Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Photographers: let's hear about your set ups!

izz said:
Hello knowledgeable photographers, can I ask a couple of dumb-ass questions ?
1) which software do you use to 'watermark' or otherwise your own pictures ?
2) which software do you use to store and manage your photos ? I'm after the equivalent of Musicbee, which hunts around on your computer for sound files).
Click to expand...

Adobe Lightroom can do both of these for you.
It doesn't hunt for images, you'll need to add them manually.

If you're a Mac user there's Photo already installed which will give you basic cataloguing of your photos but it doesn't handle Raw files that well in my experience.

Just found this link if you want to add a watermark to 1 image at a time, How to Add a Watermark to Your Photos: 5 Different Ways
 
Nivag said:
Adobe Lightroom can do both of these for you.
It doesn't hunt for images, you'll need to add them manually.

If you're a Mac user there's Photo already installed which will give you basic cataloguing of your photos but it doesn't handle Raw files that well in my experience.

Just found this link if you want to add a watermark to 1 image at a time, How to Add a Watermark to Your Photos: 5 Different Ways
Click to expand...
Thank you kindly Nivag :thumbs:
 
New toy time..! :)


51147502.ba4270e6.1600.jpg



Unusually for me I plumped for a Zeiss camera - They are often greatly overpriced but this time it was one of the few models out there that would give me network, USB and HDMI function that would all work concurrently.
 
Just splurged on a couple of new items this week.

I've been wanting a long telephoto or tele-zoom for a while, but I really can't justify the price of the pro telephoto glass (500/f4, etc.), especially since I'm a rank amateur when it comes to bird photography, I've compared the Nikon, Tamron, and Sigma tele-zooms, and they all have their pros and cons, but this week I finally bit the bullet and got myself a Nikon AF-S 200-500 f/5.6E ED VR. Got it used, but it's in like-new condition and works flawlessly, and was $800 instead of the $1400 that a new one would have cost. It's not as long as the third-party lenses, which all go to 600mm, but it's about half a stop faster, and I think 500mm is plenty, especially on a camera with an APS-C sensor.

I also grabbed a new camera body. I've been toying with moving up to full-frame, and I think I'll do that pretty soon, but this time I got a Nikon D500, which is basically Nikon's top-of-the-line DX body. Nikon have discontinued this camera, so the only new ones left are those already shipped to stores. It gets rave reviews for its low-light quality and for lightning fast autofocus. Again, I bought it used, but it's like new (about 8,000 on the shutter), and it cost me $925, which is almost $700 off the price of a new model.

I took them out in Golden Gate Park today, just to test out the combination and get familiar with the controls on the D500.

The lens is a beast; it weighs five pounds, and it didn't take too many handheld shots before my left shoulder was begging for mercy. Luckily, I also had a monopod with me, although I'll need a better one for the weight of this lens I think. The focus is smooth and incredibly quiet, and on the D500 it's also quick. Reviews of this lens are generally good, but apparently quality control can be a bit uneven, with some copies not producing very sharp pictures at full aperture. The guy who sold it to me promised that it was sharp at f/5.6, and so far he seems to be right, because I've got no complaints about how it performed today. The VR is also fantastic; I took a few handheld shots at 1/320 and 1/160, which is really too slow for such a long lens, especially on a crop sensor, and they came out great.

As for the camera, it seems great. I didn't have too much opportunity to test the predictive autofocus on fast-moving birds in flight, but it snapped everything into focus incredibly quickly, and it's nice having such a large number of selectable focus points to choose from. It's also incredibly fast if you want to rattle off a rapid sequence, getting about 10 frames per second. A big buffer means you get quite a lot of shots before it slows down. You can also crank the ISO up to 4000 and still get shots with very little noise.

Anyway, here are a few of the shots I got today. More in a gallery if anyone's interested.











 
pogofish said:
Unusually for me I plumped for a Zeiss camera - They are often greatly overpriced but this time it was one of the few models out there that would give me network, USB and HDMI function that would all work concurrently.
Click to expand...
Nice. What does a set-up like that cost? Are we talking hundreds of quid? Thousands? Tens of thousands? I have no idea, and it appears to be impossible to find prices for Zeiss microscopes online.

