|
OP, under lenses you should add that using a mechanical adapter you can physically mount and use Nikon F-Mount, Olympus OM, Leica R, and M42 lenses, albeit in stopdown metering mode, and AF-assist may not always be available without special circuitry. I hope you don't mind that I'm totally going to lift your idea and do a Pentax thread
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 19:34 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2013 20:38 |
|
|
TsarAleksi posted:Flickr is, to me, great for the community aspects if you're into that, but there are better places to set up a site to display your gallery and show work to people. And yeah, the flickr underbelly is really weird and creepy. hmm where might one find this....seedy underbelly...?
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 19:36 |
|
|
Yeah I read books. posted:hmm where might one find this....seedy underbelly...? Some of the stuff you may or may not want to find...
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 19:37 |
|
|
Yeah I read books. posted:hmm where might one find this....seedy underbelly...? The last toggle, if you're man enough 
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 19:38 |
|
|
TsarAleksi posted:Flickr is, to me, great for the community aspects if you're into that, but there are better places to set up a site to display your gallery and show work to people. And yeah, the flickr underbelly is really weird and creepy. haha, yeah. Someone put up a snapshot of a friend of mine from the winter or something. Within minutes there was a guy wanting to add it to a "men in leather jackets" group. Usually it's more generic creepy like foot fetish guys shooting girls feet in public or whatever. The circle jerking is really annoying too. I follow a couple of decent photographers and they get hundreds of comments of meaningless praise. The worst example of this is the trend of pretty girls that only take self portraits. I'd be interested in some alternative sites? I just like the ease of use with flickr and how I can follow a couple of my friends and check out what other people are doing. I'm not really into all the tagging and joining groups. My worst experience with flickr was when I used to have the "Everyone's photos" photostream on the home page. One day I saw a picture that looked like a huge dick, it couldn't have been though? It's flickr, it's supposed to be a family friendly site right? ... nope it was a huge dick.
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 19:42 |
|
|
oh wow there's lots of shemale groups what the gently caress
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 19:45 |
|
|
what would a 20x30 print from a 10mp image look like? I blew the file up to 20x30/300dpi in photoshop and it looks fine.
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 19:50 |
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:what would a 20x30 print from a 10mp image look like? I blew the file up to 20x30/300dpi in photoshop and it looks fine. It would look fine. If you got right up on top of it you might be able to see a little bit of detail loss but who gets right up on top of a 20x30 print? I've seen pretty nice looking prints at 40x60 from a 6 megapixel (canon D60) file.
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 19:54 |
|
|
TsarAleksi posted:It would look fine. If you got right up on top of it you might be able to see a little bit of detail loss but who gets right up on top of a 20x30 print? I've seen pretty nice looking prints at 40x60 from a 6 megapixel (canon D60) file. I have done some decent sized prints from a NIKON D50 which is 6MP and displayed/sold them in a gallery. The prints looked great, which is why I dont see why people need more mega pixels...
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 19:59 |
|
|
Dread Head posted:I have done some decent sized prints from a NIKON D50 which is 6MP and displayed/sold them in a gallery. The prints looked great, which is why I dont see why people need more mega pixels... For better digital zoom! Remember when that was actually a selling point for P&S cameras?
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 20:01 |
|
|
Paragon8 posted:For better digital zoom! This sounds like a great feature, I also enjoy using the direct print button...
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 20:11 |
|
|
Most inkjets output at 240dpi so 300 is overkill. You can print at 150 and it will be almost identical to 300.. I did a couple of blind tests where I did the same image at different resolutions. It was impossible to tell the difference at a normal viewing distance, and really hard even if you got close. Flickr is also creepy because any image of any woman will get 100x the views and comments of any picture of a man.
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 20:30 |
|
|
Cool, thanks guys. About flickr; it's great if you just use it for online storage/showing people stuff but jesus it's nothing but self servicing bs (adding images to a hundred groups to get a lot of comments and crap) and creepy fetish freaks. I add very few contacts and don't submit to groups, and it's been a great tool.
