Played with my new Nikon 50mm 1.8 D lens today.Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
16 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Played with my new Nikon 50mm 1.8 D lens today.I took my new lens out for a spin today, and although Newcastle was blanketed in a thick fog for most of the morning I did have some fun.
This is a shot of a steel lifting ring in a concrete block on Nobbys point. Cheers
John H.
Hmm.. I like it.
I think it would be even better if the saturation would be pushed a little bit more. Producer & Editor @ GadgetGuy.com.au
Contributor for fine magazines such as PC Authority and Popular Science.
He was using his new 50mm 1.8...
(See the title and the first post) Producer & Editor @ GadgetGuy.com.au
Contributor for fine magazines such as PC Authority and Popular Science.
I like this one, John. What aperture was this shot at? Perhaps a greater DOF would be benefitial. Alex
I like both... but probably prefer the first...
What was the rusty hoop in the ground??? Cheers, John
Leek@Flickr | Leek@RedBubble | Leek@DeviantArt D700; D200; Tokina 12-24; Nikkor 50mm f1.4,18-70mm,85mm f1.8, 105mm,80-400VR, SB-800s; G1227LVL; RRS BH-55; Feisol 1401
Thanks to all for the comments.
Alex, It was shot at f8, and the shallow DOF was intentional as I wanted to draw attention to the ring. Had the ring been larger, such that the lighthouse was completely visible, then it might have been a good shot. leek, there are a series of large concrete blocks in place to stop erosion. The rings in the blocks allowed for the blocks placement by crane. PiroStitch, at the price I don't see how anyone can afford not to have one. Cheers
John H.
That's where you could have probably taken advantage of SneakerZoom (TM, Pat. Pending) to deal with the issue. It's purely an attribute of the relative perspective of the two elements in the image, and by moving maybe an inch or three closer to the ring, I suspect that you could have achieved exactly that effect. g.
Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
John,
Last week I was in New Castle beach but missed it. Your picture is beautiful and special and it reminds me of some pictures I took over there. <img src=http://imagehost.vendio.com/preview/hk/hksupplies/aw11.jpg> <img src=http://imagehost.vendio.com/preview/hk/hksupplies/aw10.jpg> Jean in New Castle Aug 9, 2005 ---------- Regards Poon
Hi John,
here is an idea: take two photos. One with arch and lighthouse shap. The other with arch sharp and lighthouse and back ground blurred. Combine the two photos so that you have arch and lighthouse sharp, left and right back ground of the arch blurred. Cheers, CD
Previous topic • Next topic
16 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|