I've always thought it would be lots of fun to do microscope photography, and it seems that it's much easier these days because you can buy the microscope with the imaging equipment already built in, rather than have to use some sort of adapter to physically attach a camera body to the microscope.
 
In that configuration, about £6,500 incl camera.

The top-spec configuration with that model was just a shade under £10k and the most basic just under £5K There is a lot of competition/throat cutting between the various dealers/agents and yes, Zeiss's pricing structure is smoke and mirrors, unless you have enough of a budget to be able to talk to them directly!

Good photo microscopy and built-in cameras don't IME go together very well. The advantage of a trinocular mount is that you have the minimum amount of glass between the tube-end optics and the CCD. Each extra lens/prism/beam splitter in the light path reduces quality and are generally to be avoided unless they serve a particular/desirable optical purpose.

If you are looking to get started, you can do it reasonably cheaply if you don't go for too big an optical system as there are plenty of good quality used microscopes that won't break the bank and cameras from the likes of Motic or Luminera that are relatively inexpensive for the smaller sized sensor models.
 
So I've now totally flogged off all my full frame gear - the Sony RX1 was the last to go - and have not looked back as I'm dead happy with my Olympus set up and Ricoh GR camera.

I'll probably see if I can bag something cheap off eBay at some point for a bit of fun.
 
Got myself some new (used) tripod gear this week, partly for a trip I'm making to visit family and friends in Australia next month.

For years, I've had a fairly cheap, old, and rather heavy Slik aluminium tripod, and a few years ago I bought a small Benro ProAngel travel tripod for trips. The Slik is OK, but I'm not a huge fan of the fairly mediocre three-way head, and it also doesn't have an Arca-Swiss style release mechanism, which I want for the Really Right Stuff lens foot attached to my 70-200/2.8 and my 200-500/5.6.

The Benro is quite nice, and has a great little ball head on it, but after about a year one of the leg locks became loose, and it collapses at the slightest movement. Not great if you've got a couple of grand worth of camera gear sitting on it, or if you're carrying it and the leg drops down. The more expensive Benro tripods allow the legs to be taken apart, cleaned, and reassembled, but I can't work out how to do it on this one.

Anyway, I decided to get myself a new tripod, so I've picked up a Gitzo GT2545T carbon fiber model, legs only. It's one of Gitzo's travel range. It's about the same height and size as the Slik, but folds up smaller, and it weighs no more than the Benro. It wasn't cheap--they're $575 plus tax new, and I paid $425 used--but it's in like-new condition, and you can just feel the quality of the leg releases, the joints, and everything else.

For my trip to Australia, I'll probably just use the head from the Benro. It will be fine for everything up to and including the 70-200, and if I'm careful it should be fine for the 200-500 too.

But I also decided to get a heavy-duty head for when I'm not traveling, so I bought a Really Right Stuff BH-55 ball head. It goes for just under $500 new, but I got it for $275 used, and this thing is a goddam beast! I looked at the specs, but really didn't appreciate until it arrived just how big and heavy it is. I said as much to the guy who sold it to me, and he said, "that baby will hold anything!" No way I'm going to cart it on a plane, but it will be great for times when I want to set up for birds with my long lens, or need super stability for a long exposure or time lapse. Eventually, I'll probably invest in a larger Gitzo tripod to hold it.

I really blanched at forking out so much money for something that's not even a new lens or a new camera, but on camera forums just about everyone seems to agree that, while paying top dollar for a good tripod hurts a bit, it's nearly always worth it in the long run. Here's hoping!
 
I just had a realisation with respect to my camera, a Nikon D800. It always seems so new to me and I enjoy so much taking pictures with it, it always seems so eager to go, instantly on and the battery always ready, massive 36mpx files that allow loads of cropping, great raws and jpegs.

What was my realisation I hear you ask? Well, it was launched in 2012, which makes it 10 years old!

