The Photo Snob Thread

sikpuppyonglory

Likes Dirt
The 'twin lens kits' are just a more economical way of offering the typical consumer a solid focal length range. Such a kit is effectively covered by your Tamron lens.

I think the AF-S 50mm f/1.8 should suit your needs well. The AF-D style lenses operate off the screw drive built into the camera and whilst they are not slow by any means (well, at least for smaller primes), the AF-S system is much faster. Should be adequate enough for shooting moving bikes and the likes.

The only question from there is focal length - as I said, if you find 50mm too long, the 35mm f/1.8 is very similar and potentially more 'useful' (as a 'normal' lens) on your D70s.
thankyou for the input there ango, much appreciate it.
 
Ok, I need more help with Vanbar. To get my photo printed, do I have to do the online thing where I assume you upload it then go and pick it up, or can I just walk on in and get it printed then?
 

Drew.

Eats Squid
So,

I haven't shot for ages, and I need to get off my ass and get back into it. I want to get some new lightstands for my speedlights. I need to know, does anyone know of a lightstand head with a hotshoe built in?! Im so sick of using hotshoe adapters on top of lightstand heads. It's just a stack of junk i get fed up with dealing with!

HELP.
 

vtwiz

Likes Dirt
I'm not against the HDSLR movement, as I own a GH2, but, the Cons far outweigh the Pros.
Not if you know what your doing! And thats nothing personal against you but if you pick up a DSLR for video and dont have much video experience then they are pretty hard to handle. If you know what your doing however, then the pros FAR out way the cons.
 

Rendog

Likes Bikes and Dirt
Not if you know what your doing! And thats nothing personal against you but if you pick up a DSLR for video and dont have much video experience then they are pretty hard to handle. If you know what your doing however, then the pros FAR out way the cons.
Well, that's where you're wrong...

Aliasing, Moire, Rolling Shutter, Jello, Resolving around 500 lines, no XLR, no clean HDMI, Ungradable compression, PP limitations... I can go on...?

I know exactly what I am doing behind the camera, and HDSLR footage looks great, for what it is. The newer model's coming out now A77, GH2 have all far exceeded what the 5dMkii is capable of but so far no other company has released a FF camera, which is so dearly beloved by all those idiotic indie film makers.
 

Oliver.

Liquid Productions
Well, that's where you're wrong...

Aliasing, Moire, Rolling Shutter, Jello, Resolving around 500 lines, no XLR, no clean HDMI, Ungradable compression, PP limitations... I can go on...?

I know exactly what I am doing behind the camera, and HDSLR footage looks great, for what it is. The newer model's coming out now A77, GH2 have all far exceeded what the 5dMkii is capable of but so far no other company has released a FF camera, which is so dearly beloved by all those idiotic indie film makers.
You clearly haven't been around in the video world very long.

The GH2, from what I can gather, is nowhere near something like a 5D2. Certainly, it has all the drawbacks that you mention in your previous sentence.

These limitations are few compared to the huge advantages that the current benchmark VDSLR's offer. Before VDSLR's, sensors were limited in size to the dimensions of a thumbnail, had horrendous noise and compression issues, terrible DOF control, and IQ was below iPhone camera level.

One cannot expect a VDSLR to have the capabilites of RED, or film. Nor do I imagine that you have the...errr....affording capability....of ever owning a RED. I am therefore surprised that you're sticking your neck out and saying how limited VDSLR's are.

A FF camera, although not an absolute requirement, has huge advantages over 1.6, "Micro four thirds" etc.
You can use cinema lenses more easily (as their length does not vary as with the smaller sensors)
The physical dimensions of a FF sensor allow more separation between pixels (less pixel density), meaning a cleaner image, better dynamic range etc etc.

Perhaps those 'idiotic indie film makers' have some merits to their decisions you have not yet considered (nor seem to be old enough or capable enough of considering).

This is of course a discussion on technicalities. Unfortunately the real issue that a lot of individuals who "think" they are capable filmmakers have, is that they "think" they are good filmmakers. A camera has very little to do with ability. I have seen beautiful short films shot on iPhone cameras, that put RED films to shame.
 

Rendog

Likes Bikes and Dirt
Now you're just making assumptions, for no apparent reason... and all false.

I don't hate DSLRs, they've helped revolutionize camera companies.
 

vtwiz

Likes Dirt
Well, that's where you're wrong...

Aliasing, Moire, Rolling Shutter, Jello, Resolving around 500 lines, no XLR, no clean HDMI, Ungradable compression, PP limitations... I can go on...?
You can work around all of these. Sorry, but there are plenty of well graded productions out there shot on DSLRs. Again, if you know what your doing................... Many Hollywood productions use DSLR's. Yes, they are not ideal but for what most people use them for they are more than god enough. If you are using one for sports/ fast action MTB then yes, there are better cameras by far.

GH2 is probably the best DSLR (if you can call it that) at the moment for video.

Right, enough of the photo thread hijack then??
 
Last edited:

kathiemt

Likes Bikes
Ok, I need more help with Vanbar. To get my photo printed, do I have to do the online thing where I assume you upload it then go and pick it up, or can I just walk on in and get it printed then?
You can upload to most photography print places these days and then go pick it up the following day. Or take it and get it in an hour or so.
 
You can upload to most photography print places these days and then go pick it up the following day. Or take it and get it in an hour or so.
Thanks for your help. I just took it in on a memory stick. The guys were super helpful with paper choice and then wrapping it up in a million plastic bags so I could walk/tram back to the station in Melbourne's horrid weather.
 

Xplor

Likes Dirt
I got my hands on a Canon 70-200mm IS f/2.8 today! Got it at an amazing price of . I wasn't really looking to buy this lens but an opportunity popped up and it was a good price so i couldn't resist. Though i don't really take many photos where i need to zoom that much, allot of my shots are between 20mm - 70mm at the moment but im just getting into photography.

I know its a superb lens but should i sell it and get something like the 24-105mm instead or similar? Or keep the lens and as i develop my photography skills i appreciate this lens much more and gain allot of use from it. Im on a cropped body so i find it just too zoomed in for alot of my shots (portraits) .

Opinions please!
 
Last edited:
Top