I'm sure google knows prices


That being said, you can get a something in the 70-200 range for probably as little as 200 bucks. Or you can get a lens with the same reach and spend well over a grand. It depends on what you want.


A fast high-zoom lens is going to cost you.

Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor = 1500 bucks

Nikon 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF Zoom-Nikkor = 300 bucks

5/3/2006 12:30:15 PM

the 28-200 is the one i was using, its pretty damn good.

5/3/2006 12:31:00 PM

Just stay in the daylight with it. f/5.6 in lowlight is not gonna happen.

5/3/2006 12:31:51 PM

OMG WHO TAKES PHOTOS IN THE DARK

5/3/2006 12:33:22 PM

Not dark, but low light. 5.6 is not going to be effective in anything but bright daylight. Using that slow of a lens in a gym or indoors is not happening.

5/3/2006 12:34:25 PM

actually i was playing around with keeping the shutter open for a few seconds taking pictures of airplanes taking off in the dark

and that really sucked

5/3/2006 12:35:06 PM

Anything longer then 1/50 of a second, in most situations, you'll have to use a tripod for. Motion blur is a bitch yo.

5/3/2006 12:36:05 PM

I GOT A TRIPOD SUCKA

5/3/2006 12:36:29 PM

nah its my moms. i went to visit her and played with her camera

[Edited on May 3, 2006 at 12:38 PM. Reason : and i wasnt using the tripod]

5/3/2006 12:38:49 PM

from the canadian photoblog

HOW THE FUCK DO YOU CATCH THAT SHOT

in case its hotlink protecked
http://wvs.topleftpixel.com/

5/3/2006 12:43:03 PM

Yeah, handholding a long exposure shot is a good way to get nothing but this shit.

5/3/2006 12:45:08 PM

it helps to have a gut

you can totally get some stability by pressing the camera into your gut and shooting

you can def handhold 1/15 that way

btw

wvs has had a good week...

5/3/2006 12:46:26 PM

Quote :

"HOW THE FUCK DO YOU CATCH THAT SHOT"

cause you can take like 10 pictures a second, hahahaha

5/3/2006 12:46:49 PM

well yeah

but i mean, to have the perfect empty street
great leading lines
and then know the guy is gonna spread out like that

fuckin' a

5/3/2006 12:47:47 PM

I don't think it is that impressive, actually. Sure he got lucky that the street was dead, but it is easy to assume the guy would hop over the puddle.

5/3/2006 12:48:56 PM

Shot on Saturday in Brooklyn:




Shot yesterday in Queens:


i think i'm almost as vain as that glasssssssssssssss user

-ZiP!-

5/3/2006 7:54:54 PM

5/4/2006 2:10:13 AM

5/4/2006 2:34:07 AM

attn Flash: stop posting pictures. you are making the D50 look like shit and possibly forcing me to spend more than I should

[Edited on May 4, 2006 at 2:43 AM. Reason : sdf]

5/4/2006 2:41:43 AM

^You do know that in competent hands the d50 is capable of images more-or-less like that, right? Good gear doesn't make someone a good photographer if they don't know what they're doing to begin with. Flash simply knows his shit.

5/4/2006 8:57:03 AM

^i agree.

although, something about the sky in flash's last shot bugs me. i like the land area of the shot a lot though.

-ZiP!-

5/4/2006 8:58:08 AM

^^^lol, i know man, i'm tryin to improve

^at first i thought it was the sharpness of the clouds that I didn't like, but now I'm thinking it may be the saturation of blue. with how dark the blue is at the top and each cloud having an identical (and dark) gradient, i don't like it for some reason. I was guessing the current look had somewhat significant altering after shooting (as all shots do), and I may have made slightly different decisions with the sky (but again, I do like the ground a lot). However, I feel like most of my skies end up coming out as overexposed whiteness often, so I know I don't have much space to critique.

-ZiP!-

5/4/2006 3:05:08 PM

I think the sky is pretty sweet. Exposing the sky can be tricky.

5/4/2006 3:26:46 PM

The deep sky saturation is due to the polarizing filter I used. The clouds- thats just how they were on May 1st at 6:09 PM.

