The "Post a Picture You Took" thread

[Patricio Swayze 17058]

10 minutes ago, El Diablo said:

Is flying one of those in an urban area a safety issue? 

I honestly don't know a ton about it, but built into the software (I assume it is coupled with google maps or similar), there are no fly zones.  So you obviously can not fly it close to an airport.  It simply will not allow you to.  When we flew it near downtown, it limited the altitude in that particular area to about 900 ft.  On the edge of the area of downtown where we were, it also ran into a no fly zone, and I assume it had to do with a federal building in the area.

[El Diablo 4232]

9 hours ago, Patricio Swayze said:

I honestly don't know a ton about it, but built into the software (I assume it is coupled with google maps or similar), there are no fly zones.  So you obviously can not fly it close to an airport.  It simply will not allow you to.  When we flew it near downtown, it limited the altitude in that particular area to about 900 ft.  On the edge of the area of downtown where we were, it also ran into a no fly zone, and I assume it had to do with a federal building in the area.

I really know nothing about them but I had seen the topic discussed on a photographers forum but don't have enough info to have an opinion. From what I could gather there are issues with safety but fortunately there haven't been any incidents yet. There are 2 sets of rules I think, one for amateurs and another for certified pilots but if I read it right you cannot operate a drone over moving/occupied vehicles or over unprotected persons no matter what. Also some restrictions about proximity to buildings. They can take some fantastic shots that could not be gotten any other way really so I still don't have an opinion, lol. 

[Fire Jack Chevigny 938]

Nice! I have a similar shot I posted awhile back in this thread. Well, similar only because of the truck.

So a friend of mine is in town and we went to go shoot today. Not much success with abandoned places, but he brought his drone and he got some cool shots of downtown Houston and a few other things. He let me fly it and take a few photos. Now I am contemplating. Buying one myself. I question how much I would use it, but it’s a new perspective for me.

I came across this one on a drive through Arkansas a couple weekends ago. This one was a few feet from it.

[triplehorn 2664]

took a hike this morning on an old volcano 

 

 

 

[Anton Chigurh 3338]

took a hike this morning on an old volcano 
 
 
 

Incredible! Where at?

[triplehorn 2664]

5 minutes ago, Anton Chigurh said:

Incredible! Where at?

 

Broken Top

 

[El Diablo 4232]

So I'm thinking that instead of buying another lens I might instead buy a different digital camera body, I'm seeing that there are limitations to the entry level model I bought. Just out of curiosity I watched a video on the Nikon D500 and holy shit, the layout and controls are significantly different from my D3500. Grumble, grumble, clouds blah blah blah... I guess learning a different body wouldn't be impossible but I was hoping that they would at least be similar in operation but nope! Most everything that I do onscreen on mine has a button for that function on the D500. So many buttons! And most are on the side of the camera where mine has none. fml. I'd have to retrain all of the muscle memory I've spent months working on.

[naija 3066]

if you are into wildlife and birding, 200mm is not long enough for what you will need/want eventually.

the 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses are mostly event, portrait, landscape lenses

if you just started shooting digital again, almost any entry-level camera is good enough. you really have to honestly appraise your skills and what you want to get out of it before upgrading a body. also consider that the D500, while still Nikon's premier APS-C camera, is not exactly new anymore. I don't know what Nikon's plans for DSLR is going to be with their entry into mirrorless, but I would be surprised if they were done with updating them.

Edited August 18, 2019 by naija

[DougO 5269]

4 hours ago, El Diablo said:

So I'm thinking that instead of buying another lens I might instead buy a different digital camera body, I'm seeing that there are limitations to the entry level model I bought. Just out of curiosity I watched a video on the Nikon D500 and holy shit, the layout and controls are significantly different from my D3500. Grumble, grumble, clouds blah blah blah... I guess learning a different body wouldn't be impossible but I was hoping that they would at least be similar in operation but nope! Most everything that I do onscreen on mine has a button for that function on the D500. So many buttons! And most are on the side of the camera where mine has none. fml. I'd have to retrain all of the muscle memory I've spent months working on.

Try the D7500 which has the same sensor as the D500, same AF IQ, most of the same options, shoots 8fps for action. I just got one to use as a backup/side piece for football and wildlife, factory refurb for $599 at B&H. 90 day Nikon warranty and a less fancy white box, but you get the charger, battery, strap and stuff with it.

