www.phoben.com/photos/people_and_places/2003Originally posted by Toshi
that picture is scary. to reduce contrast shoot raw and select lower contrast : hehe . also, link non-functional
and no more 'you should shoot RAW' cracks. I sucked it up and switched to RAW long (2-3 months) ago... although you are indeed right.Originally posted by Toshi
that picture is scary. to reduce contrast shoot raw and select lower contrast : hehe . also, link non-functional
sweet. i like the pics. if you buy Adobe Camera Raw you can tweak the raw files even more. i dig it. how is alec doing btw? also, i think the low-angle balcony shot w/sky showing is effective, but they're all standing too straight up. also the rule of thirds off-centeredness is getting a little out of hand perhapsOriginally posted by WTGPhoben
and no more 'you should shoot RAW' cracks. I sucked it up and switched to RAW long (2-3 months) ago... although you are indeed right.
alec is cillin' going to berkley and tryin to decide if he really wants to be a musician.Originally posted by Toshi
sweet. i like the pics. if you buy Adobe Camera Raw you can tweak the raw files even more. i dig it. how is alec doing btw? also, i think the low-angle balcony shot w/sky showing is effective, but they're all standing too straight up. also the rule of thirds off-centeredness is getting a little out of hand perhaps
keyserved ver. is still 5.5 Maybe Thad can hook me up with 7Originally posted by Toshi
harvard has a keyserved copy of pshop 7 no? or just talk a ua into giving you a disc... ah, ok. if you meant to crop them close that makes sense. just with all the blown out background and a tiny sliver of face...
(i'm on lunch break now, back in my room)Originally posted by endtroducing
so toshi, i missed if you posted it elsewhere, but what does this new job entail?
hmm, still sounds pretty cool though, i'm a sucker for most any travel (lots of time to read on the plane?) Oh and they DEFINITELY should be giving you a laptop.Originally posted by Toshi
(i'm on lunch break now, back in my room)
i'm now a it guy for a hotel chain's corporate office. this makes me employee #7 . i haven't done anything too interesting, or even mildly interesting so far. but supposedly i will be in for much travel in the future, possibly to colorado next week. to fix things at one of the hotels, of course. but still.
now that i think of it, it would probably be just as well to not have one . just means i can be less useful on the road, woot.Originally posted by endtroducing
hmm, still sounds pretty cool though, i'm a sucker for most any travel (lots of time to read on the plane?) Oh and they DEFINITELY should be giving you a laptop.
that blows. (except for him not stealing the most expensive thing in your car) how's the insurance?Originally posted by Toshi
some vagrant broke into my car while it was in the public garage. broke the passenger window, stole my jacket yet left the valentine1.
i don't think i'm going to hit the insurance up, it's $135 to replace, not worth it. insurance is the biggest scam of all...Originally posted by WTGPhoben
that blows. (except for him not stealing the most expensive thing in your car) how's the insurance?
or not. I really like the way it looks with the polarizer, and it's a really handy all-purpose lens.Originally posted by Toshi
coolness . sell the zoom
eh, sell it and buy a s400. i found out my title today when i finally signed my contract, and i am "IT Director" hehe. straight from being a UA to this. i also wrote a bunch of html and perl code today. the html works -- i can test this. but the perl is entirely untested. it seems that no one knows how to get access to the webserver... they even had the hosting company wrong at first. oh well. lazy afternoons + posting to this thread while at work == the new hotness.Originally posted by WTGPhoben
or not. I really like the way it looks with the polarizer, and it's a really handy all-purpose lens.
what's the dollar figure on this lack of work that you do?Originally posted by Toshi
eh, sell it and buy a s400. i found out my title today when i finally signed my contract, and i am "IT Director" hehe. straight from being a UA to this. i also wrote a bunch of html and perl code today. the html works -- i can test this. but the perl is entirely untested. it seems that no one knows how to get access to the webserver... they even had the hosting company wrong at first. oh well. lazy afternoons + posting to this thread while at work == the new hotness.
