048px or 960px on the longest edge and save as png and no more than ~1mb file size and it doesn't compress.

Now that's what I call a pro tip. Thanks for sharing!

The 24-70 2.8 is a real workhorse. Got mine over 6 years ago and have used it in some demanding conditions.

If I could only take one lens with me for landscapes, travel, weddings, events, etc., it would be that one. Mine is ridiculously sharp wide open and focuses quickly.

I rarely shoot landscapes any wider than 24mm and for portraits if you back up and crop a little the long end (70mm) is fine.

Here's a shot I took with it in a dust storm back in 2009. Still good as new.

http://i.imgur.com/MjQT3df.jpg

Nice work, Dom! It's such a rare occurrence and treat to see your photos. Do you have some kind of online portfolio? I'd love to take a gander at more of your works.

On a related note, the 24-70 2.8 has instantly become my new favorite lens. I feel bad because its versatility tempts me to abandon my other lenses. At this point, the 24-70 and 100 macro covers everything I want to do...

[azurejer]

The 24-70 2.8 is a real workhorse. Got mine over 6 years ago and have used it in some demanding conditions.

If I could only take one lens with me for landscapes, travel, weddings, events, etc., it would be that one. Mine is ridiculously sharp wide open and focuses quickly.

I rarely shoot landscapes any wider than 24mm and for portraits if you back up and crop a little the long end (70mm) is fine.

Here's a shot I took with it in a dust storm back in 2009. Still good as new.

[url=http://i.imgur[/url]

On spread, but wicked shot.

100% accurate for the Canon 24-70 as well. I shot my 24-70L for everything - outdoor raining concerts from the press pit, fashion shoots, winter cold, speedboating - very well put together. The MkII, IMO, is a game-changing lense for zoom users - I've always been of the opinion that Canon/Nikon/Fuji was all the same ish, different image-making tools - but the 24-70L II would make me change systems, it is that good.

Here's a few more recent shots, haven't been around much to post.



Bridal party - bride/maids, groom+groomsmen



Me and my 24-70L II in action

[cunfewzed]

Indian weddings have become my favorite Good stuff J

[Boakey]

Recently got this sexy thing

Not sure if I'm more impressed by the lens or the beard...

[LieutenantGains]

Girl with little experience on Model Mayhem (not published or with an agency or anything) asked me if I wanted to shoot, I ask if she wants to do TFP, she says nope $100/hour with 2hr minimum, basically a Playboy model rate. Awfukbye.

[VmissileX]

Girl with little experience on Model Mayhem (not published or with an agency or anything) asked me if I wanted to shoot, I ask if she wants to do TFP, she says nope $100/hour with 2hr minimum, basically a Playboy model rate. Awfukbye.

If she asked you if you wanted to shoot, why do you have to pay her?

She asked you, and you must be obviously at a skill/talent level that she likes your work and your photos of her would do well in her portfolio. Therefore she should be paying you.

[DoubleChub]

poverty pic, thinking of going back when i get my new lens

[DoubleChub]

one more


am i ruining it in editing or do they look "ok"

[phailboat]

poverty pic, thinking of going back when i get my new lens

where is this? thinkin about goin there this weekend just to take pics

[DoubleChub]

where is this? thinkin about goin there this weekend just to take pics

weaver lake, BC

[KRANE]

one more
[IMG]http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h180/chodygt/Mobile%20Uploads/28df4e2a-4728-45e7-8de9-5f06b9e07538.jpg[IMG]

am i ruining it in editing or do they look "ok"

Maybe a bit high on the exposure, but good composition nonetheless.

[BlueSasquatch]

Awesome looking dog bud, you got some great shots of him, my childhood dog passed away a few years back, now that I have developed photography skills I am pretty bummed I don't have a single good shot of her, just crappy phone pictures. Have a year old German Shepard / Collie mix, been working on getting good shots, but it is tricky, dogs move quick, are random and my camera is slow at focusing and taking pictures, I am using a few tricks but haven't landed anything solid yet.


Reps for misc hat.

The biggest difference between color and b&w photography is how you deal with contrast. In B&W, some colors look very similiar or even identical, so when converting a color to B&W, it may look flat. There are several ways to deal with B&W contrast in light room, so just keep in mind contrast. Since BW contrast is heavily dependent on color contrast, temp and tint is something you want to pay attention to.

