Let me know what you guys think. New to DSLR so just practicing to get better and better.

YAY OR NAY?

Edited by Tinh Ngo on Mar 30, 2008 at 01:10 AM GMT

absolutely YA.... freaking amazing colors. You maybe new to DSLR but its obvious your not new to photography. Well done.

Yay! Very cool... love the bright colors

thanks guy keep them coming.. thanks for the love

a few more from the series







Edited by Tinh Ngo on Mar 30, 2008 at 01:15 AM GMT

That one with the kid pointing at the camera could go down as a timeless image.
You can tell he has watched one to many pros flaunt infront of cameras and on the chance he one day plays the majors that photo will say it all. Great set.

As someone said, you maybe new to dslr but not at all to photography... I more than agree. great set and hope you enjoy the digital side.

I pick up photography and my first dlsr on jan 04 2008 so Im really new to photography and DSLRR, i been loving photography ever since then.. now im majoring in weddings/potrait/commerical so yea.. doing all of these shoot with kids and ppls are really a good experince. I will post more pictures ASAP! Thanks for the love guy.

Really nice stuff. You're a natural - keep working hard at it.

Dean

very very nice - A little heavy on the saturation and contrast (my taste), but still outstanding. gREAT JOB!

Hello and welcome to this forum (and photography too).

You have a very 'good eye' and are creating some outstanding images.

Keep up the good work....and have fun too.

thanks for the love and kind words. Its very inspirational. thanks guys

few more of team and this kit last run at the bat for the day, he almost hit a home run

Tinh,

Your images are so good (most of them) that you will no doubt cause envy in many more experienced photographers around the playing fields.

I am not a 'sports shooter' but have seen many more images that fail to show the individuals and the groups as you have. You are 'on to something' with your work in this area.

My Simple Suggestion: Try to only show your best images. Eliminate any that are 'weak' or typical looking.

I hope you find these comments helpful.

gotcha thanks.. i will put that on my notebooks... time to delete bad one , sometime i like posting bad one so i can learn from the pro's and see where i can work on.. to be honest.. i like to know my failure/weak point so i can succeed/fix them later on. thanks a lot again.

Tinh Ngo wrote:
gotcha thanks.. i will put that on my notebooks... time to delete bad one , sometime i like posting bad one so i can learn from the pro's and see where i can work on.. to be honest.. i like to know my failure/weak point so i can succeed/fix them later on. thanks a lot again.

What is weak?

Purely a matter of opinion.

When looking at the images above, I think the images where the bat is cut off are 'weaker' and could be 'improved' by showing more of the figure (including bat tip) in the image. So, while the individuals (expressions) look great, the overall image is "weaker" because of the cut bat etc...

Simple Suggestion: Show the entire figure in the image (including bat tip) on the 'swing' images and then crop later to eliminate other distractions.

You might do this by taking a 'wider' shot using a zoom and anticipate the 'reach' of the bat in front of the figure prior to shutter release.

yea i was thinking of those, i love the face expression and actions but its cut off on some part.. i did it all with a 85 1.8 , my only lens for now, because i mostly shoot potrait and I figure out if i'm going to do some local games.. i need a zoom. maybe a tamron 17-50 on a 1.6 crop or sigma 24-70 . I do see the weakness where I can improve. Next time I will do better in those field. =]

Tinh Ngo wrote:
yea i was thinking of those, i love the face expression and actions but its cut off on some part.. i did it all with a 85 1.8 , my only lens for now, because i mostly shoot potrait and I figure out if i'm going to do some local games.. i need a zoom. maybe a tamron 17-50 on a 1.6 crop or sigma 24-70 . I do see the weakness where I can improve. Next time I will do better in those field. =]


Given your current images, I recommend the Sigma 24-70 f2.8. Since you like both action shots (try the lens about 30mm) and you like individual portraits (70mm).

IF you went with the 17-50mm, I bet you would feel your 'reach' was limited and your images would look very different from what you see now. Given the 'action' nature of the games, having a single lens that allows rapid change of FOV (field of view) is important.

Another to consider would be the Canon 24-105mm f4 (I have one of those too) but it is significantly more expensive (about $900 versus $350 or so).

My suggestion would be get the Sigma and start with it. Then add more equipment later as you learn the limitations of that zoom.

I was also thinking about the tamron 28-75 , so the 24-70 on a 1.6 crop will be different.. could i still fit like a whole team in one frame if i step back a few feets?

Tinh Ngo wrote:
I was also thinking about the tamron 28-75 , so the 24-70 on a 1.6 crop will be different.. could i still fit like a whole team in one frame if i step back a few feets?

On the 1.6 crop cameras, (or any camera) the extra 4mm at the wide end makes more of a difference (IMHO).

Given the choice, I would select the 24-70 over the 28-75mm range.

It is sometimes easier to walk forward (closer) to make up that 5mm on the long end than it is to walk back for the 4mm on the wide end.

Especially if you are up against the fence at those games (with people or stands behind you) or in a wedding reception area.

Put another way, you can always crop an image after the exposure, but you cannot add 'width' to the shot after the exposure.

wouldnth a 17-50 come closet to having 24-70 on a 1.6 crop and a 24-70 would be not wide no more?

Tinh Ngo wrote:
wouldnth a 17-50 come closet to having 24-70 on a 1.6 crop and a 24-70 would be not wide no more?

Given that you want to do "portraits/wedding" I suggest the 24-70mm as I suggested earlier.

The 17mm end is wider (naturally) but will rarely be used for the "portraits/wedding" typical work you want to shoot.

I used to have a 17-35mm and sold it quickly after determining that it was not the right focal length for most of the shots/situations I wanted to shoot (mostly individuals and small groups). Of course others will feel differently.

There is a big apparent difference. IF you buy the 17mm type lens, you will often find yourself wishing you had more 'reach' and that is where the 24mm - 70 mm is so useful...at the 70mm end.

IF you have $900 get the 24-105 f4.0.....but then you will realize that having a f2.8 lens is vital for most wedding work.

All lenses are compromises. In the case of having one lens that could be used for weddings and portraits (and some of the closeup sports portraits), AND for a reasonable cost (not over $1000) then I suggest you consider the 24-70mm. IF you have $900 you could get the Canon model. At the beginning of your photography "career" I suggest you start with the Sigma and use your funds to get more 'breadth' in your gear to allow you to do more different types of photography.

You will find many discussions of these lenses at the Canon SLR forum here and there are many 'reviews' online and here at this site too.

You've got a good eye for finding and isolating what is important in the scene and contrasting it with the background clutter, one of the more difficult things to do outdoors and something most beginners struggle with. You've also got the knack for capturing the decisive moment, as evidenced by the batting shots, and good technical skills (exposure, focus, etc.)

In terms of constructive criticism, the cropping on the action shots is tight to the point of cutting off the bat, feet, etc. in some and the heads are winding up much lower in the frame than in your more deliberative shots. Its very tough to catch the action and get the most effective crop at the same time. I'd suggest you shoot the action shots a bit wider to allow yourself some flexibility for cropping and composition during editing. Some of the other shots like the dugout shots have the subjects centered when they'd be more effective slightly off center with extra space in the direction the subject is looking towards.

On the more deliberate shots when you have time, once you identify your center of interest (COI) expand the frame outward from it, rather than starting wide and cropping it. As you expand the frame move the center of interest around in the frame to find the best balance. It is easier to spot distraction that way and adjust cropping to avoid them. When you crop out-to-in the tendency is to keep the center of interest where you initially put it, even when distractions in the frame at the edges.

yup i understand. sometime i wish i can crop it better.. i mostly use the 85 for individuals portrait and not usually for sports.