watmm photographers

[sidewinder]

the hdr iphone app is nice so. I did this picture with it and it would not look like that without it:

 

 

I like HDR in general but not the overdone way mentioned before. on the other hand I have some kind of twisted relationship with iphone photography. on one hand you have lots of filters with you on the go (some are very generic so) on the other hand the camera itself is pretty shit especially when it comes to low light situations. hope this gets better when I buy my iphone 4

 

I would use the EOS I have for everything but I cant take it everywhere its just to heavy for that

That's a great photo. I love seeing such things taken with phones. I don't have a smart phone yet, but I enjoy seeing what's capable.

[BOCfan]

For those interested in that, here is literally the very first thing I shot in video with my D7000. Of note, you can't shoot handheld without producing unbearably jittery footage. I used my neck strap's tension to fake a third point of contact. Also, I shot this in 1/320 shutter speed; hence, it looks like Saving Private Ryan, which is rather ridiculous.

 

This is a 720p down-rez, but nonetheless it gives you an idea of how nice things can look.

 

http://vimeo.com/16506100

 

EDIT: IPB doesn't recognize Vimeo embeds with media tag? Bullshit.

 

Dude that was very nice indeed. You've only made me want to get a D70000 even more, as the quality looks very good.

[goffer]

favourite camera?

Mamiya C330

 

mmmmmmm tasty...I'd love to buy an old analog camera like that.

 

They are surprisingly affordable... being that the Rollieflex TRL is THE TLR to buy and that's where the collector market is. I got my kit with an 80mm f2.8 (about 50mm equivalent to fullframe) and a 55mm f3.5 (about 35mm equivalent to fullframe) for $400. CHeck out KEH:

Bodies: LINK

Lenses: LINK

 

favourite lense and why?

 

Like Overlook, I have mostly old AIS Nikkor glass: 20mm f2.8, 35mm f1.4, 50mm f1.2, 55mm f2.8 with PK13 tube, CV 58mm f1.4... on my rangefinder I have a 15mm f4.5, 21mm f4, and a 40mm f1.4... I hope to acquire a 28mm f2 and I'm pretty sure that will be my go to lens.

 

Beauties. You even sprung for the 50mm F1.2? That's serious business. So is the 35mm F1.4. I have been tempted by the 20mm F2.8. How do you like it? It's pretty spendy, even for a used one. $450 on KEH. Ouch. The 24mm F2 runs close to the same. Meanwhile, you can pick up the 24mm F2.8 for $120 or so...

 

 

I ended up finding an awesome package deal from some guy in Canada... I got the 50mm f1.2 and 35mm f1.4 for around $600, both arrived in beautiful shape too. The 35mm f1.4 should be going down in price soon due to the Nikkor G version they just released.

 

I use Adobe Lightroom for all my post processing.

For color correction, too? I must get this program. I think my computer is maybe too slow...

 

It does just about anything perfectly well. But color correction is a touchy subject due to the copious amount of variables involved, most import being monitor calibration. If your monitor color is off then you might as well not even bother with PP. I have lightroom running on my little laptop for on the go alterations and backup, and it runs great.

 

That a great demonstration of the video capabilities of the D7000... sometimes I wish my D700 had video, but oh well.

 

Me for Halloween hehe:

 

[goffer]

Opps didnt answer your questions about the 20mm... it's a great lens.. the focus zone is so large, especially if your are using fullframe... on your D7000 the FOV would be the equivalent to 30mm on 35mm format. The 24mm f2 would definitely be in my bag if I used my digital system more often... not only is it 1/3 of a stop faster than the f2.8 version but it's also know for better optical performance... although I find lens sharpness to be way less important than this digital age of pixel peeps has made it out to be.

[Guest Mirezzi]

Me for Halloween hehe:

 

That's fucking awesome. Did anybody "get" it? I honestly might not have...I probably would have head scratched all evening..."I know it, but I can't quite SAY it." Then again, I'm not really a fan of the film. Sacrilege, I know, especially since I have a crush on Walter Murch.

 

Opps didnt answer your questions about the 20mm... it's a great lens.. the focus zone is so large, especially if your are using fullframe... on your D7000 the FOV would be the equivalent to 30mm on 35mm format. The 24mm f2 would definitely be in my bag if I used my digital system more often... not only is it 1/3 of a stop faster than the f2.8 version but it's also know for better optical performance... although I find lens sharpness to be way less important than this digital age of pixel peeps has made it out to be.

Nice. Yeah, the 'crop factor' of these APS-C cameras is annoying. Hence, I wanted the 5D, but not bad enough to pay the dough and buy Canon glass.

 

You're right about monitors, too. I never bother to calibrate shit, so wtf do I care. I correct images to look good on my shitty computer screen, which means I don't correct all that much or very often. That's another reason I like Nikon's natural look. I don't depend on producing the image in Photoshop.

 

I am gonna start getting into prints more. Fuck computer screens. Sadly, you have no audience without the internets, but the images you print will likely carry more meaning (in a theoretical sense).

