People who shoot photos with their lens hood on backwards
- Thread starter Bungle73
- Start date
Is this supposed to be an example of a high-quality photo?
I think I found the original... http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7001/13226631335_0780e4436c_o.jpg
Admittedly, my DSLR with a 1000 quid lens does take better pictures than my 7 year old phone... who would have thought!?!?
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
Ah, the snobbery of folks who care about their photos is a beautiful thing to behold.
Who gives a flying fuck what anyone else wants to do with their equipment and/or photos? Spend more time caring about enjoying your own hobby (or making it pay the bills, should that be your thing) and less about whether others are doing it right. Because they are. Everyone is.
Who gives a flying fuck what anyone else wants to do with their equipment and/or photos? Spend more time caring about enjoying your own hobby (or making it pay the bills, should that be your thing) and less about whether others are doing it right. Because they are. Everyone is.
Spot on...
There is no right/wrong, professional/amateur direction for a lens hood... what a fookin' ridiculous statement! It's the kind of statement you'd expect from someone who never took a decent photograph in their life but had achieved pseudo-professionalism after reading one of Ken Rockwell's blogs.
Corax
Luke 5:16
That's the kind of post only an amateur could write.
Right, I'm home. I had to reply to this one first as it's given me the biggest laugh I've had in ages. You have no idea what you were supposed to be searching for do you? First posting a bunch of pictures with no info at all on camera or settings and that are not full size is beyond useless.
That's not a low light shot. With all those buildings lit up it's practically like broad daylight. Also, what ISO was used? You don't know do you? It was probably a really high one that gives noise galore. The tiny sensor in a camera phone is just not capable of producing high quality low noise low light shots.
Try this on a phone: http://500px.com/photo/60791526
I just don't believe that was done on a phone....at least not without some kind attached lens. There is no phone out there that comes stock with a lens capable of taking a picture like that. Phones come with wide angle lenses and you'd never be able to hold the phone close enough to take shot like that.
I meant a close up of something far away with a long focal length. Any old camera can take a shot like that.
Honestly, this one's the funniest of the bunch. I can't believe you were serious when you posted it. I mean something like this:
It's a bit of a crappy quality picture but it serves very well it illustrate what I'm talking about.
Again, nice try, but no cigar. Try doing something like this on phone:
You can't, because it requires control of the shutter speed, which phones don't give you, and the ability to attach an ND filter, which again phone cannot do.
This one the second biggest laugh I've had tonight. You do realise that close-up shots always have an inherent shallow DoF don't you? You don't you do, because you thought you were being clever by posting that. This what I'm talking about:
You can only achieve that with a) a wide aperture lens and/or b) a long focal length lens. Neither of which you can get on a phone. In fact the tiny sensor is incapable of producing a decent bokeh effect as you need a large sensor to do it, and definitely not the wide angle lens (which have an inherent large DoF) phone cameras come with.
I had to laugh when I saw Ed had liked your posts as it makes quite clear he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about. Ed, you really need to do some Googling on DSLRs and educate yourself. LOL. Really.
That's not a low light shot. With all those buildings lit up it's practically like broad daylight. Also, what ISO was used? You don't know do you? It was probably a really high one that gives noise galore. The tiny sensor in a camera phone is just not capable of producing high quality low noise low light shots.
Try this on a phone: http://500px.com/photo/60791526
I just don't believe that was done on a phone....at least not without some kind attached lens. There is no phone out there that comes stock with a lens capable of taking a picture like that. Phones come with wide angle lenses and you'd never be able to hold the phone close enough to take shot like that.
I meant a close up of something far away with a long focal length. Any old camera can take a shot like that.
Honestly, this one's the funniest of the bunch. I can't believe you were serious when you posted it. I mean something like this:
It's a bit of a crappy quality picture but it serves very well it illustrate what I'm talking about.