 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1380709-REG/nikon_1581b_d7500_dslr_camera_body.html

 

It also has a control layout that is probably more similar to your camera, with the big dual dial on the left side.

 

Edited August 18, 2019 by DougO

[El Diablo 4232]

That's a good deal on a camera that was listed at $2,000 just a few years ago. I watched a side by side comparison of the D7500 and D500 on Polins youtube channel and there are some differences that caught my attention in favor of the D500 but I'm not really sure how much I would benefit from them at this stage. Thing is, I already to some degree feel like I've outgrown the D3500 or probably more accurately see things that are "would be nice to haves" and do not want to repeat that. I see used D500's with fairly low shutter counts running in the 8-900 dollar range on Ebay but there again, you don't really know what you're getting when you buy from some fucker who's 1,800 miles away. And honestly, I kind of like the DX format. 

[Anton Chigurh 3338]

There is nothing inherently wrong with crop sensor, of course. The exposure value doesn’t change, but the full frame is about a stop “ahead” at all points.

 

Meaning, if you buy and use an F/2.8 lens on a crop sensor, it gives you the same aperture look as approximately an F/4 on a full frame, since you have to apply the crop factor to the aperture too, not just the focal length. Crop factor of a DX Nikon is 1.5, so F/2.8 x 1.5 = F/4.2. So while I am over here using a Canon 5DIV with a 24-105 F/4, it’s like using the equivalent of a 40-170 F/2.8.

 

You can achieve the same look on both, until you get to the extreme wide aperture end. If I went and bought a Canon 85 F/1.2 to use for portraits, in order to create the same shot as F/1.2 on a Canon full frame, I’d need a 53mm lens with an aperture of F/0.75 to use on a crop sensor body.

 

This also works for ISO, though it’s not as exact since sensors are different than each other and it’s not strictly physically based (and ISO standards aren’t actually standardized at all). It’s also why many cameras are now ISO-invariant.

 

It would go the same way from a full frame to medium format. Medium format is about a stop ahead of full frame.

 

There is value in crop sensors. They can be made much smaller. Unless you need the benefits of using a lower base ISO all the time (which is now less and less important), or needing a super wide aperture, you can get the equivalent shots on a crop sensor.

 

I have posted this before, but it’s the best explanation of it I have ever seen.

 

 

 

 

[naija 3066]

if you like and want to stick with the DX format, I would encourage you to look at Fuji X series when it comes time to upgrade

the entire is built specifically for that sensor, so you avoid the games you get with Nikon, where you have to buy FX lenses to use on DX just to get certain focal lengths.

one con is that Fuji can be expensive compared to the NIkon DX lineup, but it is expensive for a reason. the glass is superb.

Also, using mirrorless would help you with the exposure issues, and Fuji JPGs are the best in the business, cutting down on postprocessing.

another con is that Fuji users tend to behave like a cult

[Anton Chigurh 3338]

There is nothing inherently wrong with crop sensor, of course. The exposure value doesn’t change, but the full frame is about a stop “ahead” at all points.
 
Meaning, if you buy and use an F/2.8 lens on a crop sensor, it gives you the same aperture look as approximately an F/4 on a full frame, since you have to apply the crop factor to the aperture too, not just the focal length. Crop factor of a DX Nikon is 1.5, so F/2.8 x 1.5 = F/4.2. So while I am over here using a Canon 5DIV with a 24-105 F/4, it’s like using the equivalent of a 40-170 F/2.8.
 
You can achieve the same look on both, until you get to the extreme wide aperture end. If I went and bought a Canon 85 F/1.2 to use for portraits, in order to create the same shot as F/1.2 on a Canon full frame, I’d need a 53mm lens with an aperture of F/0.75 to use on a crop sensor body.
 
This also works for ISO, though it’s not as exact since sensors are different than each other and it’s not strictly physically based (and ISO standards aren’t actually standardized at all). It’s also why many cameras are now ISO-invariant.
 
It would go the same way from a full frame to medium format. Medium format is about a stop ahead of full frame.
 
