Nikon D750 & D780

Well I have actually taken some photos rather than being active in the trading section, but that's what OCD (yes actually) does to you sometimes which really can get you down... but hopefully things are on the up!

In the mean time my happy cat on what is known to her as her bed lol.

Our bed or hers?! by Justin Akehurst, on Flickr

Enjoying a fuss by Justin Akehurst, on Flickr
 
Not much worth showing from the Rose Queen day. Apart from a photobombing chicken. It got in loads of my shots! :LOL:

28-300 yet again. A versatile lens for this sort of thing.

_7523169.jpg


_7523165.jpg



_7523221.jpg


The 28-300 isn't so good in low light. The 24-70 is a better option, but I must admit 70-200 might have been useful yesterday evening.

_7504878.jpg


Cluck, cluck!
 
Livin The Dream said:
How old was the baby Toby? I found ours a bit of an ordeal, took all bloody day ha. I was new to fatherhood, she wouldn't settle, and I struggled to put her in the poses I wanted. If I were to do it again (highly unlikely) I think I'd be much more confident handling a newborn. The photography part was the easy bit. I got a few that I was happy with and that's all I was after.
Click to expand...
5 weeks old. TBH it was a bit of a nightmare as every time they tried to lie him down, or hold him in a position to photography he just screamed his head off so a lot of shots were just grab shots at weird angles, and AF wasn't spot on as man do macro lenses hunt a lot during AF. However, I got a handful of shots and the parents love them so that's all that matters. I didn't point out all the lighting, focussing and PP flaws though :LOL:
 
JJ! said:
Well I have actually taken some photos rather than being active in the trading section, but that's what OCD (yes actually) does to you sometimes which really can get you down... but hopefully things are on the up!

In the mean time my happy cat on what is known to her as her bed lol.

Our bed or hers?! by Justin Akehurst, on Flickr

Enjoying a fuss by Justin Akehurst, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Nice, particularly the 2nd, but have you done something funky with the PP as there's a purple cast?
 
Anyone else having issues with uploading to Flickr again? Seems like it's every Sunday afternoon, wonder if that's when they do site maintenance?
 
snerkler said:
Nice, particularly the 2nd, but have you done something funky with the PP as there's a purple cast?
Click to expand...

Yeah was experimenting is LR with differing outcomes! Still getting my head around it!

Might not help that the wallpaper, curtains and duvet are all purple :LOL:
 
Last edited:
Just thought I'd let you guys know that the review section now has the D750 in it if any of you guys fancy doing a review.

Heres the link.
 
minnnt said:
Flickr is up to its usual tricks again, won't upload pics. Meh.

Anyway, can confirm the 24 is the shizzle. Lovely rendition and colours. Sharpness is very impressive too.
Click to expand...
What about for people? iI am thinking about switching my 35 Art for the 24 Art and 50 combo for weddings.
 
Quote like 2 & 4. I still haven't gotten around to something like the last one, really must do a few close ups - only that I have one of those macro screw-on lenses.
 
Livin The Dream said:
Quote like 2 & 4. I still haven't gotten around to something like the last one, really must do a few close ups - only that I have one of those macro screw-on lenses.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I guess you have to start somewhere and I've got plenty of chances to improve. Hopefully when he's a few months old he'll be more compliant. I really need to find somewhere else to shoot, trying to fit a softbox, blanket, two parents trying to get the baby into a position to shoot, and me trying to stand over the top of them whilst crammed into the corner of my less than spacious dining room isn't ideal :LOL:
 
After a severe bout of "meh", I seem to have my enthusiasm back, even though all I managed this weekend was this. My new shed :D

The Garden Shed by Paulie-W, on Flickr
 
minnnt said:
A few people pics from the 24. The 50 never got a look in all weekend tbh, but i took it as i like the extra weight in the bag.... :rolleyes:


Laura by David Raynham, on Flickr

Lily by David Raynham, on Flickr

LOVE LOVE LOVE capturing moments like this, makes me feel uber proud.


Love by David Raynham, on Flickr

Love by David Raynham, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Really like the last two mate but the first two affirms my reluctance in using 24mm for close up portraits, i'm not keen on the distortion. I like the FL for more distant subjects and your landscape stuff is great. Have you missed the flexibility of a zoom for landscape?
 