[Guest Mirezzi]

For those of you interested in the D7000, check out the low-light capabilities of this camera:

 

 

Note the movement of people. In other words, shot at a reasonably fast shutter speed. I'm not sure what ISO, but my guess is somewhere in the neighborhood of 3200.

 

I need to go shoot some video tests at high ISO.

[goffer]

No one really got it... and when I explained they still didn't really get it, or even have heard of the film. The ones that did see the film thought I was Marlon Brando lol. I wont judge you on you dislike of the film, Coppola is hard to get into at times... often drawn out and operatic, but I enjoy his patience :)

 

I too need to get more into printing... I got some shots from my last adventure I'm interested to print.

 

If I were you I'd invest in an old Nikon SLR camera that you can use your AIS glass on. The F3 is all mechanical and can be had for relatively cheap.

 

Dayum that looks good for 3200... especially on a crop sensor! My D700 can shoot up too 6400 with good results as long as I nailed the exposure.

[Guest Mirezzi]

I really should buy something like the F3.

 

By the way, The Conversation is in my top ten favorites of all-time, so I'm not a Coppola hater. Drawn out and operatic (or, as some might argue, gay and pretentious) are descriptions of films I tend to enjoy.

[goffer]

Good man... watch Rubicon at all? It vaguely reminds me of the film at times... only in the broadest terms though. I guess the whole intelligence analyst/conspirator themes is all that they share, actually.

 

Back on topic... might have found a new toy on craigslist... found a Minolta Hi-Matic 7sII in black for $80... waiting for the dude to reply :)

 

[cichlisuite]

For those of you interested in the D7000, check out the low-light capabilities of this camera:

 

 

Note the movement of people. In other words, shot at a reasonably fast shutter speed. I'm not sure what ISO, but my guess is somewhere in the neighborhood of 3200.

 

I need to go shoot some video tests at high ISO.

this is good capability. i was shooting for some research for my project and that included lots of low-light scenes where my pentax just could not perform. do you have any dusk/night not-in-the-city scenes shot with d7000? i'd really like to see how it performs with darker shades.

[Guest Mirezzi]

Sadly, I don't have anything that fit that description. I'll definitely upload some when I do.

[goffer]

You lowlight shooters also need to take note of your lens... ISO helps indeed, especially when you need to stop down to expand your focal zone, but as does your lens and your understanding of how aperture works. Lately as I have noticed, most people associate aperture with subject isolation, or Bokeh... not so much lens speed. Bokeh is cool and all I think... just overused nowadays (very much like HDR) and a lazy way to compose in my opinion... not saying it doesn't have its spot though, because nothing beats it with portraits.

 

So if you are shooting a scene and your lens is set to f4 and your buddy is shooting at F2, your buddy will be able to take in 2 stops worth of extra light (4x more light) than you if you both decided to shoot the scene at 1/60th a second. Or if you were shooting at 1/60th and your buddy would be able to capture the same exposure at 1/250th.

 

Personally, I would much rather have 2 stops of real light rather than 2 stops of computer generated light, if the scene didnt need the extra DOF.

 

Also, fast glass and high ISO capabilities work even better together :)

 

Fast lenses have their pros and cons... the larger the maximum aperture is the more likely you'll have to deal with chromatic aberration (when color waves don't meet on the same focal plane... creates an unsharp image)... the better the optics are the less you have to deal with CA... this is the reason why you see Zeiss\Leica glass selling for the price of a car, they use better optics (ASPH in some cases) than nikon/canon/etc and often look tac sharp wide open.

[Guest Mirezzi]

You lowlight shooters also need to take note of your lens... ISO helps indeed, especially when you need to stop down to expand your focal zone, but as does your lens and your understanding of how aperture works. Lately as I have noticed, most people associate aperture with subject isolation, or Bokeh... not so much lens speed. Bokeh is cool and all I think... just overused nowadays (very much like HDR) and a lazy way to compose in my opinion... not saying it doesn't have its spot though, because nothing beats it with portraits.

 

So if you are shooting a scene and your lens is set to f4 and your buddy is shooting at F2, your buddy will be able to take in 2 stops worth of extra light (4x more light) than you if you both decided to shoot the scene at 1/60th a second. Or if you were shooting at 1/60th and your buddy would be able to capture the same exposure at 1/250th.

 

Personally, I would much rather have 2 stops of real light rather than 2 stops of computer generated light, if the scene didnt need the extra DOF.

 

Also, fast glass and high ISO capabilities work even better together :)

 

Fast lenses have their pros and cons... the larger the maximum aperture is the more likely you'll have to deal with chromatic aberration (when color waves don't meet on the same focal plane... creates an unsharp image)... the better the optics are the less you have to deal with CA... this is the reason why you see Zeiss\Leica glass selling for the price of a car, they use better optics (ASPH in some cases) than nikon/canon/etc and often look tac sharp wide open.

 

I agree with you about the overuse of shallow depth of field. You'll probably recall that I utilized bokeh quite a bit with my first film but virtually not at all with my second. The subject should motivate focal length, depth of field, etc.