a zoom lens? Toshi are you okay? Housekeeping must have put something in that mint they leave on your pillow.Originally posted by Toshi
hehe, sat night foosball tournament. oh wait, i used to do those (2nd place singles and doubles in quincy tournament, aw yeah)
i shot some frames with a D100 and sigma 12-24 and 15-30 lenses today. if the 12-24 shots look decent i am going to buy that lens (my first zoom! well, since the 70-200 f/4 L) after i get my first paycheck
hotness. also i signed a lease on an apartment. feel so grown up, ya know
oh, and one more thing: the cops called, and apparently they caught the guy who broke my window and retrieved my ski jacket. maybe i'll even be able to shake the bum down for the window replacement cost in small claims court if he is not totally broke, we'll see
i'm looking for the magic bullet, that is, a wide, sharp non-fisheye lens. unfortunately the 12-24 is _not_ it. the 15-30 beats it soundly in my informal comparison (which will be posted tomorrow since i can't post through my cell phone connection). agh.Originally posted by WTGPhoben
a zoom lens? Toshi are you okay? Housekeeping must have put something in that mint they leave on your pillow.
but seriously...
what's the motivation? Just don't have anything to cover those lengths? 12-24 and 15-30 are pretty small ranges as zooms go.
then why not buy prime? (god, I sound like you) sigma makes a 20 f/1.8Originally posted by Toshi
i'm looking for the magic bullet, that is, a wide, sharp non-fisheye lens. unfortunately the 12-24 is _not_ it. the 15-30 beats it soundly in my informal comparison (which will be posted tomorrow since i can't post through my cell phone connection). agh.
maybe i should try out the 17-40 f/4 L. these lenses only are their sharpest around f/8 anyway, so having a fast max f-stop is not essential...
also procrastination:Originally posted by WTGPhoben
then why not buy prime? (god, I sound like you) sigma makes a 20 f/1.8
er, i don't know quite what to sayOriginally posted by WTGPhoben
also procrastination:
what kind of shooting do you have in mind for this new not-quite-but-almost-fisheye lens?Originally posted by Toshi
er, i don't know quite what to say
yeah, i have thought about going primes. looks like i might have to do that, too. the thing is that even the 15-30 is wider than the decent non-fish primes (of which the widest i'd say is the 17mm tokina at-x pro. the 14mm ones are no good, so i've heard)
also i am thinking tonight that maybe i could get a cheap (under 5k) car instead of a motorcycle. what sports cars fit that bill, eh? might be safer...
i dunno, night shot stuff of buildings? maybe i can get arrested for being a potential terrorist if i keep that habit upOriginally posted by WTGPhoben
what kind of shooting do you have in mind for this new not-quite-but-almost-fisheye lens?
What ISO did you shoot the test pics at? They're super grainy. It still looks like they werent too sharp, but I wonder how much of that had to do with the lighting.Originally posted by Toshi
i dunno, night shot stuff of buildings? maybe i can get arrested for being a potential terrorist if i keep that habit up
i have cooled on the idea after seeing how lackluster the lens was in real life btw. sample pics are up, file names should be self-explanatory:
http://harvard03.ath.cx/images/miscellaneous/an informal wide angle lens comparison - january 25 2004/
also have pics of my apartment hunt mentioned a few posts back (from sunday) up
http://harvard03.ath.cx/images/daily/apartment hunting - january 25 2004/
ya, it's the camera's fault! shot them on the nikon d100 demo unit at the counter, the guy didn't have the 12-24 in canon mount. all were at iso 800. if you look at the sigma 15-30 f/8 shots you can see that decent sharpness was theoretically possible even given the shutter speeds and high iso noise.Originally posted by WTGPhoben
What ISO did you shoot the test pics at? They're super grainy. It still looks like they werent too sharp, but I wonder how much of that had to do with the lighting.
also, testpic link is broken. I had to find it from the parent