There is value in crop sensors. They can be made much smaller. Unless you need the benefits of using a lower base ISO all the time (which is now less and less important), or needing a super wide aperture, you can get the equivalent shots on a crop sensor.
 
I have posted this before, but it’s the best explanation of it I have ever seen.
 
 

 
 

So I guess I didn’t post the video. Sorry. Here.

[Anton Chigurh 3338]

I like Fuji as well, though I haven’t used one myself. Their jpgs are great as naija said, but their RAWs are difficult to work with.

Also, the medium format GFX series is ridiculous.

[naija 3066]

For Fuji RAW files, use Capture One or the Iridient Developer/Transformer.

[naija 3066]

yes, the GFX is incredible. also uses Bayer instead of Xtrans so working with those RAW files is easier.

I want this lens in a bad way

[triplehorn 2664]

RIP Ced 

 

[DougO 5269]

I have both DX and FX bodies. I try to avoid buying exclusively DX lenses so I don't have to worry about which to use with what and their limitations. But sometimes the DX lenses are the cheaper, better good option. There seem to be more choices, more affordable and practical for DX bodies, though usually at the expense of maximum aperture.

There are good reasons for choosing DX for what you're shooting. I spent more money than I ever had on a camera when I purchased my first "full frame" DSLR, the D800. I shoot a lot of football and games were being scheduled mostly at night or indoors and I needed better high ISO quality. Problem is the camera sucked ass at following focus because of all the viewing real estate it had to process with more loosely cropped subjects with the same 300mm lens. The relatively smaller image of the focus subject in the viewfinder also made it more difficult to compose and follow, and crop modes with an even smaller selected area were no help. Nikon had prolonged the wait for a D300 replacement for far too long and it ended up biting me in the ass. I ended up with a lot of nice clean high ISO backgrounds I had to crop out of poorly focused action images shot at a shutter frame rate that is too slow for grown-ass-man sports, and at a cost that also screwed my bottom line.

I find the DX D500, the eventual replacement for the D300, and the FX D750 do a remarkably similar job in low light. But the D750 far too often left me with loose photos that were rarely useful with heavier cropping, which made them look dirtier anyway. That's why I recently bought a D7500 DX body to use as my side piece for sports and wildlife. I find myself using DX bodies the vast majority of the time.

They are all tools. Use what you need. Sometimes a small crescent wrench works better for the job than a giant monkey wrench.

Edited August 19, 2019 by DougO

[El Diablo 4232]

@DougO thanks for your thoughts. I went to the Ferrell Center yesterday just for shits and grins. They had a volleyball scrimmage and it was free so I figured I'd give shooting in there a whirl. I thought I was doing alright until I got home and looked at what I had. When I first got there I took a few test shots, checked the histogram and the image on the back of the camera and they seemed passable. I got home and pulled the files into Nikon Capture NX-D and ugh. The light blond colored wood of the court, the dark seating areas of the arena... That floor is almost the exact same color as a white girls legs. They damn near disappear. I probably could have gotten down on the floor to shoot at eye level but didn't. Navigating stairs for me is a nightmare already and I did good to get down as far as I did. And vball is boring to shoot. After you get a few pics they all start to look the same. Also hard to track. The ball goes wayyyy up and then moves so fast when it's hit... hard to get a grip on just what to shoot. I tried to lock the focus on the white tab across the top of the net and then fire like Rambo when there was a play at the net. I haven't really looked thru all of what I shot yet but what I did look at was garbage. Also tried getting shots of them serving. I had one shot I thought was probably pretty good but I haven't looked at it on the computer yet. If it turned out like what I have seen though it's going to be shit too. I may post some up just so we can all laugh.

[El Diablo 4232]

Here's one, this is pretty typical, most look a lot like this. EDIT: This was shot at f2.8, 1/640 and ISO 1600 using the 85mm fixed lens. I don't know if there are things that can be done in processing to make them look better or not. That whole aspect of digital photography is just foreign to me.

 

Edited August 19, 2019 by El Diablo

[El Diablo 4232]

Here's another. Original and cropped/doctored shot. Shat was taken at f2.8, 1/1000, ISO3200. Ball and net top seem to be pretty well in focus but girly-poos one hand is blurry as fuck and the rest of her ain't real sharp either. I'm not used to shooting people playing sports, all I've been doing is shooting horses, is that motion blur or just out of focus? If I understand right the DX at f2.8 will have the DoF of a 35mm f4.2, right?