 

Low light performance is important to me (and lo-fi filmmakers) because, until the advent of DSLR video cameras, ability in low light was video's achilles heal when it came to emulating film. Zacuto's recent shootout emphasized the low light capabilities of DSLR cameras for just this reason. These cameras still have shitty dynamic range compared to film, but the gap is closing. Right now, my camera probably has around 8 stops of dynamic range, the new RED tech more like 13, which puts it right on the heels of film!

 

I could go on, but suffice to say, I started buying fast primes, first and foremost, for latitude. I will continue buying fast glass for just that reason. I'm not thinking of putting shitty, slower, AF-S lenses on my D7000 just because of its low noise at higher ISO ratings.

 

Hence, my mention of ND filters. I have to shoot 1/50 shutter speed if I want my video to look like film. With a 50mm F1.4 lens in noon daylight, I'm blown the fuck out at stops <F8. I typically like that lens at F4 or F5.6, for bokeh and sharpness.

 

If you wanted to make the point that deep focus is underused these days, we'd /hi5 because I totally agree.

[goffer]

I thought the thin DOF in your short film was used correctly... as it was a film about isolation and about this character, not so much about the environment that shaped him.

 

I'm all for low light performance too, hence my move to full frame... the larger the sensor, the lower the pixel density, the better the ISO performance.

 

I do envy the crop sensors though for their light gathering ability and DOF... say you shoot a 50mm @ f1.2, your end product will have the light gathering ability of 1.2 but the DOF of 1.8... the new micro 4/3s cameras which have a crop of 2x... they have a 25mm f/.95 coming out shortly basically giving you a 50mm focal length with the light gathering ability of f.95 but the DOF of f2.

 

Speaking of ND filters... have you checked out the Fader Variable ND filter? It's pretty sweet as it lets you adjust your density say from 2 to 8 stops.

[Muflontillah]

I got this SP-565UZ Olympus which I use ocassionaly...

[Guest Mirezzi]

I thought the thin DOF in your short film was used correctly... as it was a film about isolation and about this character, not so much about the environment that shaped him.

 

I'm all for low light performance too, hence my move to full frame... the larger the sensor, the lower the pixel density, the better the ISO performance.

 

I do envy the crop sensors though for their light gathering ability and DOF... say you shoot a 50mm @ f1.2, your end product will have the light gathering ability of 1.2 but the DOF of 1.8... the new micro 4/3s cameras which have a crop of 2x... they have a 25mm f/.95 coming out shortly basically giving you a 50mm focal length with the light gathering ability of f.95 but the DOF of f2.

 

Speaking of ND filters... have you checked out the Fader Variable ND filter? It's pretty sweet as it lets you adjust your density say from 2 to 8 stops.

Doh.

 

Unless I misunderstand your post, crop factor doesn't change DoF. It changes FoV. This is very commonly confused. The crop factor trims the fat and gives you the sweet spot of a camera's interpreted subject (e.g. most lenses lose sharpness at the edges), but it does not change the DoF characteristics of the lens. In other words, a 50mm lens on a Micro 4/3 camera does not magically become 100mm in anything other than field of view.

 

There's a good read about it here:

 

http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00JvcX

 

I have not seen that ND filter. I will check it out though!

[goffer]

I understand it doesn't change DOF if the distance between the camera and subject is unchanged, but with a crop body you would have to step father away form the subject to get the same shot thus increasing DoF.

[Guest Mirezzi]

Ah right then. I misunderstood your post.

 

[goffer]

[Guest Mirezzi]

Hey goffer, can you give me some info on fader ND filters?

 

I would love to get one in 52mm and 72mm.

 

Do you have one you like?

[goffer]

I personally don't own one but have only tried them out in the store. The brand I am familare with is Genus... LINK

 

Looks like they are back ordered everywhere :( well it looks like eBay has some listings.

 

Seeing as your 2 fastest lenses both use 52mm filter, if memory serves me right, I would opt for the 52 which is also less expensive than the 72 if budget is a deciding factor.

 

EDIT:

 

sorry misread throught you asked 52mm or 72mm

[Guest Mirezzi]

I wouldn't buy a 72mm. I just talked to a buddy that said these fader ND filters tend to be a bit blurry. Meh.

[goffer]

The shots I saw with it looked pretty good to me...

 

Examples (not my own, just shots I found on a forum):

 

 

 

 

 

My D700 can be pulled to ISO 100 and has a max shutter of 1/8000th so I didn't really need one or look into them much further.

 

Edit... dayyum the D7000 has 1/8000th too... that camera is quite the package!

[funkaholic]

[o00o]

For those of you interested in the D7000, check out the low-light capabilities of this camera:

 

 

Note the movement of people. In other words, shot at a reasonably fast shutter speed. I'm not sure what ISO, but my guess is somewhere in the neighborhood of 3200.

 

I need to go shoot some video tests at high ISO.

 

this picture and the video posted before made me cum. I knew it was awesome and I want to have it everytime I see pictures