Pulling Strings With The 70-200 VR2!!
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Things are getting a bit spotty with the 500/4 Nikkor!!
Next: But will MS's overheat in the sun, like the Crapple iPad?
From: Savageduck on 1 Aug 2010 20:16 On 2010-08-01 16:39:29 -0700, Larry Thong <larry_thong(a)shitstring.com> said: > I know, I know, this was a job for the good old 200/2, but I was a bit > lazy to carry it today so I went on the cheap with the trusty old 70-200 > VR2. It worked! > > <http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm261/Ritaberk/Strings.jpg> This is a nice capture, but it is spoilt by shooting wide open and having the right arm OF. I don't know what your actual aperture was, as we have no EXIF data. I can only guess you were wide open at f/2.8. I would have thought there was more than enough light + VRII to shoot at f/6.3-f/12 bringing that arm into focus. -- Regards, Savageduck
From: LOL! on 1 Aug 2010 21:27 On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 20:07:00 -0500, Larry Thong <larry_thong(a)shitstring.com> wrote: >On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 17:16:19 -0700, Savageduck wrote: > >> On 2010-08-01 16:39:29 -0700, Larry Thong <larry_thong(a)shitstring.com> >> said: >> >>> I know, I know, this was a job for the good old 200/2, but I was a bit >>> lazy to carry it today so I went on the cheap with the trusty old >>> 70-200 VR2. It worked! >>> >>> <http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm261/Ritaberk/Strings.jpg> >> >> This is a nice capture, but it is spoilt by shooting wide open and >> having the right arm OF. What's that? ANOTHER DSLR image shot to hell due to too shallow DOF? What were the odds of THAT happening? AGAIN. LOL! >> >> I don't know what your actual aperture was, as we have no EXIF data. I >> can only guess you were wide open at f/2.8. I would have thought there >> was more than enough light + VRII to shoot at f/6.3-f/12 bringing that >> arm into focus. > >Thanks. I'm content with the arm not being in focus But of course you are! You're a low-life crapshooter. How would you know what is and is not a decent image? You've proved that so many times it has become common knowledge. LOL! > as this is what I wanted. Of course it is! > I do have other shots at different apertures for different >effects. Sure you do! LOL!
From: John McWilliams on 1 Aug 2010 22:22 Larry Thong wrote: > On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 17:16:19 -0700, Savageduck wrote: > >> On 2010-08-01 16:39:29 -0700, Larry Thong <larry_thong(a)shitstring.com> >> said: >> >>> I know, I know, this was a job for the good old 200/2, but I was a bit >>> lazy to carry it today so I went on the cheap with the trusty old >>> 70-200 VR2. It worked! >>> >>> <http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm261/Ritaberk/Strings.jpg> >> This is a nice capture, but it is spoilt by shooting wide open and >> having the right arm OF. >> >> I don't know what your actual aperture was, as we have no EXIF data. I >> can only guess you were wide open at f/2.8. I would have thought there >> was more than enough light + VRII to shoot at f/6.3-f/12 bringing that >> arm into focus. > > Thanks. I'm content with the arm not being in focus as this is what I > wanted. I do have other shots at different apertures for different > effects. The arm being OoF distracts. But otherwise a perfect shot. -- john mcwilliams
From: Bruce on 2 Aug 2010 05:53 On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 17:16:19 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: >On 2010-08-01 16:39:29 -0700, Larry Thong <larry_thong(a)shitstring.com> said: > >> I know, I know, this was a job for the good old 200/2, but I was a bit >> lazy to carry it today so I went on the cheap with the trusty old 70-200 >> VR2. It worked! >> >> <http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm261/Ritaberk/Strings.jpg> > >This is a nice capture, but it is spoilt by shooting wide open and >having the right arm OF. Absolutely. Potentially a very good shot, ruined by a poor choice of aperture.
From: John McWilliams on 2 Aug 2010 09:13
Bruce wrote: > On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 17:16:19 -0700, Savageduck > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: >> On 2010-08-01 16:39:29 -0700, Larry Thong <larry_thong(a)shitstring.com> said: >> >>> I know, I know, this was a job for the good old 200/2, but I was a bit >>> lazy to carry it today so I went on the cheap with the trusty old 70-200 >>> VR2. It worked! >>> >>> <http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm261/Ritaberk/Strings.jpg> >> This is a nice capture, but it is spoilt by shooting wide open and >> having the right arm OF. > > > Absolutely. > > Potentially a very good shot, ruined by a poor choice of aperture. Possibly that particular aperture was fine, but if the focal point was moved to just past the arm, the arm and the face/violin could have also been in focus, no? -- john mcwilliams |