My work flow after basic flow,
Convert to BW.
Adjust Temp
Adjust saturation of specific colors
... decreasing blue will increase the contrast between clouds and the sky.
... adjusting yellows will create contrast in stone
... adjusting greens will create contrast in different trees
... adjusting oranges and reds will create contrast in a brilliant sky

Spot adjust
Dodge and burn if needed to improve contrast.

Still learning myself and trying to nail bw.

(at work so can't upload color version now)

Thank you. I really like the lens, and I actually like the manual aperture of the rokinon as well. I took some close ups but didn't like them as much.

Awesome, thanks for the detailed tips/information, I appreciate it. How do you know what shots will be better in B&W? Ones with large natural contrast differences?

The 24-70 2.8 is a real workhorse. Got mine over 6 years ago and have used it in some demanding conditions.

If I could only take one lens with me for landscapes, travel, weddings, events, etc., it would be that one. Mine is ridiculously sharp wide open and focuses quickly.

Good to know, I am wanting to start my lens collection, I mainly hike, landscape shots and animal shots are my meat and potatoes, does this thing work well for animals? What kind of zoom does it have? I have no idea how to tell these things.

I bought it because I wanted a single lens for backacking (getting work visa's to new zealand and australia for 6 months this winter and escaping the Canadian cold...)

Plan on hiking the top half of the te araroa then getting jobs in rural Australia on a farm or something

Wood hike with/10
Looking forward to some sick shots from your travels bro, Imma ask you the same thing as Dom, much luck with wildlife photography and this lens?

Awesome shot, I love photos where the subject of focus is not in the middle but off in a corner or side, allowing for good depth in the photo, I try to do similar things when possible. Very clear photo too, solid stuff.

poverty pic, thinking of going back when i get my new lens

I agree with KRONK there, it is set up nice, has great potential, but it seems over exposed, which could be addressed in processing, or when the shot is taken if you have time to adjust. I never manage to find a lake still enough to do this with, always a bit of wind, especially when you get up in elevation. :-/





Looking to plan a Thanksgiving trip from IL to IA to SD to CO (Home-GF's parents - Mt Rushmore and all those national parks - my parents home) does anyone live in the South Dakota area or have visited that would recommend spots/areas to visit? Mix of outdoorsy adventures and more laid back things, looking at a full day, maybe two or one and a half in this area, not a ton of time but it is "on the way" home for us, so we don't have a ton of time. I plan on researching it to a good depth but locals can typically give better tips of places to visit than some tourism guide.

[BlueSasquatch]

Fuck me sideways, that lens is 2 grand?!

[DoubleChub]

I agree with KRONK there, it is set up nice, has great potential, but it seems over exposed, which could be addressed in processing, or when the shot is taken if you have time to adjust. I never manage to find a lake still enough to do this with, always a bit of wind, especially when you get up in elevation. :-/

its a cellphone shot edited in photobucket. i still havent figured out how to get lightroom 5 to work with my XP, i have high hopes going back with the dslr on raw and full options in LR

[acrawlingchaos]

Awesome, thanks for the detailed tips/information, I appreciate it. How do you know what shots will be better in B&W? Ones with large natural contrast differences?

Well, I think any photos that is good in color can be good in black and white. It just takes a few extra steps to think about how to process (either with color filters) or digitally.

Good to know, I am wanting to start my lens collection, I mainly hike, landscape shots and animal shots are my meat and potatoes, does this thing work well for animals? What kind of zoom does it have? I have no idea how to tell these things.

Looking forward to some sick shots from your travels bro, Imma ask you the same thing as Dom, much luck with wildlife photography and this lens?

If you are using DSLRs, get rid of the term zoom, and think in terms of focal length. A 24 - 70mm is 3x zoom (24 goes into 70 3 times). A prime lens is a single focal length with no zoom. How close you get to the subject is a matter of focal range.

Here is a comparison of focal ranges... (35mm is approximate to human eyesight). 70mm would never get you close to the wildlife... unless the subject is 10 feet away.

Fuck me sideways, that lens is 2 grand?!

I have the canon 24-70L and found it used for $1000. You can find third party lenses that are much more inexpensive.

Figure out what you want to do, and then figure out what lenses you need. If wildlife and landscape are your thing, an Ultra wide and telephoto are what you want.

The Rokinon 14 was ~325'
The Sigma 150-500mm was ~850.
Both new.

