Photography Thread
- Thread starter Eddie_uv777
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.
This site may earn a commission from merchant links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.
I've been using and abusing Yongnuo speedlites for some time now and they've been very reliable. But I recently found an even better cheap brand in the form of Godox. Their V850 (pretty sure that's the right model number) is more powerful and it uses a single Lithium Ion battery (like a mobile phone etc) that lasts much, much longer than four AAs. You can get them on eBay for around AUS$150 a pop. Cheap as chips.
ThePhilosopher
Reason User
I've burned up too many Vivitar VH285HVs 
to deal with speedlights, they just didn't work for my style of shooting. I should have access to an assistant for all summer so I'll be breaking out my huge umbrellas (60"+) outdoors and overpowering the sun like crazy 
.
to deal with speedlights, they just didn't work for my style of shooting. I should have access to an assistant for all summer so I'll be breaking out my huge umbrellas (60"+) outdoors and overpowering the sun like crazy .
Tang
Master of Chihuahuas
Been working on my skin tones from some archive pics.
Pentax K30
Tammy 17-50 2.8
1/30s
f/2.8
ISO6400
That's a very pleasant ISO6400. No extra noise reduction added.
And here's a handheld 1/5s exposure that slightly out of focus. I promise this'll be the last out of focus shot I ever post.
Pentax K30
Tammy 17-50 2.8
1/30s
f/2.8
ISO6400
That's a very pleasant ISO6400. No extra noise reduction added.
And here's a handheld 1/5s exposure that slightly out of focus. I promise this'll be the last out of focus shot I ever post.
Yeah that's what I was looking at; then I found these 'Cactus' thingumies, $139 and built in wireless transceivers along with 580EX grade features for 1/5 of the cost.
The Godox and Yongnuo stuff is great for the money, the Cactus has me sold on their transceiver stuff.
I really dig the first and last ones. 
Before I realized it was a girl, I was wondering why that bass looked so huge. 
So...
Something showed up early.
First impressions:
Heavier than I was expecting. Not in a bad way - I like the extra weight because it feels more solid, but I might get a battery grip eventually because I like when the weight is balanced back a bit farther.
Build feels good. The zoom ring turns about as smoothly as my friend's Nikon 70-200 2.8, and the switches feel really meaty. The focus feels fine, but the throw is insanely short (doesn't really bother me). There's some noise when you shake it, probably the OS, but it feels sturdy. The lens cap feels solid. The only thing is like I've read online - the lens hood doesn't sit on super tightly. Mine isn't nearly as bad as other people make it sound - it has a bit of noticeable click into place, and doesn't seem to shake around when it's on at all, but it's not a crazy tight fit. As it is, it doesn't seem like it will be an issue - and for more than double the price, the Canon 17-55 2.8 doesn't come with a lens hood or case.
Image quality seems good. My laptop's officially dying - it should work if I keep the OS on an external drive and boot from USB, but for the time being, I don't have one, so I've only been going by my phone and the camera LCD screen. Having said that, it looks sharp at each end of the focal length spectrum so far. The background blur seems like it could be a bit edgy, but that could be the in-camera jpg sharpening for all I know. The colours seem juicy and it looks sharp, though.
It seems to focus pretty quickly - maybe as fast as my 50 1.4 or a bit faster? It doesn't seem a whole lot faster so far, but there's noticeably less hunting; it seems to be a bit more deliberate.
It literally showed up ten minutes ago. Here's one I took of Dawn's dog. He'd hide his head whenever I got close, so I pulled it out to 17mm, leaned back, and stuck it in his face without looking, and this came out. I edited it on my phone with Photogene.
Before I realized it was a girl, I was wondering why that bass looked so huge. So...
Something showed up early.
First impressions:
Heavier than I was expecting. Not in a bad way - I like the extra weight because it feels more solid, but I might get a battery grip eventually because I like when the weight is balanced back a bit farther.
Build feels good. The zoom ring turns about as smoothly as my friend's Nikon 70-200 2.8, and the switches feel really meaty. The focus feels fine, but the throw is insanely short (doesn't really bother me). There's some noise when you shake it, probably the OS, but it feels sturdy. The lens cap feels solid. The only thing is like I've read online - the lens hood doesn't sit on super tightly. Mine isn't nearly as bad as other people make it sound - it has a bit of noticeable click into place, and doesn't seem to shake around when it's on at all, but it's not a crazy tight fit. As it is, it doesn't seem like it will be an issue - and for more than double the price, the Canon 17-55 2.8 doesn't come with a lens hood or case.
Image quality seems good. My laptop's officially dying - it should work if I keep the OS on an external drive and boot from USB, but for the time being, I don't have one, so I've only been going by my phone and the camera LCD screen. Having said that, it looks sharp at each end of the focal length spectrum so far. The background blur seems like it could be a bit edgy, but that could be the in-camera jpg sharpening for all I know. The colours seem juicy and it looks sharp, though.
It seems to focus pretty quickly - maybe as fast as my 50 1.4 or a bit faster? It doesn't seem a whole lot faster so far, but there's noticeably less hunting; it seems to be a bit more deliberate.
It literally showed up ten minutes ago. Here's one I took of Dawn's dog. He'd hide his head whenever I got close, so I pulled it out to 17mm, leaned back, and stuck it in his face without looking, and this came out. I edited it on my phone with Photogene.
I started out using Cactus V4 triggers before moving to Yongnuo's YN603Cs. Far more consistent.
