Imagemaster wrote:
No idea why you would use such a low shutter speed, unless you like that blurred result.
Imagemaster wrote:
No idea why you would use such a low shutter speed, unless you like that blurred result.
I admit I’m not a bird photographer but I have shot a lot of sports, and generally motion blur is a desirable effect when the subject is in focus. You remind me of Trenchmonkey over on the Nikon forum, real good at bird photography and kind of confrontational if it is anything you don’t agree with or like. Are my photos threatening you because you only know how to dial in 1/3000 of a second?
I do know how to use a camera, I have been doing it since film, and early DSLR cameras like the canon 20d.
Willy Y. wrote:
I admit I’m not a bird photographer but I have shot a lot of sports, and generally motion blur is a desirable effect when the subject is in focus. You remind me of Trenchmonkey over on the Nikon forum, real good at bird photography and kind of confrontational if it is anything you don’t agree with or like. Are my photos threatening you because you only know how to dial in 1/3000 of a second?
I do know how to use a camera, I have been doing it since film, and early DSLR cameras like the canon 20d.
Geez, what is confrontational about one saying they don't like something? Do you want everyone to say they like everything they look at?
So you you like some motion blur, and I don't. My, my. If I want to see sports motion, I will watch video. When I see a ball or player in mid-air my little brain knows it was in motion. I don't need any blur to figure that out. Some like it and some don't. If you have a problem with that, too bad.
Why don't your 20D eagle shots have any motion blur?
I don't need YOUR confrontational attitude, so your posts are now hidden. You are too big a threat to me.
Willy Y. wrote:
I admit I’m not a bird photographer but I have shot a lot of sports, and generally motion blur is a desirable effect when the subject is in focus. You remind me of Trenchmonkey over on the Nikon forum, real good at bird photography and kind of confrontational if it is anything you don’t agree with or like. Are my photos threatening you because you only know how to dial in 1/3000 of a second?
I do know how to use a camera, I have been doing it since film, and early DSLR cameras like the canon 20d.
Do not worry: this is not a photography forum where people look at pictures. This a place where they show they can shoot the BIF over & over with no attempt at doing anything anything else than focusing, exposing and framing so that the image is sharp.
And there are endless bitter discussions about which gear is best to get said sharp images. So when you talk to the kind of person who used Olympus, trashed it for a long time, said Sony was better, finally switched to Sony, continued to trash Olympus and finally switched back, what do you expect?
FM is a good forum but the Micro Four Thirds section is a joke.
Willy Y. wrote:
You remind me of Trench monkey over on the Nikon forum, real good at bird photography and kind of confrontational if it is anything you don’t agree with or like.
Also I just picked up my S5 yesterday and the weight and size is night and day different. Albeit you have to accept the EVF being nowhere close to that of the S1/S1R.
Wilbus wrote:
I does indeed seem like a great camera but I can see why you are selling if you don't crop or print. I have my Canon Prograf 1000 printer which I intend to use more and more and the S1R doesn't only give higher pixel count but also the ability to crop more, which I find my self doing more and more in order to experiment and learn (so I can get it right in the future in camera).
The Sigma 85mm DG DN looks superb, and its rendering looks quite similar to the PL 42,5mm I must say, from what I have seen so far so I think that will be a great alternative IF I decide to sell my m43 gear. I was thinking I'd keep the G9 and the great lenses for a while and see but I suspect I will end up selling it and investing in the L-mount. I'm currently fine with the fact that there aren't all too many lenses as Sigma finally seems to be putting out some great DG DN mirrorless lenses, the 14-24 is high on the list as well as it is now, not to mention the new 105 macro.
I'm also fine with F1.8 lenses actually, it's still faster in relative terms than what m43 has. The F1.2 lenses on m43 are more or less similar to F2.5 lenses (if I am right?) on FF when you take sensor quality in to the equation. Should be around two stops better. There are pros and cons to both though, I love the ability to shoot close with m43 thanks to the lenses close focusing ability. With the S1R cropping can have the same function in many cases though and more often than not I'll end up with more pixels on target.
However, the F1.8 primes from Panasonic will also depend on whether they are good or not. I suspect they will be unless they treat them as entry level V-loggers lenses.