I shouldn't be surprised, I bet my 3 primes are even older :) :(
 
Mr.Bishie said:
Was reading an article recently, that Canon & Nikon will not be designing any new dslr’s - manufacturing will continue of certain current models - mirrorless tech is catching up.
Click to expand...
Yes mirrorless has arrived, but not yet for the budget photographer, for people on a shoestring the used pages still offer lots of dslrs and their lenses at bargain prices.

My first camera, a Fuji Finepix 4900z was mirrorless with an EVF, it worked fine for my needs back then. What I notice about the Nikon Z series is that all the lenses cost more than a thousand pounds, with many going higher. My F mount lenses cost hundreds (used).
 
Surely like Canon you can get a lens mount, so all your old Nikon glass can fit the latest mirrorless? But yeah, the Canon R series is beyond my budget!!
 
Mr.Bishie said:
Surely like Canon you can get a lens mount, so all your old Nikon glass can fit the latest mirrorless? But yeah, the Canon R series is beyond my budget!!
Click to expand...
There is a Nikon Z adaptor, but my F mount lenses are all screw drive focus and won't AF with it. If I had AFS lenses (with an internal focussing motor) they would AF with the adaptor, but I don't own any AFS lenses.
 
I'm so glad I switched back from Sony FF to Olympus. I never got on with the feel of the A7ii and I hated the size of the lenses.

So my current collection is:

Olympus OM-D EMiii - primarily for sports photography and any paid work I might get

Olympus OM-D EM5iii - carry about camera when I want to do 'proper' photography

Olympus Stylus1 - recently bought 8 yr old bridge camera that is incredibly small considering it has a 28mm-300mm zoom. Picked it up for £200 in near new condition and it's easy to see why some still go for £400+. It's now my carry everywhere camera and I'll be taking it on tour with me in the future. Not so great in low light but then my Huawei P30 Pro can take care if those pics.

Ricoh GRii - used for photographing my DJ gigs. The snap focus feature means it constantly produces outstanding results!

Ricoh GRiii - street snapping camera which has just been edged out of favour by the Stylus 1

Huawei P30 Pro- still capable of astonishingly good photos, particularly in low light
 
Nikkormat said:
I really liked the X-T1. I had the 35mm f/2 and 16-55mm f/2.8, and it was a near perfect setup. The thing that caused me to get rid of it though was the ease with which the controls could turn as I pulled it out of my bag - drive selector, meter mode and exposure comp dial. It was so very well designed in some regards, but with a complete lack of thought in others. I keep thinking of returning to Fuji, but it depends if they've sorted out this issue. Then again, I've never read of anyone else complaining of it, so maybe it was just me.
Click to expand...
Now gone for an XT-2. With the same glass. But bought an old Olympus Zukio 135mm 3.5 with an adaptor. Off to Istanbul and Bulgaria in October.
 
Nikkormat said:
I really liked the X-T1. I had the 35mm f/2 and 16-55mm f/2.8, and it was a near perfect setup. The thing that caused me to get rid of it though was the ease with which the controls could turn as I pulled it out of my bag - drive selector, meter mode and exposure comp dial. It was so very well designed in some regards, but with a complete lack of thought in others. I keep thinking of returning to Fuji, but it depends if they've sorted out this issue. Then again, I've never read of anyone else complaining of it, so maybe it was just me.
Click to expand...

IIRC the ISO and shutter dials on the X-Tx series all have locking buttons to stop them from being turned when you press in the nipple on the top. The expcomp dial on the X-T3 and 4 (haven't tried the 1 or 2) is rather hard to turn accidentally I find, although I still find the aperture rings too easy to turn (especially when switching lenses).

