RR

Joined: 3rd December 2008

All Forum Comments

Topics Created Topics Contributed Forum Comments Photo Comments

All Forum Comments

RR
A lens cannot make noise better or worse.

Comment by RR posted on I'm glad I've not got a Canon ;-) at 04/07/2010 - 14:49

RR
Hi all, another plea for the benefit of your direct experience chaps.

I'd like reccomendations of an online printing service that can host a gallery and allow others to order prints. I'm not looking to make money, just offer prints of a family occasion to those who wish to have a copy. I can then distribute the web address & each person can order their own prints.

First hand experience of a decent print/cost ratio would be great, but if anyone has done some research into it without actually trying a service out, then I'd gladly accept some pointers.

Comment by RR posted on Online gallery offering decent prints at 04/07/2010 - 13:27

RR
Algernon wrote:


Pity that old FD lenses can't be used on anything quite a lot still kicking around and they were quite good.

Algi
The faster FD primes are gaining popularity & thus price amongst the micro 4/3 community due to the availability of reasonably priced adapters.

Comment by RR posted on I'm glad I've not got a Canon ;-) at 04/07/2010 - 13:22

RR
It shows why the guy is a @#?>head. He does know how to get page hits though, quite how he managed to get to this level of notoriety I don't know though.

What do you think of his review of the Pentax 645D , without laying hands on one I might add.

Comment by RR posted on Why NIKON is King at 01/07/2010 - 15:23

RR
George Lazarette wrote:
RR wrote:
It's lucky I don't have the cash in the bank, as this would be the perfect "excuse" to indulge my LBA & buy the 200mm f2
Pentax don't make a 200mm f2.

Whoops! Sorry. Forgot you were posting in the wrong forum. It's a bit sad that you have to come here for advice. One can only conclude that Nikon users must be an ignorant and unhelpful bunch.

You are, of course, always welcome here. Even when you can't resist the urge to remind us that the Nikon system contains a 200mm f2 lens.

G

PS: In your position, I would get out a tape measure and take some measurements. Much easier to learn from real life than from dry theory.
I was careful not to post in the "Lenses for Pentax cameras" section as common courtesy. I came here first as there is a small group of posters & I know whos work & advice I value. Whilst there are some great togs on an alternative forum I frequent, it can be very busy with a large user base so I wouldn't know which advice to value & which to not.

I think you're right about the "real life" part, I intend to do a dry run tomorrow at the location with my wife to pose as a test subject. I shall go at the same time of day to scope out where the light is best.

Comment by RR posted on What lens for full body isolation ? at 26/06/2010 - 02:27

RR
It's lucky I don't have the cash in the bank, as this would be the perfect "excuse" to indulge my LBA & buy the 200mm f2

Comment by RR posted on What lens for full body isolation ? at 25/06/2010 - 14:51

RR
No worries Terry...

It was more trying to glean some wisdom from those with experience, I have a fairly firm grasp of the principles, just no experience of portraits (head or full)

I've told them that I'm not doing the full monty with all the arranged family & such, I just don't want the hassle. I'll concentrate mostly on the couple, then bridesmaids/best man included & only then on to all & sundry if time permits.

Looking back at our wedding shots, they are far too formal, so I'll try and interject some fun into the shoot. I just want to get some nice sharp & well exposed, full length shots in the bag first.

There is a small playground in one corner of the area so I'll be sure to keep that out of the background to avoid the bright colours. But I'm hoping to persuade them to hop on the swings & try a few fun shots.

Comment by RR posted on What lens for full body isolation ? at 25/06/2010 - 14:43

RR
Thanks again Matt, you're quicker than me on the draw today, that's really helpful.

It's basically for my Nephews wedding, I've been asked last minute & whilst I'd obviously like to say no for an easy life, they can't afford a pro tog & whilst having my reservations, I'm confident that my efforts will be far better than other relatives taking snaps with their compacts at least.

I will be careful about their relative position & adjust accordingly. I think I'll nag my wife into doing a dry run test tomorrow so that I can see what I can get away with. Perhaps focus, then ask her to take a step back to check if she's still within the dof.

Comment by RR posted on What lens for full body isolation ? at 25/06/2010 - 13:49

RR
Those calculators are handy Matt thanks. It's just working out how far away you'll need to be to get the couple in frame. I'll do some guesstimation in the back garden & work it from there.

I'll be taking the shots outdoors in quite a large area surrounded by mature trees, so space isn't an issue really.
I'd agree 20mm is a bit extreme, but I may whack it on if their patience is holding out.

Comment by RR posted on What lens for full body isolation ? at 25/06/2010 - 13:43

RR
Equivalents need not come into the discussion Terry. Whilst the wiki page on dof has some quite cracking equations I was wondering if anyone could give me the benefit of their experience.

I'm guessing it'll be between the 85mm f1.4 & 150mm f2.8 (although I'd like to close them down a stop for better performance) - if the wife wasn't in work, I'd get her to be my Guinea pig.

Comment by RR posted on What lens for full body isolation ? at 25/06/2010 - 13:36

Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo