File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Screwing around with background blur on the new camera. What does /p/ think?
>> Anonymous
if the focus was better and crisper on the car, it'd be much better... but nice shot with new camera

what brand/model is the camera?
>> Anonymous
Nikon D2X with an AF-S DX 55-200 VR.

It's weird for panning shots, because I'm used to a MUCH lighter, smaller camera. (D50) Picked the D2 up in almost-new condition for sub-1500 the other day. Being insanely out-of-practice doesn't help much, either.

Here's an older example of the stuff I shot with the D50 back in the day.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D50Camera SoftwareVer.1.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.4Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern824Focal Length (35mm Equiv)135 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2006:04:09 04:50:01Exposure Time1/125 secF-Numberf/13.0Exposure ProgramShutter PriorityExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length90.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2256Image Height1496RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used200Image QualityNORMALWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeAF-AFlash SettingNORMALFlash Compensation0.0 EVISO Speed Requested200Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EVAE Bracket Compensation0.0 EVTone CompensationAUTOLens TypeUnknownLens Range80.0 - 210.0 mm; f/4.5 - f/5.6Auto FocusSingle Area, Center Selected, Top FocusedShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModeLandscape sRGBLighting TypeNATURALNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations3057Image OptimizationNORMALSaturation 2NORMAL
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>242588
D'oh, pic was HUEG.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>242590
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>242590

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D50Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 MacintoshMaximum Lens Aperturef/4.9Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern810Focal Length (35mm Equiv)187 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:08:25 13:23:30Exposure Time1/320 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramShutter PriorityExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length125.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1774Image Height981RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
>>242588
Wtf...Why are you using a D2X with a 55-200. Talk about a trash lens. And leave the exif data in, why the hell are you stripping it? Get a better lens.
>> Anonymous
>>242594
Just bought the body, haven't gotten any decent lenses for it yet. Gotta scrape up the grand for a 80-200 2.8 like the one I had to sell a few years ago. Picked up the 55-200 because I heard it was a decent buy, and Samy's had 'em refurbished for $169. Figured it was worth it for that little money.

The 55-200 isn't all that horrible for a cheap lens, though. Certainly better than anything off-brand I've used, and pics are decently sharp. VR works well, too, and focus is fast enough. It looks stupid on the camera, but it takes fine pictures, and that's all I care about. It's also small and light, which means I can transport and swap it easily, unlike a real professional telephoto.

Besides, the three I posted there came out decently enough, and they were shot on a dirt-cheap piece of Tamron shit.

Honestly, I think the lens quality complaints that come up over so many lenses are only an issue for "art" photographers, who demand absolutely perfect image quality at huge sizes. My stuff is mostly action, and I go into it with the knowledge that it'll never need to be blown up, as the target is online posting, and print publications, where even a cheap lens will exceed the quality of the printing presses. (Besides, I don't expect to get any two-page spreads any time soon, I'm happy if I managed to get a three inch wide pic in a one-page race report or news article.)
>> Anonymous
Oh, as for EXIF data... I've been habitually using CS2's "Save for web" option, never noticed that it strips the data.
>> Anonymous
a fuckin looser with alot of money
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Not OP, but what does /p/ think of this?

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeHPCamera ModelHP psc1400Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution200 dpiVertical Resolution200 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1153Image Height777SaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>> Anonymous
>>242606
Hey, good stuff. I totally understand. Bought a D300 and had to wait a bit for the nice lenses to start coming in. You ever try out lens renting companies? There's one local to me, so it makes it a bit more cost effective, but I'd say worth it if you're buying new lenses in the future. Get to see what you like. Oh, and keep the exif, it's helpful for those newer photographers wanting to know how a shot like "that" is done.
>> Anonymous
>>242707
I probably will be renting lenses when I do big events. There's no shortage of places to do it, I'm right in the middle of Hollywood.

I've used most of the stuff out there already, though. I was one of the idiots who fell for the Brooks pitch, and went for a few semesters before it turned into a clusterfuck bad enough to take me out of photography for a few years. The one good thing about Brooks, though, was that they had a sort of "camera library", where just about anything imaginable, from Canons and Nikons to Leicas and Hasselblads, and all kinds of accessories, could be checked out for a couple days and tried.

My experience there was bad enough that it ended with me quitting after my pothead dorm-mates let us get all our gear ripped off, and it's only recently that I've started to get serious again. I'm not turning out much in the way of good work now, but everything from composition to exposure is gradually coming back to me.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>242606
>Honestly, I think the lens quality complaints that come up over so many lenses are only an issue for "art" photographers, who demand absolutely perfect image quality at huge sizes.
More an issue for the sort of people who masturbate to spec sheets and resolution charts and don't ever actually take any pictures. Artfags are a lot more likely to shoot with a Diana than to complain that a lens is a little soft.