Again, nice try, but no cigar. Try doing something like this on phone:
You can't, because it requires control of the shutter speed, which phones don't give you, and the ability to attach an ND filter, which again phone cannot do.
This one the second biggest laugh I've had tonight. You do realise that close-up shots always have an inherent shallow DoF don't you? You don't you do, because you thought you were being clever by posting that. This what I'm talking about:
You can only achieve that with a) a wide aperture lens and/or b) a long focal length lens. Neither of which you can get on a phone. In fact the tiny sensor is incapable of producing a decent bokeh effect as you need a large sensor to do it, and definitely not the wide angle lens (which have an inherent large DoF) phone cameras come with.
I had to laugh when I saw Ed had liked your posts as it makes quite clear he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about. Ed, you really need to do some Googling on DSLRs and educate yourself. LOL. Really.
OK people. Let's leave Bungle73 alone, or even find them help.
This has gone far enough.
This has gone far enough.
I am going to have to add this:
Look at the quality of photography posted here every month, week, day! It is far better than stuff you see in specialist websites and magazines. Look at all the threads here - no need to doubt that there is very good knowledge and creativity here.
Learn from it.
Look at the quality of photography posted here every month, week, day! It is far better than stuff you see in specialist websites and magazines. Look at all the threads here - no need to doubt that there is very good knowledge and creativity here.
Learn from it.
editor
hiraethified
Hey, what kind of camera do you think a professional would definitely need if they were commissioned to shoot a series of dramatic landscapes for the prestigious National Geographic magazine?
Ah, the old goalpost trick again... 
If you want the EXIF data, search Flickr for S4 photos and you'll find it.
No doubt the EXIF data will be telling porkies, or photos from Flickr don't count, or they have to be taken by Ken Rockwell to count, or whatever goalpost shift you decide to choose next
E2A... I was going to post links to the Flickr pages but I can't be arsed.
If you want the EXIF data, search Flickr for S4 photos and you'll find it.
No doubt the EXIF data will be telling porkies, or photos from Flickr don't count, or they have to be taken by Ken Rockwell to count, or whatever goalpost shift you decide to choose next
E2A... I was going to post links to the Flickr pages but I can't be arsed.
Last edited:
It's funny how when people's wrong "facts" get shot down in flames I'm "moving the goal posts"Ah, the old goalpost trick again...
And what about the rest of them? The pictures you posted were crap, pure crap, and nothing whatsoever like what I was talking about. The fact that you are still defending them after I obliterated them one by one tells me all I need to know.
It's funny how when people's wrong "facts" get shot down in flames I'm "moving the goal posts"
And what about the rest of them? The pictures you posted were crap, pure crap, and nothing whatsoever like what I was talking about. The fact that you are still defending them after I obliterated them one by one tells me all I need to know.
They were exactly like you were talking about... or do photos only count if they're posted by someone who can pre-empt your next goalpost shift?
I think they would need a camera that does the job.
What would you say if you were getting married, hired a photographer, and he turned up with a camera phone?
You don't know anything at all about photography do you? You don't, otherwise you would not still be defending those pictures.
I posted pictures of exactly what you asked for... If you don't know enough about photography to be more specific... that's hardly my fault/problem.
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
Last edited:
editor
hiraethified
Yes they would. But you'd insist that something like a Lumia couldn't possibly be up to the job, yes?
weltweit
Well-Known Member
I was today in an interesting location.
My iPhone was the best camera I had with me.
The photos will not blow up as easily as ones from my dslr, but I didn't have my dslr with me!
It was good light so I hope there will be little motion blur when I look at them on my PC.
If I wanted to use the photos, in relatively small size, I expect they would be ok.
My iPhone was the best camera I had with me.
The photos will not blow up as easily as ones from my dslr, but I didn't have my dslr with me!
It was good light so I hope there will be little motion blur when I look at them on my PC.
If I wanted to use the photos, in relatively small size, I expect they would be ok.
editor
hiraethified
Requoted, to set the scene perfectly.