[pieceofdebri79]

Fuck me sideways, that lens is 2 grand?!

Good sh*t ain't cheap; cheap sh*t ain't good. (Not entirely true, but you get the idea.) As for knowing when to go B&W, if the colors don't add anything, go black and white. That's how it is for me anyways.

[VmissileX]

cheap sh*t can be pretty good nowadays

[Avalanche3319]

If you are using DSLRs, get rid of the term zoom, and think in terms of focal length. A 24 - 70mm is 3x zoom (24 goes into 70 3 times). A prime lens is a single focal length with no zoom. How close you get to the subject is a matter of focal range.

Here is a comparison of focal ranges... (35mm is approximate to human eyesight). 70mm would never get you close to the wildlife... unless the subject is 10 feet away.

Said much better than I could, but so much this. I have a 400mm lens that I use for wildlife and still find it hard to get close enough for really good shots. Many wildlife photographers use 500 or 600mm lenses with teleconverters that magnify the focal length by a factor of 1.4x or 2x.

[BlueSasquatch]

Said much better than I could, but so much this. I have a 400mm lens that I use for wildlife and still find it hard to get close enough for really good shots. Many wildlife photographers use 500 or 600mm lenses with teleconverters that magnify the focal length by a factor of 1.4x or 2x.

Interdasting. . Can someone explain Teleconverters to me? Are they pricey, I imagine they are.

My current P510 has a 42x Zoom, now what would that be in Lens talk? 400mm? Just so I can get an idea of what to expect.

Well, I think any photos that is good in color can be good in black and white. It just takes a few extra steps to think about how to process (either with color filters) or digitally.

If you are using DSLRs, get rid of the term zoom, and think in terms of focal length. A 24 - 70mm is 3x zoom (24 goes into 70 3 times). A prime lens is a single focal length with no zoom. How close you get to the subject is a matter of focal range.

Here is a comparison of focal ranges... (35mm is approximate to human eyesight). 70mm would never get you close to the wildlife... unless the subject is 10 feet away.

[img]http://noelombrog.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/fields-of-view_tokina.jpg[img]

I have the canon 24-70L and found it used for $1000. You can find third party lenses that are much more inexpensive.

Figure out what you want to do, and then figure out what lenses you need. If wildlife and landscape are your thing, an Ultra wide and telephoto are what you want.

The Rokinon 14 was ~325'
The Sigma 150-500mm was ~850.
Both new.

Unbelievably helpful. I can get my hands on a used D80, I can't find it in the mess that is my gf's storage ROOM, but it had a lens with it, nothing amazing but a good one I was told, not sure what it is yet, but we were handed down this camera/lens combo because of the inability for newer lenses to work with this body is my understanding.

[Avalanche3319]

Interdasting. . Can someone explain Teleconverters to me? Are they pricey, I imagine they are.

About $500 for an OEM TC. The biggest problem is using one limits your maximum aperture. Using a 1.4x you lose one stop and 2x you lose 2 stops. For a lens like mine which is wide open at 400mm at F5.6 it really hurts the speed of the lens. I'd only be able to shoot at f6.3 or f8 respectively. Also many lenses (like mine) you lose autofocus with a TC. Here's a good page of information: http://digital-photography-school.co...-on-your-dslr/

[Dominik]

Nice work, Dom! It's such a rare occurrence and treat to see your photos. Do you have some kind of online portfolio? I'd love to take a gander at more of your works.

On a related note, the 24-70 2.8 has instantly become my new favorite lens. I feel bad because its versatility tempts me to abandon my other lenses. At this point, the 24-70 and 100 macro covers everything I want to do...

Appreciate it T, will send you a link.

re: 24-70, some might say the middle of its range is on the "boring" side but like you said it's incredibly versatile and both the Canon and Nikon versions are very well constructed so you can always rely on it.

100% accurate for the Canon 24-70 as well. I shot my 24-70L for everything - outdoor raining concerts from the press pit, fashion shoots, winter cold, speedboating - very well put together. The MkII, IMO, is a game-changing lense for zoom users - I've always been of the opinion that Canon/Nikon/Fuji was all the same ish, different image-making tools - but the 24-70L II would make me change systems, it is that good.

JC, great work as usual.

Canon's 24-70 2.8L II is definitely the benchmark right now. All it needs is some updated sensor technology to get even more out of it.