As fast an optically brilliant as it is, I found the 16-55mm f/2.8 too large and heavy for me - as much as many may recoil the appellation of "kit zoom", the 18-55mm f/2.8-4 is far better than it has any right to be, and relatively tiny to boot. I briefly tried the f/2 version of it but the 35mm f/1.4 is IMHO a god-tier prime - surpassing that of my first love, the 50mm f/1.4 Zuiko - but I prefer the wider angle so I went for the 23mm f/1.4 (35mm equivalent) as my low-light knockabout. The first version of it has clutch focus which I'm particularly a fan of and the optical quality is flat-out beautiful (very nearly as good as the 35mm f/1.4). I'm saving up for the 16mm f/1.4 (24mm equivalent) which I've tried in the shop already - another clutch focus that I find a joy to shoot with.

FWIW when I decided post-lockdown I wanted a proper camera again, I was gunning for an Olympus MFT of some variety (as I cut my teeth on the OM system when I was a kid), but for me the Fuji system knocks it out of the park ergonomically. As much as I wanted a slightly titchier camera, I've got big hands and the Olympus just felt too cramped.
 
My friend wants to do a photography course. A short 2-3 day thing.

I agreed to this as I'm interested, but don't have a camera. Sure this questions been asked a million times but what do people suggest for beginners? I almost went for Nikon D3000 on eBay at £120 but then a review put me off.

Anyone have experience with a particular camera they'd suggest, or want to sell me one? :)
 
I’d go and get a used Canon 40D. It’s basically a crop sensor version of the original 5D. But it has a sensor cleaner. 10.1 MP. Beautiful images. My main camera from 2008-2013. Here are some images from it. Usually with the Canon EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS which was a great combo. You’ve got all the modes, plus manual control. ISO800 gives a clean film like image with minimal noise. Expect to pay £90 for a body. They are built like tanks.
6967CF02-A44E-4C01-8FFC-30873E9BA555.jpeg9472BF6B-6176-4E8B-B189-DEE66B766A67.jpeg58E66184-524C-4D7F-BB2B-FF45C93A5266.jpegD9EFD346-E7F6-4687-BCC1-F91F4F7A69EA.jpeg
 
Changed my rig. Kept the Fuji XT-2 but have added a Canon 6D and a 24-105L & the ubiquitous 50mm 1.4. I fancy having a DSLR system for when I travel. Those batteries go about 1000 frames. Plus the 6D colour science is beautiful. Especially in low light. I still think it’s the best DSLR Canon ever made for stills.


F24F9285-E952-4152-A3D5-7AD3BD6878F6.jpeg563CB187-2642-43A5-88A8-D36A1C67DD5B.jpeg64E69D33-E10C-48C4-AA76-65A22626D37C.jpeg
 
What's everyone's opinion on Mirrorless cameras/lenses?

I'm about to go on a Safari holiday for hopefully a fairly intense 'lens-hunting' trip. I currently have a D750 (with a Tamron 150-600 (and a nikon 50-150 or something). I bought this after I got back from my last Safari trip where my old gear felt undergunned.

Should I upgrade from my D750? To the D850 (bigger sensor, same lenses, not future proof), Z7 II (now relatively inexpensive mirrorless, can use old lenses with adaptor) or the new Z8 (yay, debt!)

I'm half inclined to say to myself that few of my photo's did I look at and think "hmm, if only I had a better camera this would be a much better photo", but at the same time photograpy does bring a lot of joy to me.
 
I went to my Fuji system from the Canon 6D.

My main issue is the sensor seems more exposed. I’ve had to have my sensor cleaned twice now. Whereas in a DSLR the mirrorbox seems to offer more protection.
 
I've not bought anything second hand from them (only new stuff), but I've sold a couple of things to Wex who seem pretty hassle free.

They have a store in the East End too :thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

weltweit
Masters Student photographers on show
Replies
1
Views
224
RoyReed
RoyReed
Flavour
  • Poll
Film photographers: Do you have a scanner?
Replies
6
Views
345
Flavour
Flavour
Flavour
help me find artists/photographers who do nice seascapes
Replies
12
Views
379
Flavour
Flavour
Aladdin
Post your favourite painting
Replies
20
Views
661
ohmyliver
ohmyliver
Aladdin
"The Hanging Committee:": thread for amusing tales about arts events.
Replies
6
Views
452
moochedit
moochedit
Back
Top Bottom