5/4/2006 3:56:33 PM

ah, well in that case, nicely done

-ZiP!-

5/4/2006 4:00:43 PM

[Edited on May 4, 2006 at 11:23 PM. Reason : a]

[Edited on May 4, 2006 at 11:24 PM. Reason : a]

[Edited on May 4, 2006 at 11:24 PM. Reason : a]

5/4/2006 11:23:15 PM

long exposure to try to get house in focus, house is about a half mile away


gravestone

5/4/2006 11:50:27 PM

Quote :

"long exposure to try to get house in focus, house is about a half mile away"

noob question: how exactly does the length of exposure affect the depth of focus?

-ZiP!-

5/4/2006 11:58:25 PM

he used a long exposure because he has a really high Fstop... smaller aperature produces wider depth of field...

5/4/2006 11:59:52 PM

ah - just to counteract the f-stop, gotcha... i thought for a second it was simply the increased shutter time that was adding depth

-ZiP!-

5/5/2006 12:01:48 AM

D70

5/5/2006 12:10:03 AM

what ISO did you shoot that on? looks a bit high in noise.

or is that just the compression?

5/5/2006 12:11:34 AM

I don't really like the lighting on this one, but I do like the coloring.

noob question: What is the best way to download and save pictures while maintaining their quality/integrity? Is there a convenient way to save all the info (time, date, iso, f and t values are the main ones i am interested in) that my camera saves for each file?

5/5/2006 12:12:34 AM

it all gets transfered to the computer

and are you talking about a website? i dunno, i'm looking for a good website for my stuff too really.

5/5/2006 12:14:22 AM

central park stalking

ok fine, i felt bad about taking this pic



-ZiP!-

5/5/2006 12:17:08 AM

^^i was asking about both, downloading it to my computer (specific program?) and a good website

Quote :

"it all gets transfered to the computer"

that's what I assumed but I don't find it in properties anywhere, so was wondering if i needed a specific program to get all that

rebel xt, if that makes a difference

^when I was in Wisconsin over christmas I saw a great shot of a guy in a wheelchair who had mnd or something waiting in the street at a railroad crossing for a train to come and then pass, however I had no camera....would't feel bad about taking it though

[Edited on May 5, 2006 at 12:21 AM. Reason : ;]

5/5/2006 12:18:43 AM

it shows up in my properties with my d fiddy...

if you use the uploading program for canon i would imagine that the info would be transfered that way as well... or atleast displayed in a manner of viewing...

then again it is canon...

5/5/2006 12:19:53 AM

If you open the file in Photoshop and go to File -> File Info, you'll see lots of good stuff -- the exposure data and such.

-ZiP!-

5/5/2006 12:21:11 AM

I don't even have photoshop, guess I should get on that

5/5/2006 12:23:27 AM

absolutely man --

if you're able to get a hold of an older version, it'll work fine as well -- for the vast majority of basic photo processing, Photoshop 7 is fine (pre CS or CS2)...

-ZiP!-

5/5/2006 12:26:17 AM

i think iso was at 400, im not sure you can look at the exif. sharpening + compression adds to the noise too. its probably over sharpened but it was just pass through my basic web display action and was too lazy to do a specific sharpening.

5/5/2006 12:31:17 AM

fun trees in brooklyn

but crappy exposure



-ZiP!-

5/5/2006 12:31:39 AM

Your mom got some crappy exposure last night!

BURN!!!!!!

5/5/2006 1:02:58 AM

haha not bad, spookyjon!

-ZiP!-

5/5/2006 1:05:33 AM

one of each plz.

5/5/2006 1:25:20 AM

^^nice moment to capture, haha

if you slapped it in photoshop real fast and turned down the blues a little and turned up the reds some, you'd be good to go

-ZiP!-

[Edited on May 5, 2006 at 1:27 AM. Reason : ]

5/5/2006 1:26:17 AM

hahahaha it was 3000xsomething

i dont know much about editing pics to make em look better i just like taking them a whole lot

5/5/2006 2:43:06 AM

^^^ all i need is the one in the bottom right corner

^ fair enough, keep 'em comin'!

-ZiP!-

5/5/2006 9:26:26 AM

as impressed as i am about that one... a normal man cannot hold it... nor a normal tripod... sooo

you can have that one... i'll take the rest. they actually recommend a pentapod with it i think.

5/5/2006 9:33:27 AM

whatever camera this guy uses....http://www.akornphoto.com

5/5/2006 9:40:24 AM