Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

People Contest
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 4:30 pm    Post subject: People Contest Reply with quote

Please post here some of your people shoots (all non-portrait shoots, street photography etc) ! Please declare camera body , lens and every other technical details what you think it is important to know.

Please rate every pictures with rate function! You can see it below every posts.



Comments would be nice also.

You can follow actual rates [b]here.


Last edited by Attila on Wed Oct 13, 2010 8:53 pm; edited 3 times in total


PostPosted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Does this category include any non-portrait shots of people, e.g. sports, concerts, weddings, events, etc?


PostPosted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

yes, I make it to more clear, thanks!


PostPosted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In boat
Canon Eos 350D
MTO-500/8



PostPosted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've got a bunch of street people photos, mostly slides from back during the 80s when I hung out at Venice Beach, CA a lot. That was the best place I ever found for street people shots.

On the Venice Beach Boardwalk, about 1986. Canon F-1, probably a Vivitar 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5 (one of my favorite walking around lenses back then). Kodachrome 64.



I've got more, which I'll post separately. I'm assuming it's okay to post more than one photo?


PostPosted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, okay I did modify my first post at every contests post more.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 11:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's my little contribution: Surprised

E-300 + Zuiko 50mm f1.4, at f1.4



PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Konica S III, Hexanon 47/1.9, BW400CN:



PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FE2, E35/2.5, Ferrania 400:



PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 12:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interest...


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 7:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This image is a crop of about a 1cm x 1.5cm sized section of the original slide. Canon A-1, FD 50mm f/1.8, Kodachrome 64, taken at a luau in Hawaii, September 1983. Exposure unrecorded.



Last edited by cooltouch on Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:01 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

EOS 400D, Jupiter-21M 4/200:



PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

EOS 400D, Contax Sonnar 2.8/180:



PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

STUNNING imagery Orio. How often do you "fall in love" with these
beautiful vixens? Shocked Both lenses show different characteristics
and tonalities, and both are superb. The Sonnar is obviously knife sharp!


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laurence wrote:
STUNNING imagery Orio. How often do you "fall in love" with these
beautiful vixens? Shocked Both lenses show different characteristics
and tonalities, and both are superb. The Sonnar is obviously knife sharp!


Thanks Larry! You are a photographer so you know perfectly that you must always fall in love with all your subjects if you want to make good photography. With girls it just comes easier than with men or with buildings Laughing


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laurence wrote:
STUNNING imagery Orio

did you know it is a contest and you have to vote when you find a stunning imagery Rolling Eyes Smile


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You are so correct regarding falling in love. I agree, even when taking
a picture of some ferns, you need to spend some time admiring and
looking at them for their own character and characteristics.

I am having difficulty "getting over" just how fantastic that image of the
red-haired girl is. The Sonnar, combined with your abilities, makes it a
true artist's portrait. You seem to handle the heavy Sonnar with skill. Man,
what a lens! Shocked Clarity, bokeh, rendition -- it has to be among the
best ever made in 180mm lenses.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laurence wrote:
You are so correct regarding falling in love. I agree, even when taking
a picture of some ferns, you need to spend some time admiring and
looking at them for their own character and characteristics.

I am having difficulty "getting over" just how fantastic that image of the
red-haired girl is. The Sonnar, combined with your abilities, makes it a
true artist's portrait. You seem to handle the heavy Sonnar with skill. Man,
what a lens! Shocked Clarity, bokeh, rendition -- it has to be among the
best ever made in 180mm lenses.


Thanks Larry. I was lucky, because it was one of those occasions where everything fits: the blue uniforms, the red tinted hair, the orange butterfly, and the touches of muted reds and purple in the bokeh, where the muted greens echo the colour of the eyes. I could not have made it better if I arranged that myself.
Plus, like you note, I had the luck to have the lens perfect for this situation: the Sonnar 180 is not the sharpest of lenses, but it has a killer bokeh, and in this shot, bokeh does really keep it all together.
Everything was really like I could ever wish in this image, so I kept it even if I slightly back focused. But in this image the pictorial side is more important than the focus. Smile


PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 11:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK, I'm cheating. But I hate photographing people. So this demure nymph will have to do.

Pentax K10 Soligor 135 f2.8 chrome ears model.

[img]
Statue by Mudplugga, on Flickr[/img]


PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote: the Sonnar 180 is not the sharpest of lenses, but it has a killer bokeh

Orio, so you feel that the Sonnar is not sharp? Or, just not as
sharp compared to other lenses? The reason I ask is because I have one
"ordered" through the auction site. I had the older version with uncoated
lens and Pentacon mount, and this time I'm trying out the newer
version. In fact, brand new. Very Happy I like having the reach for floral and
rain forest plant images, as it allows me to avoid laying on the ground
all the time, especially when near an alpine stream.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lloydy, NICE image. Good colors, and it looks like the K10 renders nice
tones from its sensor.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 2:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

poilu wrote:
Laurence wrote:
STUNNING imagery Orio

did you know it is a contest and you have to vote when you find a stunning imagery Rolling Eyes Smile


Haha poilu! Thanks for reminding me! I gave a "stunning"rating to Orio's
Sonnar image.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laurence wrote:
Orio wrote: the Sonnar 180 is not the sharpest of lenses, but it has a killer bokeh

Orio, so you feel that the Sonnar is not sharp? Or, just not as
sharp compared to other lenses?


Just not as sharp compared to other Contax lenses (or modern Nikon and Canon lenses). Smile
But it's a very old design, this is normal, it is the Olympia design from 1936. Zeiss did update it a bit for the Contax version, but it's not as advanced as the long teles from Nikon or Canon that we are used to today, with APO build, aspherical elements, high refraction or fluorite glasses, close range correction etc... In comparison, the Sonnar 180 is really a retro lens.
Contax itself made sharpest zoom lenses in the range (both the 80-200 and 100-300 Vario-Sonnars are sharper than the 2.8/180).
But none of these lenses has the luscious bokeh of the 2.8/180. It is clearly a portrait lens and as such it outperforms every other 180mm that I know of. It should be used in the close to medium range, that is where it really shines. Used at infinity for landscape is still a good lens, and adequate for most uses, but it's not super, for instance you have the CA in high contrast edges such as line of trees over sky.
At least this is my experience.
I am sure you will love the Sonnar 2.8/180. For the type of pictures you make, where you concentrate on meaningful details and luscious green bokehs, it looks like the perfect 180.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
.... Used at infinity for landscape is still a good lens, and adequate for most uses, but it's not super, for instance you have the CA in high contrast edges such as line of trees over sky....

Olympic Sonnar stopped down to f8 or more is even better than most of the never lenses in 180 - 200 mm range at infinity I've tested. Naturally , you can't still compare it to wide-open APO-Telyt 3.4/180 but given it's age the overall performance of this lens is amazing.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Followup about the Sonnar 180 here:
http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1079296.html#1079296
(so we don't clutter the contest thread with lens discussion)