Search results

Oh and as expected-a new lens means the re-appearance of test cat. A quick one from around the house I did before- ​ Moody Test Cat by Niall97, on Flickr

Really, there is no need to shoot RAW all of the time. If it will need a fair bit of tweaking like a landscape shot then yes, put it in RAW, but for everything else then JPEG is more than sufficient. I was actually quite surprised by the level of detail that can be extracted for JPEG files...

I've owned a D5100 and it would be a great starter camera, lenses I'd reccomend you get are either a 50mm F1.8 or F1.4 (if you can stretch the budget for the 1.4) and a wide angle such as the Sigma 10-20. I've got a 35mm F1.8, a Sigma 50mm F1.4 and a brand new (recieved yesterday) Sigma 10-20 on...

Very quick shot from a place near the DHL depot, I’ll post some better ones once I get chance to use it properly outside. Leafy Lane by Niall97, on Flickr

Got mine today. After using it outside briefly, I love it. I can’t wait to use it properly outdoors for some landscapes/architecture/cars etc. I have a shoot with a car coming up soon so I’ll use it for that and post the photos :)

Love the Ground Zero shot, Adele!

A lovely FRS parked next to my brother's 182 today. People really aren't kidding when they say cars are getting bigger and bigger.

​My best advice to you would be to get your kit lens, zoom it to 35mm and see what it’ll be like with the 35, then, take it to 50mm and see what it’ll be like with a 50 and decide which focal length suits you best :)

I’ve just ordered mine from Digital Rev for £319, it’s a grey import though so hence the lower price tag. I think I’d sooner get one brand new for a bit more money really, I don’t think it’s a considerable enough of a saving. Plus you have a warranty when new.

Yeah I've got both a 35 F1.8 and a Sigma 50 F1.4 and in all honesty I prefer the 50's focal length not to mention the awesome bokeh, but most people on here seem to reccomend the 35, which don't get me wrong is still a brilliant lens. If you did get a 59 though make sure it's the AF-S version...

I’d get two things: Adobe Lightroom and a 50 F1.8 The reasons for these are that with some tweaking these images could be improved significantly, you can totally transform a shot in PP, it’s half of the whole image when done right. I recommend the 50 due to the quality of image it produces...

I’d go for either Sony NEX or Micro 4/3’s.

He has a 17-40, TEG, its pretty much the same as a 10-20 really, well on Canon crop sensors the 10-20 is effectively 16mm in 35mm terms.

Yeah I’ve heard that too, it’s a stunning lens in both versions. It should work well on your D90, I’m sure there’s be plenty of examples on Flickr from that combo.

Nikon D7000 for me, Luke. And the F4-5.6 version. I couldn’t justify the extra money for 1/3 of a stop at the wide end, plus it’ll be getting stopped down for landscapes anyway :)

That’s precisely what I thought when I tried James’s 10-20 a while back, when I looked though the viewfinder for the first time I was amazed by how stupidly wide it was haha, I knew I had to have one.

Just placed my order for my long awaited 10-20, test shots etc in 3-6 days :)

ENTRY Two 182s by Niall97, on Flickr

Lol, perhaps I should re phrase it to SOME L lenses. The focal lengths on lenses such as the 24-70 are strange on APS-C and on full frame are ideal, it's the same with Nikon. I've tried a 5D Mark II with a 70-200 F4 and yes it was short but the quality was incredible, on a 7D with the identical...

7D’s are really cheap for what they are nowadays with the replacement just round the corner, however, Riad has said to me before about switching to Canon and I agree with him, but I’d only go once I go full frame due to the sensors in the APS-C Canons being inferior to the Nikons. The L lenses...

I think having some shallow DoF at a wide angle could give some awesome images, I like it, however it's going to be way out of my price range.

Nikon D7000

Cheers, it was taken using purely natural light. The radiance of the colour of the car was enough to expose it, I then lightly tweaked it with the spot adjust in Lightroom to further brighten it. ​Cheers!

It depends how clumsy you are with your gear, I don’t use them and my front elements are immaculate.

One from the shoot I did of Kris Dey’s Leon tonight, or looking at the time, last night- Seat Leon FR by Niall97, on Flickr

Blurriness will be solely down to the shutter speed, anything under 1/60th handheld and even over this can be blurry at times, it isn't anything to do with the ISO. That's the problem when indoors with a kit lens, they just don't let enough light in, a 50mm F1.8 would be ideal for that, it'd let...

They look like fairly normal beginner images tbh, I’d try some other subjects like landscapes and cars too, they’re easier for a beginner to get right, pets are really tricky to get good photos of lol, they never stop moving. Also, a fast 50 would suit these type of images, so ie. 50mm F1.8...

The D3000 isn’t exactly known for it’s ISO performance, my D40 was terrible over ISO 800 in good conditions, never mind places and things with dark tones, so 1600 will be very noisy.

I shot these using James Bryan’s 5D Mark II and his new 135mm F2L, that lens is absolutely awesome, this photo doesn’t do the DoF justice either with it being shot from such a distance and with that background, anyway- Two 182s by Niall97, on Flickr Clio 182 by Niall97, on Flickr

You’re using f22, this won’t let much light into the camera and will also cause diffraction to occur which will cause the image to be softer. So there are the quick fixes to your problems, just open that aperture, bring the ISO down and you’ll be sorted.