Godox now has a model with the Li-Ion battery and a built-in transceiver I believe. Not sure on the cost though. No doubt more than $135.
ThePhilosopher
Reason User
Is that per set or each? If that's $135 each then you're in Pocketwizard III territory.
Got out with Dan today to try out the 17-50. Here are a couple I edited quickly.
Birds on a line by philbabbey, on Flickr
Wetlands - March 2014 by philbabbey, on Flickr
Birds on a line by philbabbey, on FlickrWetlands - March 2014 by philbabbey, on FlickrI'm talking $135 per 58 guide flash with transceivers built in.
Flash and transceiver - $135.
http://cactus-image.com/rf60.html
EDIT:
I reckon I'm gunna pick one of these up for my K1000, anybody any experience of it? Tang?
Pretty damn cheap so I don't frankly care if it is a big pile of poop, but hey, figured I'd ask.
Pentax 135mm 3.5 on eBay
EDIT EDIT: oops bought it
Last edited:
My computer's logic board is dying, but I rigged it so it still works with the HD running through the USB port. Here's a Lightroom edit of a sunset from last week or so.
Sunset at Bluewater - April 2014 by philbabbey, on Flickr
Sunset at Bluewater - April 2014 by philbabbey, on Flickr Tang
Master of Chihuahuas
Rook, I love my 135 f/2.8, but I don't have any experience with the 3.5. I got mine for $20 and it's taken some of my favorite shots. Once you get used to manual everything, that is.
I found this shot on my external HDD and I don't know why I overlooked it. I took this shot about a month after I started shooting seriously and it's inspired me to try and get away from making everything perfectly symmetrical. Can I control my OCD?
I found this shot on my external HDD and I don't know why I overlooked it. I took this shot about a month after I started shooting seriously and it's inspired me to try and get away from making everything perfectly symmetrical. Can I control my OCD?
GET USED TO? MUAHAHAno but seriously it should be cool, the 2.5 version goes for like £100 here so I wasn't too fussed for the sake of a stop.
Developing all my HP5 this weekend (myself GULP) so I'm about to find out if I've been kidding myself this entire time.
Developing all my HP5 this weekend (myself GULP) so I'm about to find out if I've been kidding myself this entire time.
ThePhilosopher
Reason User
It's not terribly hard to develop B&W. You'll do just fine.
Here's one of my new favorite pick reverse-mounted 85mm:
Here's one of my new favorite pick reverse-mounted 85mm:
How do you like that pick on 8? I love the feel of the fatter picks, but for 8 string, I always end up going back to thinner picks (like .73) for the punch on the low strings.
JeffFromMtl
Уродливый, но честны
Phone pic from today of my dog going bug-eyed over a stick.
Tang
Master of Chihuahuas
Nice dog!
A few from today. I wasn't really in a shooting mindset but I took a couple of snaps that hopefully aren't half bad.
I really wanted to emphasis the contrast between the windows and the rest of the structure.
I liked the light and shadow play in this one.
So this strange. I took the shots above trying to get out of practicing street work but I still managed to get a shot that showed the kind of good time an art walk can be. I feel like there are a couple different layers to this one.
A few from today. I wasn't really in a shooting mindset but I took a couple of snaps that hopefully aren't half bad.
I really wanted to emphasis the contrast between the windows and the rest of the structure.
I liked the light and shadow play in this one.
So this strange. I took the shots above trying to get out of practicing street work but I still managed to get a shot that showed the kind of good time an art walk can be. I feel like there are a couple different layers to this one.
ThePhilosopher
Reason User
Tang, that last shot tells so many stories all at once - good job.
I really like playing with thick picks for almost everything - I'm using my HufPicks for when I play bass (my finger playing is terribly imprecise). I'll use smaller picks (3mm or smaller) if I want that sound, but for the most part I'm using 4mm+ picks for everything. I've even asked Chris if he's going be making anything in the 8-10mm range.
I do have a 1.5mm Gravity that I use for cleans playing near the bridge to give it a really punchy sound. If I were playing live I'd probably use my 3mm Gravity picks or my Winspear Daggers.
I really like playing with thick picks for almost everything - I'm using my HufPicks for when I play bass (my finger playing is terribly imprecise). I'll use smaller picks (3mm or smaller) if I want that sound, but for the most part I'm using 4mm+ picks for everything. I've even asked Chris if he's going be making anything in the 8-10mm range.
I do have a 1.5mm Gravity that I use for cleans playing near the bridge to give it a really punchy sound. If I were playing live I'd probably use my 3mm Gravity picks or my Winspear Daggers.
I got to play with a 5Dii quickly the other day when Dawn and I were meeting a guy about filming the wedding. Oh man. I didn't get to shoot much, but it felt so good in my hands - really makes me want to upgrade to a 5D whenever I do. I love the extra size and weight, and the body felt super solid. Despite never picking up that camera before, and having a different generation's button layout, everything still felt so intuitive. I'd love to pick up a used one some day to use in tandem with the 70D.
I've been working on re-editing that photo from the other day, I'm really not happy with it. I tried using the brush this time so I could turn the sharpening off and keep the bushes from looking too scary, but keep it on Dan so he didn't turn into mush. Still not thrilled with it, but I'm getting a better feel for things.
I've been working on re-editing that photo from the other day, I'm really not happy with it. I tried using the brush this time so I could turn the sharpening off and keep the bushes from looking too scary, but keep it on Dan so he didn't turn into mush. Still not thrilled with it, but I'm getting a better feel for things.
