The "Ive taken a pic and I kinda like it" thread

Brazo · Jul 18, 2012

Let there be Light by Brazo76, on Flickr

DanFreemanPhoto · Jul 18, 2012

^Wow love that. Really clean and simple.

Hixle · Jul 18, 2012

Lovely shot Brazo. Love how the light runs along the top of the cliff.

Brazo · Jul 18, 2012

Thanks guys, going back there tomorrow to try a different angle.

adele_90 · Jul 18, 2012

Another one of the BMW

BMW by adele_90, on Flickr

v15ben · Jul 19, 2012

Awesome photo, Brazo!

brisa4984 · Jul 19, 2012

Turkish · Jul 20, 2012

Can't decide which of these looks better, best of a bad bunch from the shots I took tonight.

mas · Jul 20, 2012

1st one

Brazo · Jul 20, 2012

yes mate, first one!

Gavin. · Jul 20, 2012

Ay Ay Ron · Jul 20, 2012

Picture quality isn't the best as I uploaded them to Facebook for ease. Taken at a wedding a few weeks back using my 550 & the 18-200 Canon lens.

Super grainy from the high ISO. Dark, gloomy day and the lens isn't the fastest, especially on near full zoom.

Brazo · Jul 21, 2012

253 Seconds by Brazo76, on Flickr

gee28 · Jul 21, 2012

http://www.flickr.com/photos/83129124@N02/7614755414/in/photostream/

DanFreemanPhoto · Jul 21, 2012

A_Cro said:
Picture quality isn't the best as I uploaded them to Facebook for ease. Taken at a wedding a few weeks back using my 550 & the 18-200 Canon lens.

Super grainy from the high ISO. Dark, gloomy day and the lens isn't the fastest, especially on near full zoom.

That's exactly the reason I'm brutally honest when people on here ask if they should shoot a wedding with 'non pro' gear. It's just not designed for the job.

Oh and Brazo...that shot is epic too.

Turkish · Jul 21, 2012

Inception, a Brazo taking a decent photo within a shitty photo taken by me, lol

Ay Ay Ron · Jul 21, 2012

DanFreemanPhoto said:
That's exactly the reason I'm brutally honest when people on here ask if they should shoot a wedding with 'non pro' gear. It's just not designed for the job.

Yeah I would never attempt to shoot a wedding properly with the kit I have! We were just at friend's wedding and the photographer is one we have booked for ours (a friend of the gf) who's second shooter bailed on her last minute so I said that I would try to get some half decent candid shots ( I managed to get a few that she liked) If I had known earlier, then I would have rented a fast lens for the day but it was all last minute.

Looks very stressful too. The weather was awful so trying to do group shots was a nightmare (although to be fair to her, she handles it very well)

Christopher. · Jul 21, 2012

Gildstar · Jul 21, 2012

Dogwalk0013 by JackGilder, on Flickr

Dogwalk0015 by JackGilder, on Flickr

Ben · Jul 21, 2012

Derwent Dam by bensambrook, on Flickr

Ladybower Plughole by bensambrook, on Flickr

RoryW · Jul 21, 2012

Plug hole picture is a cracker, like that a lot for some reason

v15ben · Jul 22, 2012

Yep great shot of the plughole. Fantastic place to take photos!

Pint · Jul 22, 2012

Sphere by m'p'd, on Flickr

Niall · Jul 22, 2012

Architecture by Niall97, on Flickr

Brazo · Jul 22, 2012

Thanks mate, your opinion means a lot. Re the wedding photography, what do you consider as pro gear? Are we talking ff and f1.4 for low light and flattering dof.

DanFreemanPhoto said:
That's exactly the reason I'm brutally honest when people on here ask if they should shoot a wedding with 'non pro' gear. It's just not designed for the job.

Oh and Brazo...that shot is epic too.

Brazo · Jul 22, 2012

The lighting doesn't really show the subject as a sphere, more 2d than 3d.

Also doesn't appear tack sharp when pixel peeping.

Pint said:
Sphere by m'p'd, on Flickr

Pint · Jul 22, 2012

Brazo said:
The lighting doesn't really show the subject as a sphere, more 2d than 3d.

Also doesn't appear tack sharp when pixel peeping.

Sphere was more being clueless as to what to name the file.
It was a hand held macro shot so it is far from perfect.

Dare I ask....pixel peeping?

Brazo · Jul 22, 2012

Close scrutiny mate

JustinS · Jul 22, 2012

From this years IOM TT

Pint · Jul 22, 2012

Ahh fair enough. First attempts at macro. Only using a raynox dcr 250

DanFreemanPhoto · Jul 22, 2012

Brazo said:
Thanks mate, your opinion means a lot. Re the wedding photography, what do you consider as pro gear? Are we talking ff and f1.4 for low light and flattering dof.

Firstly, the following is my opinion, but I have done quite a few weddings now so I am speaking from experience.

What I mean by pro gear essentially is a prosumer body, designed to give very nice photos at very high ISO, which you WILL need. For example, at Daves wedding (bomber on here) I was shooting at ISO2000 in the church.
You shoot like that on any 'consumer' body, the photos will look s**t.
And yes, for lenses, the faster (and more expensive) the better. A fast lens means you can achieve those nice depth of field style photos, but also a large aperture means easier shooting in darker conditions.
And also, a lens like my 70-200mm is PIN sharp at all focal lengths. The photos from a kit lens or cheap telephoto could not hold a candle to it.

I hope I don't come across all snobby and cocky. I'm just saying that I have only done weddings in the past because I do have the kit that can do the job. If I had a cheaper body and 'consumer' lenses, I wouldn't dream of being the main pgotographer at any wedding or similar event, and that's why I advise other people on here not to either.

Oh and lastly, having the proper gear doesn't mean epic shots. You still have to know how to use it.