Mostly just that every one of them I've ever tried was a steaming pile of shit. I know they have a few decent models, but of the ones I've had a chance to use... eeesh.
Camera Showoff... literally:
Believe it or not, these tissues are (a year or so) older than me
AF 50 (75mm*)
Minimum distance: 45cm
Maximum aperture: f/1.7 (love it!)
Focusing speed**: 590ms (45cm to ∞)
AF 35-105 (52.5-57.5mm*)
Minimum distance: 150cm
Maximum aperture: f/3.5
Focusing speed**: 480ms (150cm to ∞)
Sadly someone dropped it (and the Dynax 7000i it was mounted on, which didn't survive) and bent the thread.
AF 70-210 (105-315mm*)
Minimum distance: 110cm
Maximum aperture: f/4
Focusing speed**: 990ms (110cm to ∞)
Same person who dropped the previous one also dropped this one, smashing the focus indicator glas cover.
* Due to the sensor's crop factor of 1.5.
** Driven by the body's AF motor at maximum speed.
Like the colours and the noise is a nice touch. Don't like the imperfect nail polish, although it probably fits her style.
Personally I would probably have chosen a different angle to include the Shisha in the composition
Tried out the bulb mode on my Pentax K-M. I have no tripod yet, nor do i have remote control, so the result isn't very good. I have no idea why i left my front light on. Held the button for ~40seconds (maybe less). It's 2AM here.
Since I also don't have a remote yet, I never even tried a conventional shot in bulb mode, I just use very slow shutter speeds (up to 30 seconds).
I did do some bulb-mode experiments though.
On the first two, I had quite a lot of dust on the sensor as you can see
A lamp in my room.
A streetlight.
The moon
An airplane.
A cigarette.
And for good measure, a funny one. Mr. Flat Pacman:
@morpha
from names of files I see u're using sony with adobe rgb color profile.
do you use any special software to preview those photos? or you have same profile in your monitor settings?
I can't set it right to have good picture with this profile.
You're right. For the curious ones: the Sony alphas prefix filenames with a single underscore if the Adobe RGB profile is used
I'm using Windows 7's Windows Photo Viewer with Photoshop installed, of which the Photo Viewer seems to make use as it displays Adobe RGB images correctly while IrfanView doesn't. Attached is a comparison showing Windows Photo Viewer on the left and IrfanView on the right. Depending on what you're displaying it on, it might automatically be converted to sRGB rendering both sides indentical. Though if your monitor and software support it, you will notice the left side has punchier colours and better contrast as a result of it. Adobe RGB is definitely the better choice in my experience
PS: Pay attention to the rear lights and the black parts.
PPS: Yes, it's a Matchbox Milka car.
PhotoN00b here with a few more questions. I've been looking at lenses:
1) Minimum Focus/Working distance - I understand that the minimum focus distance is the distance from the subject to the image/sensor (whatever) plane, and the minimum working distance is from the subject to the front of the lens.. Is that right?
2) The minimum focus distance... does this change depending on whether the Macro setting/functions/whatever is/are on or off?
<insert strange question below>
3) If I were to take a picture of a lego man from the minimum focus distance of a sorta bog standard zoom lens (say the distance is 0.4m), with the right settings dialled in, would this provide sufficient depth to the picture? When I say sufficient depth, I mean: would you be able to make it look like the picture was taken by say, a lego photographer standing within about 2-3m of the lego man if you see what I mean?
I know a macro lens would probably be better, but I could do without spending £400 or smn on one, and I know this question is an epically specific piece of fail... but if you could give me an idea, i'd be grateful :-P
Meh.. I don't have much knowledge on this, but the camera's working distance is measured from the lens flange to the film plane. It's the area that the mirror (on SLR cameras) and the shutter mechanism (aka curtain) on film cameras occupy.
The minimum focusing distance, as far as I know, is the minimum distance from the subject to the front of the lens.
As for whether your camera will do it, if you set it up for a long exposure and set the aperture to minimum (f/22 or whatever it is) you might be able to get close to macro focusing. True macro is 1:1 or greater ratio, where a photo of a fly is at least as big on the film/sensor as it is in real life. A lot of cameras have macro modes that aren't true macro. Suck it and see
