advertisement


pfm Picture A Week (PAW) 2020

Status
Not open for further replies.
eguth said:
bdsbB04.jpg
Click to expand...
Does anyone know what, or can guess what, the odd shaped white dot in the top eighth of the photo is? A u.f.o.? I ask because one of my neighbours, a few years ago, pointed out a very unusual circular object near this area. He was certain it was a u.f.o. I had not idea what it was.
 
Whenever I see photos of that monstrosity I tend to have vague fantasies about the Luftwaffe, but I have to say I like that, Amar, works really well.

I've been toying with the idea of getting a Z6 with the 24-70 lens, but a lot of the images I see from that lens look really sterile, its so sharp. Yours seem to buck the trend, they look really nice. Any thoughts?
 
Daughter's mint OM2n, mentioned somewhere upthread, with lens on approval courtesy of Uncle Marchbanks of this parish. Such a lovely thing to handle.

NPKanm.jpg


I never seem to beat the dust when I take photos of cameras. You don't see it until you upload the photos onto your screen. A fine paintbrush would be the answer.
 
eternumviti said:
Whenever I see photos of that monstrosity I tend to have vague fantasies about the Luftwaffe, but I have to say I like that, Amar, works really well.

I've been toying with the idea of getting a Z6 with the 24-70 lens, but a lot of the images I see from that lens look really sterile, its so sharp. Yours seem to buck the trend, they look really nice. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

Many thanks Toby - it's such a well photographed and.... 'unique' building so I wanted to get something a bit different from the norm. I also wanted to process the image to be on the cool side of neutral. Somehow seems to suit the building's character if that makes sense?

In terms of the lens, optically it's stellar. Yes it's sharp, (probably on par with my old Nikon 24-70/2.8 G) but it's certainly not clinical or sterile. (Macro lenses can sometimes be like that I find). I think a lot comes down to how the files are treated. Treat them sensitively (as I know you would do) and you won't have any problems.

The only thing I don't like about the lens is the twist to lock / unlock design (I can imagine this being a point of mechanical failure over time). On the plus side, it's very small, light and cheap (for the performance on offer).

The Z bodies work superbly for my needs. They are rugged, light, ergonomically well thought out and the sensors are absolutely stunning.

Hope this helps :)

Lefty
 
Marchbanks said:
I haven't had many complaints.
Click to expand...

Heavens, perish the thought!

Lefty said:
Many thanks Toby - it's such a well photographed and.... 'unique' building so I wanted to get something a bit different from the norm. I also wanted to process the image to be on the cool side of neutral. Somehow seems to suit the building's character if that makes sense?

In terms of the lens, optically it's stellar. Yes it's sharp, (probably on par with my old Nikon 24-70/2.8 G) but it's certainly not clinical or sterile. (Macro lenses can sometimes be like that I find). I think a lot comes down to how the files are treated. Treat them sensitively (as I know you would do) and you won't have any problems.

The only thing I don't like about the lens is the twist to lock / unlock design (I can imagine this being a point of mechanical failure over time). On the plus side, it's very small, light and cheap (for the performance on offer).

The Z bodies work superbly for my needs. They are rugged, light, ergonomically well thought out and the sensors are absolutely stunning.

Hope this helps :)

Lefty
Click to expand...

Thanks Amar. I'm cropped, so have your old 24-70/2.8 equivalent, the 17-55/2.8, which is a fine lens, though its weight makes it prone to getting knocked. I've actually got two of them, and gave probably paid for Fixation's Christmas staff party at least once. The lighter weight, FX, and the better video possibilities of the Zs are drawing me in, but I've seen a lot of Z images elsewhere that seem very clinical.

Anyway, you've reassured me. My pp is very grungy, so I'm sure I can deal with it, and theres always the legacy lenses that I have with my F SLRs.
 
Good call. Thanks for going to the trouble.
Definitely a tighter composition.
Might well return to it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top