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 21:04 |
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Cool, thanks guys. I think like any tool it is what you make of it. People use the tool for different things but if it is doing what you want then there is nothing to complain about.
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 21:07 |
|
|
Pretty much. I've also learned to not add any tags like "kids," "child," etc when uploading photos of children. 
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 21:16 |
|
|
There are some more art oriented people who use it in an interesting way to showcase their work, but it's hard to find them with all the noise on there.
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 21:20 |
|
|
I'm a big fan of flickr and the community aspect. Especially early on learning about film and film camera's I had so many questions that were always answered in the discussion groups and linked to examples. And I often go to flickr meetings with various groups, its a good way to meet other photographers.
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 23:08 |
|
|
There were EOS bodies before digital. Just sayin'. 
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 00:38 |
|
|
HPL posted:There were EOS bodies before digital. Just sayin'. Feel free to write something up about them, and I'll throw it in the OP. I don't know enough about the pre-digital bodies to write about them.
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 02:01 |
|
|
Martytoof posted:OP, under lenses you should add that using a mechanical adapter you can physically mount and use Nikon F-Mount, Olympus OM, Leica R, and M42 lenses, albeit in stopdown metering mode, and AF-assist may not always be available without special circuitry. You can also get some K mounts on there but generally have to do a little modification to the aperture lever. There's also the C/Y mount where you can find some pretty nice glass... Also, not all lenses will mount with the adapters -- you have to be careful that the rear of the lens doesn't bang into the mirror. edit: also also also
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 02:29 |
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Also, not all lenses will mount with the adapters -- you have to be careful that the rear of the lens doesn't bang into the mirror. That 5D mirror clearance website ought to be in OP  Edit: also that 5D mirror clearance website ought to be in the OP 
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 02:47 |
|
|
Martytoof posted:OP, under lenses you should add that using a mechanical adapter you can physically mount and use Nikon F-Mount, Olympus OM, Leica R, and M42 lenses, albeit in stopdown metering mode, and AF-assist may not always be available without special circuitry. Clayton Bigsby posted:You can also get some K mounts on there but generally have to do a little modification to the aperture lever. There's also the C/Y mount where you can find some pretty nice glass... I added this info in the OP. Thanks, guys! And hell yeah, Martytoof -- get with that Pentax thread.
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 03:15 |
|
|
The 5d mark II is nice and everything, but holy poo poo is it a dust magnet, I AM SO IRRITATED GJOEIRWJEWIRJG i got a big fat spec of dust on my sensor, and I try to rocket blow it away only to get MORE dust on my sensor, then I got dust on my viewfinder, then on my mirror, then more on my viewfinder, then more on my sensor.... Holy jesus gently caress, how can I get rid of this poo poo? Im using gloves and being super careful, but I'm scared I'm damaging the focusing screen touching it so much  I've tried wiping it with anti static cloth, brushing it with a camel brush, blowing air, everything. blargjhijehiohrioht
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 03:38 |
|
|
Honestly I've been able to keep mine fairly clean using just the self-cleaner...
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 03:39 |
|
|
it was fine until i got that one spec. ive had it for months and no issues, but wtf? now i cant get rid of it all
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 03:42 |
|
|
somnambulist posted:it was fine until i got that one spec. ive had it for months and no issues, but wtf? now i cant get rid of it all That's obnoxious. I had a stubborn chunk on my other camera and finally gave up and paid to have it cleaned. I have heard people talking about some kind of cleaner called an Artic Butterfly-- maybe someone who knows more about it can help?
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 03:55 |
|
|
ok, what the hell-- I point my camera at a bright light and I can see my focusing screen scratched to poo poo. I didn't use ANYTHING abrasive, ughhhhh. The closest thing to being abrasive was a camel brush, is it seriously that sensitive? Now I need a new focusing screen. Goddamn it, any suggestions? I know there's different types. My primary usage is portraiture. I'm not going to use ANYTHING but rocket blowers from now on, I'm over it. poo poo, what if I scratched the mirror too? Is there any way to tell?I have insurance on the camera, but I need it right now, so I cant send it in. This is my worst nightmare.