[Dominik]

Girl with little experience on Model Mayhem (not published or with an agency or anything) asked me if I wanted to shoot, I ask if she wants to do TFP, she says nope $100/hour with 2hr minimum, basically a Playboy model rate. Awfukbye.

Tell her "Sure, $100/hr sounds reasonable. My rate is $200/hr so I'll give you a 50% discount."

[ShoryuBrah]

Looking to plan a Thanksgiving trip from IL to IA to SD to CO (Home-GF's parents - Mt Rushmore and all those national parks - my parents home) does anyone live in the South Dakota area or have visited that would recommend spots/areas to visit? Mix of outdoorsy adventures and more laid back things, looking at a full day, maybe two or one and a half in this area, not a ton of time but it is "on the way" home for us, so we don't have a ton of time. I plan on researching it to a good depth but locals can typically give better tips of places to visit than some tourism guide.

Definitely hit up the badlands. Even spend a night or two camping there if you can. All my recent pictures in this thread were taken there. Also there's a cool t rex on a leash statue on one of the highways. Makes for a cool snap shot. You have to off to the shoulder to get the shot.

http://flic.kr/p/oxARp6 is my shot (on mobile, can't embed)

I have the canon 24-70L and found it used for $1000. You can find third party lenses that are much more inexpensive.

The version I you can definitely find for under a grand used. Version II is still pretty pricey, but seems worth it IMO. It's worth noting that Tamron makes a $1000 24-70 now that IMO rivals the Canon version II easily. I would buy that one if I was in the market for one.

[VmissileX]

i'd love to see your work too dom. You seem like a knowledged person.

[FunkDaddy]

If she asked you if you wanted to shoot, why do you have to pay her?

She asked you, and you must be obviously at a skill/talent level that she likes your work and your photos of her would do well in her portfolio. Therefore she should be paying you.

If you spend any sort of time on MM you'll find plenty of models will inquire about a shoot, plan something out then quote rates.

I make it clear right off the bat whether I'll do the shoot in trade (which will 99% of the time include nude work) or if it's a project where I'm expecting that they pay me. I have no need to pay models as I don't have clients paying me nor do I sell prints.

An inexperienced model quoting rates, just tells me they are looking to make a quick buck.

[VmissileX]

If you spend any sort of time on MM you'll find plenty of models will inquire about a shoot, plan something out then quote rates.

I make it clear right off the bat whether I'll do the shoot in trade (which will 99% of the time include nude work) or if it's a project where I'm expecting that they pay me. I have no need to pay models as I don't have clients paying me nor do I sell prints.

An inexperienced model quoting rates, just tells me they are looking to make a quick buck.

I've been doing alot of reading into this as i've been looking at meetup and venues like that to network with other photographers/ learn the trade + start shooting people. Not much into MM, and don't plan on for a while

I understand models gotta pay their bills and all, but in gains situation that seems like an auto ignore almost. If gains asked for the model for a specific style he was going for, and he/she is the only model that can go for that i understand a payment should be required...even atleast a meal and travel. But that isn't the situation.

In your case that makes sense, you aren't profiting off the work and neither is he/she.

From the discussions i read on google searches, sometimes it seems photographers are the money people. They buy everything, pay for the model and the gear and the model has to pay to pose pretty.
Ok , i'm generalizing and its probably not true, but i guess thats what i'm hearing.

[LieutenantGains]

A couple more recents since I had time to edit last night


Via san Pietro All'Orto - Milan, Italy by garyhebding, on Flickr


Via A Manzoni - Milan, Italy by garyhebding, on Flickr

[azurejer]

The version I you can definitely find for under a grand used. Version II is still pretty pricey, but seems worth it IMO. It's worth noting that Tamron makes a $1000 24-70 now that IMO rivals the Canon version II easily. I would buy that one if I was in the market for one.

I have to disagree. Though the Tamron actually is advantageous due to it's form of image stabilization (VC or w/e it's called), I tried both it and the Mark IIL somewhat extensively before purchase; the Tamron does great in Good to Average light, but when things get darker, it struggles - especially with off-center focus points. This becomes an issue for me during both events as well as fashion shoots when utilizing a ND filter; since sometimes I want to be shooting wide open, I don't have a lot of focal margain for error, and the Tamron missed too often to make it worth the price savings.