Awaits the inevitable shift in the tectonic plates, moving the goalposts yet further away....
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
Hey there. Could you give me some examples of photos you've taken with a dslr without some kind of attached lens? Please?
That's more like it; but it's not quite what I posted is it.
No you didn't. You went off and Google image searched a bunch of pictures that you *thought* would do, but in reality you had no idea what you were supposed to be searching for, and now you've been found out you don't want to admit it.
Why did you "Like" that post then? It's obviously because you thought the images posted had me done up like a kipper. That only proves you had no idea what I'm talking about, or what a DSLR is truly capable of, and what a phone isn't.
neonwilderness
What would Badgers do?
editor
hiraethified
I think the words you're looking for are, "Oh sorry, I got it wrong. You can adjust the shutter speed on some camera phones and you can use ND filters, and I was silly to assert otherwise".
Now, that National Geographic magazine, eh? There's a prestigious photo journal and one that would never, ever accept sub standard or 'unprofessional' images shot on crappy cameras, wouldn't you say?
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
You can get little self-adhesive ND filters that will fit on anything. I used to use some on my SX-70. Then they started producing ND filters that would actually fit on the film pod which was awesome. Made worrying about the adhesive drying up a thing of the past.
Ah, technology.
Ah, technology.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
This is a popular thread, good for photography, but some people seem to be arguing for the sake of it.
I don't think it is possible to say a camera phone is better, equal or worse than a dslr. They are quite different things.
In some applications phones are better, for the recording of the details of a road accident, chances are these days that one or more participants in an accident will have a camera phone they can use to record the event. For that application, a camera phone is probably ideal. Especially in good light.
And one phone is not like another. My iPhone's camera is much better than my older Nokia although the Nokia can take many more photos on the same charge. There is as much variation between the best smartphones and the most basic as there is between point and shoots and top of range dslrs.
If I wanted to create a portrait in natural light with a well diffused background of the three cameras I have available, I would use my dslr with either a 85mm f1.8 or a 200mm lens. My phone camera would not make that image so easily. However, if my subject was standing with their back against a hedge which was sufficiently different to make a good background the camera phone would probably make a good job of it.
I haven't yet tried to print images from my phones, my dslr will easily print 10x15 inches in super quality, and if I shoot max resolution much more than that. I am a beginner with camera phones, I don't even know the resolutions yet.
I am a camera club member and I want to create some stunning images with my phones, such that they score 10 or win a competition. It would be fun and a learning experience. I am sure it is possible to create top quality images, it is just a case of making the most of the qualities of the device much as I work with the specific characteristics of my dslr.
I don't think it is possible to say a camera phone is better, equal or worse than a dslr. They are quite different things.
In some applications phones are better, for the recording of the details of a road accident, chances are these days that one or more participants in an accident will have a camera phone they can use to record the event. For that application, a camera phone is probably ideal. Especially in good light.
And one phone is not like another. My iPhone's camera is much better than my older Nokia although the Nokia can take many more photos on the same charge. There is as much variation between the best smartphones and the most basic as there is between point and shoots and top of range dslrs.
If I wanted to create a portrait in natural light with a well diffused background of the three cameras I have available, I would use my dslr with either a 85mm f1.8 or a 200mm lens. My phone camera would not make that image so easily. However, if my subject was standing with their back against a hedge which was sufficiently different to make a good background the camera phone would probably make a good job of it.
I haven't yet tried to print images from my phones, my dslr will easily print 10x15 inches in super quality, and if I shoot max resolution much more than that. I am a beginner with camera phones, I don't even know the resolutions yet.
I am a camera club member and I want to create some stunning images with my phones, such that they score 10 or win a competition. It would be fun and a learning experience. I am sure it is possible to create top quality images, it is just a case of making the most of the qualities of the device much as I work with the specific characteristics of my dslr.
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
I wish I could like my own post. I was really proud when I found that Admiral Ackbar picture.
Similar threads
