Picture Of The Day

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #3340 on:** 18 Aug 2014, 12:20 pm »

Good planning on having back-ups. Sorry to hear Pete.

SET Man · « **Reply #3341 on:** 22 Aug 2014, 04:01 am »

Hey!

"Lunch"

Lunch by setpower1, on Flickr

Take care,
Buddy

viggen · « **Reply #3342 on:** 22 Aug 2014, 06:52 am »

Guy 13 · « **Reply #3343 on:** 22 Aug 2014, 07:01 am »

Hi viggen.
Nice picture, I like that kind of picture, however,
it's under exposed, probably because of the website itself.
Please post more, I like that and I am sure others do too.

Guy 13

Can you give us details of the camera, lens used
and exposure details and where it was taken.

viggen · « **Reply #3344 on:** 22 Aug 2014, 07:14 am »

hi guy. thanks for the message. equipment is Nikon D90 and lens is 17-55mm on monopod. i think the settings are f2.8 iso 400 shutter 30 sec.

i had uploaded a series of images onto my blog here

Guy 13 · « **Reply #3345 on:** 22 Aug 2014, 07:37 am »

Quote from: viggen on 22 Aug 2014, 07:14 am

hi guy. thanks for the message. equipment is Nikon D90 and lens is 17-55mm on monopod. i think the settings are f2.8 iso 400 shutter 30 sec.

i had uploaded a series of images onto my blog here

Hi viggen.
Thanks for the info.
30 seconds with a monopod !
Wow, you must have steady hands to hold everything steady/motionless.
I went on your site, lots of nice pictures, thanks.
Did you travel to Carcassonne, France or you live there?
If you live there, means that you can read the following:
Je suis un petit cousin du Quebec.
If you can't understand what I wrote, it means that you are not French.
Thanks again for answering and commenting.

Guy 13
A French Canadian from Montreal, Quebec.
By the way, always wanted to go to France,
but never did, maybe one day...

viggen · « **Reply #3346 on:** 22 Aug 2014, 07:45 am »

it's one of those monopods with feet:

http://www.amazon.com/Manfrotto-682B-Standing-Monopod-Black/dp/B000186QGI/ref=pd_tcs_subst_p_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=10R82FJYJHYBYQA3TNX7

i was only in carcassone for an evening while driving through southern france. i don't speak french much but you said you are a small cousin from quebec?

Guy 13 · « **Reply #3347 on:** 22 Aug 2014, 08:02 am »

Quote from: viggen on 22 Aug 2014, 07:45 am

it's one of those monopods with feet:

http://www.amazon.com/Manfrotto-682B-Standing-Monopod-Black/dp/B000186QGI/ref=pd_tcs_subst_p_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=10R82FJYJHYBYQA3TNX7

i was only in carcassone for an evening while driving through southern france. i don't speak french much but you said you are a small cousin from quebec?

Hi viggen.
You might not be aware of that,
but I am the exclusive distributor/importer/retailer for Manfrotto in Vietnam.
I sell lots of monopod here,
the little feet can be of great help to make a low light shooting successful
or it can be disastrous when it's windy and the camera on the monopod is unattended.
A monopod with legs is not a tripod.
I am sure you know that already.
I hope you will be posting more picture of your trip to Europe.

Guy 13

jhm731 · « **Reply #3348 on:** 23 Aug 2014, 12:05 am »

bside123 · « **Reply #3349 on:** 24 Aug 2014, 10:52 pm »

Moments Before the BIG Downpour - Louisville, KY

2nd Street Bridge - Ohio River

gnuyork · « **Reply #3350 on:** 28 Aug 2014, 01:56 am »

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #3351 on:** 28 Aug 2014, 03:31 am »

Looks like Niagara Falls, but on second glance, the entire area is about the size of my hat.
Neat shot!

Guy 13 · « **Reply #3352 on:** 28 Aug 2014, 03:41 am »

Quote from: Bob in St. Louis on 28 Aug 2014, 03:31 am

Looks like Niagara Falls, but on second glance, the entire area is about the size of my hat.
Neat shot!

Hi Bob in St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
The Canadian's Niagara Falls are a lot better, bigger, more impressive than the water from a tap on the picture.
Now, more seriously, that's what I call I nice shot.
I should dig in my shoe box to see if I can find similar pictures that I did
when I was still in Canada enjoying life.

Guy 13

bside123 · « **Reply #3353 on:** 30 Aug 2014, 01:50 am »

As I've shared with many of you, I have begun a foray back to some film photography. It's been a lot of fun, and there's a learning curve as I refresh my old knowledge base
and skills, but... it's kinda like riding a bike, and this feels very familiar. There is a leap between the two worlds of digital and film. I am using two vintage film camera bodies:
1) 1972 Nikkormat; 2) 1992 Minolta 9xi. Since I am an Alpha shooter, the Minolta allows for me to use virtually all of my lenses that I use on my Sony A99 Digital Full-Frame.
For the last week, I've been learning how to use a film/document scanner. Okay... imagine the quality control and calibrations issues: film variety (ISO, tone, hue, grain & personality),
computer, monitor, printer and now... a scanner!