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 04:05 |
|
|
somnambulist posted:ok, what the hell-- I point my camera at a bright light and I can see my focusing screen scratched to poo poo. I didn't use ANYTHING abrasive, ughhhhh. Wait is the dust on the sensor or in the viewfinder?
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 04:07 |
|
|
both. basically, if i take off my lens and point my camera at a bright light I can see my focusing screen, and its all scratched up, but if i put my lens back on it, things look fine in the viewfinder, minus the annoying dust marks. I know dust in the viewfinder doesnt affect pictures. but its annoying anyway. I also have a big black spot on my images, and i cant see it on my sensor, but it has to be on it. It doesnt come off, but im scared to go near my sensor.
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 04:12 |
|
|
somnambulist posted:ok, what the hell-- I point my camera at a bright light and I can see my focusing screen scratched to poo poo. I didn't use ANYTHING abrasive, ughhhhh. Your post reminded me about rocket blowers and I think I'm going to get one. I'm looking at the choices on adorama, and they carry a number of Giottos that are different lengths. Does the size make a tangible difference? I'd like to get the smallest one if it doesn't so I can keep it in my bag.
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 06:47 |
|
|
Jadeilyn posted:Your post reminded me about rocket blowers and I think I'm going to get one. I'm looking at the choices on adorama, and they carry a number of Giottos that are different lengths. Does the size make a tangible difference? I'd like to get the smallest one if it doesn't so I can keep it in my bag. It's a matter of "whoosh-whoosh-whoosh-whoosh" versus "WHOOOOOOOOOOSH!"
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 06:49 |
|
|
HPL posted:It's a matter of "whoosh-whoosh-whoosh-whoosh" versus "WHOOOOOOOOOOSH!" Do you think the bigger one is worth it?
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 06:54 |
|
|
Yeah I read books. posted:oh wow there's lots of shemale groups
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 06:59 |
|
|
I've been using flickr for years and have only got the occasional creepy person commenting when I've put shots of my wife up there. Is there a better site I could be using? smugmug seems quite popular and I like that I have the option to sell directly from the site. Suggestions?
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 11:44 |
|
|
Take a peek in the concert photog thread, I put some thoughts down in there. If you have any questions though just fire away. The tl;dr on Smug is that it works as advertised, and it's got every option you could wish for. The support's good too. Clayton Bigsby posted:You kids and your fancy toys these days.. my 1Ds2 has a big sensor and it doesn't clean itself. I'm pretty impressed with the sensor cleaning on my D90. I've had it for half a year now and it's still squeaky clean, I just remove the big chunks from the sticky collecting strip from time to time. evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at Jul 15, 2009 around 12:36 |
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 11:51 |
|
|
TsarAleksi posted:Honestly I've been able to keep mine fairly clean using just the self-cleaner... You kids and your fancy toys these days.. my 1Ds2 has a big sensor and it doesn't clean itself.
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 12:33 |
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Take a peek in the concert photog thread, I put some thoughts down in there. If you have any questions though just fire away. I was taking some product shots of pillows the other day and notice a black spot in the same place on every image. I had several pieces of hair or something on my sensor 
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 17:40 |
|
|
Im wondering if when I get a 40D if Im going to need to worry about cleaning my sensor more than I do now thanks to my Olympus, sometimes I think it likes to clean itself when Im not looking just to make me realize what I might be giving up.
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 21:45 |
|
|
Verman posted:Im wondering if when I get a 40D if Im going to need to worry about cleaning my sensor more than I do now thanks to my Olympus, sometimes I think it likes to clean itself when Im not looking just to make me realize what I might be giving up. The 40D has a self cleaning sensor.
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 21:59 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2013 20:38 |
|
|
psylent posted:I've been using flickr for years and have only got the occasional creepy person commenting when I've put shots of my wife up there. smugmug is nice because it's amazingly customizable. I use it as my main site. Plus, you can auto-watermark and disable right click. I just use flickr for hosting, really. For about half a second I was tempted to see what kind of creepy things I could find on flickr, then realized it's probably not worth it.
|
| # ? Jul 15, 2009 22:02 |
|
