Photography Shoutbox

[Dinzdale40]

i just use my hand for a hood sometimes....

 

[Nismode]

Plastic is plastic.. the OEM one might have ridges on the inside to help scatter and absorb most of the stray light though...

There are stupid expensive though. I need one for the nifty fifty and it's $23 + shipping

Yea, the OEM Canon hoods have better mounts and some velvet material on the inside that absorbs light instead of reflecting it.

For the 50 f/1.8? Grrr, I have that lens too...idk if I wanna shell out cash for a filter for that as well...prob not, cuz the front element is weak as it is.

 

[finch13]

The front element is recessed enough where you shouldn't have to worry too much about scratching it. Since it's my only prime and I want something sharp I use it a lot during the day, when it can be nice to have a UV filter on. Do you have filters larger than 52mm? I use my 62mm polarizer with a 62-to-52 step down ring so I can use it on the 50.

Velvet eh?

 

[Nismode]

The front element is recessed enough where you shouldn't have to worry too much about scratching it. Since it's my only prime and I want something sharp I use it a lot during the day, when it can be nice to have a UV filter on. Do you have filters larger than 52mm? I use my 62mm polarizer with a 62-to-52 step down ring so I can use it on the 50.

Velvet eh?

I have a filter for the 50mm...I ended up taking it off after this thread.

So it's just sitting in my bag right now.

 

[finch13]

That usually won't happen if you shoot during the day and the only time you really need a UV... that effect only happens on the 50m for me.

I got a filter case from Adorama for like $12 to protect my 5 filters and step-down ring.

 

[Wildman]

i can spend about 800 right now since i have other things going on but all i really want is something to learn on. I know someone who bought a markIV or whatever the hell that shoots in HD. He said i should just get one too because out of the box it will render better results than others and then i can always play around and learn so not sure if i should wait to get the budget up there which will take a few months or start with something small

Don't claim to be as knowledgeable as the other folks in this thread, but I wouldn't spend $800 on my first dslr, and honestly I'd seriously consider buying used as well. I'm honestly pretty mediocre at taking pictures, but I don't believe that there's any point in spending more money on equipment until you get familiar with the hobby and learn what you're doing first.

Here's some pics taken with my mom's Nikon D50 (dumbed down D70). It was a pretty affordable DSLR, I think I've gotten some pics to come out pretty good and if I can do it the camera is definitely capable of more lol. I forget the less it has to be honest, I know its not the kit lense though (she already had a lense from analog slr). Not trying to whore the thread, just I wouldn't spend $1k on a camera just so I could take pictures in auto mode out of the box

2nd ever attempt at a night shot (Graceland)

And these ones from Wyoming last summer are still some of my favorites. Unfortunately didn't have a tripod though (first pic especially, other times I improvised with a fence or something)

Lost the high res version of this

 

[Raymond]

Damn Wildman, think you could make the pics a little bigger? I can't see them.

 

[TheHunter]

Holy Craps nice pics!

 

[Sketch o5]

those pics are sick cody

 

[fastflyinaccord]

nice pics cody