[Patricio Swayze 17058]

Took this with my friend's drone.  I am pretty sure I will end up getting one soon.  This is "The House of the Century" south of Houston.  Read more about it here:  https://www.architectmagazine.com/design/buildings/ant-farms-ruin-of-the-century_o

Edited August 21, 2019 by Patricio Swayze

[El Diablo 4232]

@DougO the green tint to everything is bullshit. I thought I'd be able to take it out. Best I could find to do was adjust the green channel in the levels and curves. Still not sure how to do a WB preset. 

 

[Anton Chigurh 3338]

[mention=378]DougO[/mention] the green tint to everything is bullshit. I thought I'd be able to take it out. Best I could find to do was adjust the green channel in the levels and curves. Still not sure how to do a WB preset. 
 

I think it’s time for a real photo processing program for you! Are you shooting in RAW or not? I can’t remember.

[DougO 5269]

It's not a great place to shoot for color balance. At least they aren't wearing chartreuse.

[El Diablo 4232]

32 minutes ago, Anton Chigurh said:

 

I think it’s time for a real photo processing program for you! Are you shooting in RAW or not? I can’t remember.

 

Yeah, shooting in RAW. 

Two things going on this weekend: A wood turners symposium which might have some opportunities for some artsy object/artisan photos and DRAG BOAT RACES! VRRROOOM!! BABES!!! FUCKERS HAULING ASS AND THROWING UP BIG ASS ROOSTER TAILS!!! BE THERE! BE THERE! BE THERE!!! 

[Anton Chigurh 3338]

Yeah, shooting in RAW. 
Two things going on this weekend: A wood turners symposium which might have some opportunities for some artsy object/artisan photos and DRAG BOAT RACES! VRRROOOM!! BABES!!! FUCKERS HAULING ASS AND THROWING UP BIG ASS ROOSTER TAILS!!! BE THERE! BE THERE! BE THERE!!! 

On the Brazos? I almost went to that once.

[El Diablo 4232]

7 hours ago, Anton Chigurh said:

 

On the Brazos? I almost went to that once.

 

It's a spectacle. Dan Pastorini raced there years ago, if you know who he is. I've been going to them off and on over the years since I was a teen. Lots of gasoline and alcohol fueled eye candy.

[El Diablo 4232]

Quick question; how do you take a shot like this? Panning with the boat I get but how to keep the pan smooth? Any idea what shutter speed would be needed?

 

[Anton Chigurh 3338]

Panning, yes. Slower you can handle, the better. Put it on continuous focus mode. If your lens doesn’t have a stabilization mode for panning just leave it off and be very smooth with your movement. Anticipate the boat entering the frame and start to move before it arrives. You can try 1/200 to start and go lower once you figure it out.

[DougO 5269]

You probably wouldn't even have to worry much about focus. Plenty of light, the depth of field in that photo looks pretty massive, probably not a super long lens from close to the bank. Especially with VR to help stabilize the subject, it might be as slow as 1/30th, on a monopod or video tripod.

[Fire Jack Chevigny 938]

A few shots from my weekend of hitting the backroads of the Ozarks.

[Hornius Emeritus 12834]

I love that first one with the chair on the porch, Fire Jack .. real moody.

[Hornius Emeritus 12834]

On 8/20/2019 at 10:26 PM, DougO said:

It's not a great place to shoot for color balance. At least they aren't wearing chartreuse.

 

If I think it's going to be tricky I adjust my white balance in my camera using a white card, otherwise  just white balance in Post in Adobe Camera Raw. 

[El Diablo 4232]

11 hours ago, DougO said:

You probably wouldn't even have to worry much about focus. Plenty of light, the depth of field in that photo looks pretty massive, probably not a super long lens from close to the bank. Especially with VR to help stabilize the subject, it might be as slow as 1/30th, on a monopod or video tripod.

I was wondering about VR, I only have one lens that has that, the 18-55mm. I wasn't planning on taking it but like you've said ebfore, it's so small and light that I might as well throw it in the bag.

Thanks guys.

[Patricio Swayze 17058]

So I ended up buying a drone.  If I get bored with it, I will take it to Brazil and sell it for at least how much I paid for it.  I haven't had to chance to fly it a ton, but I took a few shots just trying to get used to flying this thing.  I figure this is something else to do when in a photographic rut.  I have a list of places I want to go shoot.  And yes, I will be insuring the drone.  The one of the freeways is from 1200 ft.

[DougO 5269]

Cool stuff. What kind of drone did you get? I thought about getting one to keep an eye on the cows out in the field and just to mess with.

[Patricio Swayze 17058]

30 minutes ago, DougO said:

Cool stuff. What kind of drone did you get? I thought about getting one to keep an eye on the cows out in the field and just to mess with.

Thanks.  I got the Mavic 2 Pro.  Hopefully some of my ideas will be less derivative than the ones I posted.  As a 42 year old that had some budget RC cars and dreamed of having an RC airplane, it is pretty cool to fly this thing and take photos with it. 

By the way, Fire Jack Chevigny, I love those photos of abandoned shit.

One I caught today in Houston's 5th Ward...

[El Diablo 4232]

Heck of a segue...are those abandoned black men?  

[Patricio Swayze 17058]

Heck of a segue...are those abandoned black men?  

Abandoned by the US government (no cr). But really, I had bit to drink and didn’t write that well haha.

[El Diablo 4232]

23 minutes ago, Patricio Swayze said:

Abandoned by the US government (no cr). But really, I had bit to drink and didn’t write that well haha.

Well in your defense, I was up early and hadn't had my coffee yet so it read a bit odd to me at the time. 

Edited August 24, 2019 by El Diablo

[El Diablo 4232]

Tried my hand at a portrait picture of my mom today. Outdoors. Bright and hazy out. 

 

[Fire Jack Chevigny 938]

By the way, Fire Jack Chevigny, I love those photos of abandoned shit.

Thanks man. Job has really been cutting into my shooting time. Here’s another from my Ozarks trip.

[El Diablo 4232]

Boat races. 

 

[El Diablo 4232]

Moar boats.

 

 

[Patricio Swayze 17058]

Having fun messing around with this drone.  Still trying to get the hang of it, but can't wait to go use it somewhere other than Houston.  A few from this afternoon...

[El Diablo 4232]

On 8/18/2019 at 11:47 AM, DougO said:

Try the D7500 which has the same sensor as the D500, same AF IQ, most of the same options, shoots 8fps for action. I just got one to use as a backup/side piece for football and wildlife, factory refurb for $599 at B&H. 90 day Nikon warranty and a less fancy white box, but you get the charger, battery, strap and stuff with it.

 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1380709-REG/nikon_1581b_d7500_dslr_camera_body.html

 

It also has a control layout that is probably more similar to your camera, with the big dual dial on the left side.

 

I looked at that camera a bit, had it confused with the D750, stupid Nikon naming conventions. Anyway, my D3500 uses a different battery and charger entirely. You'd think there would be some similarities across product lines. 

[DougO 5269]

1 hour ago, El Diablo said:

I looked at that camera a bit, had it confused with the D750, stupid Nikon naming conventions. Anyway, my D3500 uses a different battery and charger entirely. You'd think there would be some similarities across product lines. 

Most of Nikon's DSLR's are using the same battery now, the ones in the D500, D7500, D750 and D800 are all the same.

They recently upgraded the battery with a different letter at the end of it, but still fits all of the above and more.

They do have some stupidass confusing model designations.

[DougO 5269]

19 hours ago, Patricio Swayze said:

Having fun messing around with this drone.  Still trying to get the hang of it, but can't wait to go use it somewhere other than Houston.  A few from this afternoon...

 

I would be tempted to tie a little fake bird to the drone and try to get a bigass hawk to attack it.

[El Diablo 4232]

2 hours ago, DougO said:

Most of Nikon's DSLR's are using the same battery now, the ones in the D500, D7500, D750 and D800 are all the same.

They recently upgraded the battery with a different letter at the end of it, but still fits all of the above and more.

They do have some stupidass confusing model designations.

Well hell, I guess my D3500 is the oddball in the bunch then. It uses an EN-EL 14a I think. Prolly a battery designed for beginners.