Last edited:
Some cracking pictures on this page - good effort guys.

edited to add: @minnnt how do you find the 24mm f/l? I harbour a desire to get the 20mm f/1.8 Nikon at some point as I prefer that length for landscapes. And I can't imagine ever using either for people shots (a bit like Kris above)?
 
Last edited:
Livin The Dream said:
Really like the last two mate but the first two affirms my reluctance in using 24mm for close up portraits, i'm not keen on the distortion. I like the FL for more distant subjects and your landscape stuff is great. Have you missed the flexibility of a zoom for landscape?
Click to expand...

TBH i love WA portraits and was one of the reasons i went for the Sigma.

As for the zoom, no, it's quite good having a fixed focal length but i do have the 50 aswell so if i needed longer then i can just swap (as i did for the shot of the water tower). I also have the 70-200 but i may swap that for something else.
 
pjm1 said:
Some cracking pictures on this page - good effort guys.

edited to add: @minnnt how do you find the 24mm f/l? I harbour a desire to get the 20mm f/1.8 Nikon at some point as I prefer that length for landscapes. And I can't imagine ever using either for people shots (a bit like Kris above)?
Click to expand...

You don't know what you're missing mate. ;)

I really like 24. The 20 appeals also but 24 is what I'm used to so made sense to go with that over the wider 20.
 
minnnt said:
You don't know what you're missing mate. ;)

I really like 24. The 20 appeals also but 24 is what I'm used to so made sense to go with that over the wider 20.
Click to expand...

I have a 19-35 zoom at the moment and when I compose at 24 and look through the viewfinder it just looks a bit "normal". Whereas at 20 what I see seems to have the potential to deliver more "wow". I'm not saying my pictures are capable of it 99 times out of 100, but I find 20 just about squeezes into UWA and therefore delivers a field of view which is more impressive.

Not sure it really makes sense to me reading that, but those 4mm feel quite a lot. (oo-err missus!)
 
pjm1 said:
I have a 19-35 zoom at the moment and when I compose at 24 and look through the viewfinder it just looks a bit "normal". Whereas at 20 what I see seems to have the potential to deliver more "wow". I'm not saying my pictures are capable of it 99 times out of 100, but I find 20 just about squeezes into UWA and therefore delivers a field of view which is more impressive.

Not sure it really makes sense to me reading that, but those 4mm feel quite a lot. (oo-err missus!)
Click to expand...

I also have the 19-35 and to me it doesn't seem much different to 24 in reality when out shooting. I may sell it now i have the 24. I think for me the next logical FL is 16mm.

KitsuneAndy said:
I love that last one
Click to expand...

Thanks Andy.
 
minnnt said:
I also have the 19-35 and to me it doesn't seem much different to 24 in reality when out shooting. I may sell it now i have the 24. I think for me the next logical FL is 16mm.
Click to expand...

To be fair, the only thing that lens (the 19-35) lacks is an ability to shoot into the sun without ghosting/flare etc. And do I like shooting into the sun... It's probably the only reason I'm considering swapping it for a 20 - well that and the fact it mostly stays at 19-20mm!
 
Anyone else getting javascript errors when posting, but if you refresh the page it has actually posted?
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
Nice set of images Sir, and for me the last two are right on the money.(y)

George.
Click to expand...

Thanks George.

pjm1 said:
To be fair, the only thing that lens (the 19-35) lacks is an ability to shoot into the sun without ghosting/flare etc. And do I like shooting into the sun... It's probably the only reason I'm considering swapping it for a 20 - well that and the fact it mostly stays at 19-20mm!
Click to expand...

TBH mine's not too bad with the sun. It looses a bit of contrast but that's to be expected i guess. My 70-200 is terrible with the sun. Meh.
 
pjm1 said:
Yeah, there's a thread in support about it. Marcel's on the case apparently!
Click to expand...


Good !!! I thought it was my PC playing up.(y)

George.
 
minnnt said:
Thanks George.



TBH mine's not too bad with the sun. It looses a bit of contrast but that's to be expected i guess. My 70-200 is terrible with the sun. Meh.
Click to expand...

To be fair this isn't a nice challenge to be setting for any lens, but I think zooms do suffer more from this than primes:

LYX5jWd.jpg


SOOC apart from the adjusting back out the -ve exposure comp. I'm sure I don't have to point out the "issue"!
 
Alot of lenses do this. My 24 and 50 does. The Nikon 20 is notoriously flare resistant although it is possible to get some. At least it's an easy fix in PP for your shot. Try editing flare out at 200mm. Meh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top