Here's a recent example of a still life.

Fujifilm X-TRA Superia 400 Color Film
1992 Minolta 9xi Camera, Tamron 28-75mm Lens @ 28mm
Epson Perfection V700 Scanner, 4800 dpi
Processed in DxO Optics Pro & Lightroom 5

Elaine's Kitchen Table on Film

SET Man · « **Reply #3354 on:** 30 Aug 2014, 03:31 am »

Hey!

bside123/Din, that is a pretty picture, nice natural window light.

Talking about camera, I remembered the 9xi, wanted one back than but couldn't afford it so I got the 7xi of which I still have but the rubber on the grip is turning white and seems to dry out but still work fine. I have to say that with all the SLR or DSLR cameras I've owned (not many) and those I've encountered the 7xi and 9xi are the most comfortable in my hand. The zoom I usually use back than with the 7xi was Tokina 28-70mm f2.6-2.8 the original Angenieux version and I still have that zoom.I was going to sell it but once I see the result with my Sony A700 I just can seem to let it go.

As for scanning color negative. Yes, it can be a challenge since each negative film have their own color character and you can't see it unlike slide film so I find it hard sometime of how much I should fine tune the color tone.

Anyway, good to see someone shooting with film here.

Take care,
Buddy

bside123 · « **Reply #3355 on:** 30 Aug 2014, 04:48 pm »

Hi Buddy,

I got lucky and bought a circa 1992 Minolta 9xi Camera Body, Minolta AF 35-70mm Lens and a 3500xi Flash as a package. All "near mint," in the original boxes with caps and manuals for only $75.00!

The 9xi is a lot of camera. Very sophisticated. It's was Minolta's flagship pro-model at the time, and it seems that it created a lot of controversy due to its many electronically controlled features. Most pros loved it... several hated it. I've also been reading about the successor, which was the Minolta 9. It still commands prices above $300. It seems to be the predecessor design for our Alpha mount cameras to this day.

For now... I'm set with the 9xi, AND I get to use my lenses for film.
Bonus!

gnuyork · « **Reply #3356 on:** 30 Aug 2014, 06:29 pm »

B side...nice film image. I agree there is a lot more involvement with profiling adding a scanner to the loop. I don't know if there technically is a way to profile color negative film, but I use the wolf faust targets for slide film. I'm not sure they are helping me much, I can't seem to fully understand the process. It gets pretty complex. I mainly work with color slides and transparencies for color film (not as much anymore since the Merrill). I have shot a few rolls of Portra which I think has an interesting color cast. The main problem I have is that my favorite color slide film is now extinct - E100VS, Kodachrome, and Velvia iso 50 for 4x5. I have plenty of B&W film in my freezer to last me the rest of my life probably, especially at the rate I am shooting film these days.

SET Man · « **Reply #3357 on:** 31 Aug 2014, 08:57 pm »

Quote from: bside123 on 30 Aug 2014, 04:48 pm

Hi Buddy,

I got lucky and bought a circa 1992 Minolta 9xi Camera Body, Minolta AF 35-70mm Lens and a 3500xi Flash as a package. All "near mint," in the original boxes with caps and manuals for only $75.00!

The 9xi is a lot of camera. Very sophisticated. It's was Minolta's flagship pro-model at the time, and it seems that it created a lot of controversy due to its many electronically controlled features. Most pros loved it... several hated it. I've also been reading about the successor, which was the Minolta 9. It still commands prices above $300. It seems to be the predecessor design for our Alpha mount cameras to this day.

For now... I'm set with the 9xi, AND I get to use my lenses for film.
Bonus!

Hey!

That's is a great buy for sure. Is the Minolta 35-70mm a constant f4 one? If so that is a nice compact zoom and matched your Minolta 70-210mm f4.

Yes, the 9xi was and still is a very nice camera, it was aimed at pro market but as usual Minolta never really push hard on pro market. But the xi series sold well. I bought my 7xi new back in 1991 and have shot countless roll of films with it. And accumulated A-mount lenses, all Minolta's except one over the years. Although, the 7xi had been sitting on the shelf since I've got the 7 in 2004 and than Minolta and Sony DSLRs.

Funny thing about AF SLR film cameras is that many of them go for less than older MF film SLR cameras.

Anyway, fun the your new "old" film camera

Take care,
Buddy

bside123 · « **Reply #3358 on:** 1 Sep 2014, 03:56 pm »

Quote from: SET Man on 31 Aug 2014, 08:57 pm

Is the Minolta 35-70mm a constant f4 one?

No, it's the Minolta AF 35-70mm f3.5-4.5. I took a few photos with it on my full-frame, and the lens was much sharper than I expected! Nice colors too.

Thanks again.

PeteG · « **Reply #3359 on:** 1 Sep 2014, 04:39 pm »

Quote from: bside123 on 1 Sep 2014, 03:56 pm

No, it's the Minolta AF 35-70mm f3.5-4.5. I took a few photos with it on my full-frame, and the lens was much sharper than I expected! Nice colors too.

Thanks again.

I have the same Minolta lens on an 450si that I bought in 94 (still use it), its alway been a good solid lens.