Search results

Good work, not really a regular photoshop user myself so I didn't know that. I quite like the orange cast as well though, it kind of looks like it's missing something when you remove it.

Nearly forgot about that, just for Justin and Mark, here is that chavvy 172 in the car park with Fast and Furious style alloys...

Somebody asked about getting the original high-res files, just head over to the gallery, click a thumbnail, hover over the main image that appears on the right, click 'Save Photo'. Job done.

I got some strange looks when I fired up my mobile phone, but I wanted to see what was possible. K850i...

After a nice meal and chat we headed out at about 9:30 this evening to get some pics...after polite negotiations with security guards and 2 lots of police we were finally allowed to have a civilised gathering of our cars in a static position and take some pics. I blame chavs for making people...

I'm holding out for the weekend so I can get outside when it's light, got a few ideas up my sleeve.

My camera is 6mp, and I've now used every size poster print that Photobox do (30" x 20" being the biggest iirc) and none of them have been anything short of stunning, I've never sharpened any of them and with cropping the file size usually ends up at around 2-3MB. To be honest the original image...

Can't think of anything else in my bag, apart from... - Lens Cloth - Gorillapod SLR Zoom Lens cloth has been essential in the rain, Gorillapod replaces my tripod in 99% of situations but even that hardly ever gets used, I hate being restricted.

Either with a screw-on filter (for a fairly extreme effect) or you can achieve a similar thing by using a narrow aperture i.e. f22. f22, no filters...http://chrisharrison.smugmug.com/photos/108072995-L.jpg

Starburst filter? Effect is a little extreme, saying that I like #4 a lot, no particular reason, just a cool shot. #5 has loads of potential, maybe a longer exposure at rush-hour (whilst we just about still have darkness at that time) would really liven it up. #6 I love, really atmospheric.

Awesome little buy that, especially as you have Rentech nearby so you know you will always get cheap reliable servicing with it as well. Looks pretty smart with its foggies up front, photoshoot? ;) hehe.

The way forward? ;) Saturated the internet about a year ago imo, I'm a hater, as you may be able to tell! In fairness, extremely subtle use is fine as a camera simply cannot easily replicate certain scenes, but it's painfully overused and more often than not used as a get out of jail free...

Yup D50, 26,000 shutter actuations and counting :)

Yep, read much the same but have never used a 2x so can't really comment. The 1.4 is fantastic though, particularly if you've got a good lens to start with, I can't tell which shots I've used it on when I get home, no noticeable difference in my opinion.

I signed up for the Open College of Arts ('OCA') Photography course, which leads to a BA in Creative Arts (Photography) it's essentially an Open University course. Signed up in August but we bought our first house shortly after so I've literally not even touched it yet. Regretting it to be...

I'm happy to write a full lens guide similar to what I've done so far with Motorsport etc, I've decided to modify them for my photography course so I could do with writing more of them anyway.

Mine is the AF-S version, hardly ever seems to come up for sale now, and when it does it goes for silly money. I would go with the 1.4x personally, best balance of quality and extra reach and still keeps the autofocus pretty fast. You always want extra reach when shooting motorsport, it...

Great shots, I actually like #2 the best, nice effective angle.

Yes it doubles the focal length. A 2x usually reduces the speed of the lens by two stops (i.e. f2.8 to f5.6), you can also get 1.4x (which I have) which reduces it by one stop (i.e. f2.8 to f4) and 1.7x which reduces it by 1.5 stops. So a 80-200mm f2.8 would become a 160-400mm f5.6 with a 2x...

Most people with expensive cameras use a fixed lens ;) The 50mm type lens actually used to be the standard bundled lens with high-end cameras, sadly the marketing teams have changed this over to the 18-55mm kit lens these days, but really the 50mm would show off a DSLR far better than a kit lens...

The 50mm (little one on the left in my pic) is a must-buy in my opinion. They are £80-90 (Canon and Nikon both do them) and you will be amazed at the quality. It's sharper than almost anything you can buy up to 3 or 4 times the price, and it can be used in so many situations...macro, portrait...

Haven't used extension tubes myself, heard very good things about them but also that they can be hard to use. They don't degrade the quality of the image as there is no glass involved, but they are more suited to still-life macro shots, rather than insects etc. Macro Filters are pretty good...

Here's a good idea of how the aperture of a lens affects its physical size... Second lens in from the right is the Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6, the beast next to it is the Nikon 80-200mm f2.8. The Sigma covers a range of 230mm in total and goes all the way up to 300mm, the Nikon only covers...

I've had 4 PMs about this lately and still haven't found a good site to explain different lens and how they work etc. The bigger numbers usually stated in mm is the focal length of the lens. Forget about 3x zoom or whatever you see on compact cameras, that is completely irrelevant now. It can...

Done. Mods feel free to unsticky this one now.

This is the first round of the competition proper after a very successful trial run, the subject is... YELLOW Rules: - Deadline: Wednesday 13th February 2008 - Post a maximum of 3 images at one time, you can come back with more pics if you have tried something different, but please...

Huge job considering some people posted 6 or 7 shots each. Maybe next time you can post as many pics as you want but have to flag one shot as your entry, then we can have a proper little competition. I'm happy to collate etc if we have one entry from each person. As it is, 'Yellow' got the...

imo they offer a good balance of quality and cost. Give somebody a £600 Sigma 70-200 2.8 and a £1200 Canon 70-200 2.8 and most people wouldn't see any difference, let alone a £600 difference. Considering nearly all of us here shoot with sub £1000 DSLRs I think Sigma offer an extremely good...

You will love it there, such a great place. Yep it was f4 for the tiger shots, they were much further away than the Meerkats so I didn't lose any detail with those.

Don't these handle like a complete dog or something? I always remember them being stupidly expensive and not very good.