Non-Erotic Photos

[Kahlo]

Oh wow! Beautiful pics! My crush grows ever stronger.

Thank you very much FC! It was the macro lens wasn't it?

btw.. Your sky pics are gorgeous! You already know I am a fan of your photography though.

 

[Ekserb]

I love playing with my macro lens

This one is my favorite. I love the colors and composition!

 

[functioncurve]

Was trying to take a pic of the moon, but this happened. I thought it turned out pretty cool, though.

 

[tcwild100]

Was trying to take a pic of the moon, but this happened. I thought it turned out pretty cool, though.

definitely pretty cool

 

[Deleted member 1177770]

This one is my favorite. I love the colors and composition!

I have to agree here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I didn't get the point about macro lenses though. Was it a digital camera ? I don't have all that idea about using and exploting a camera yet, so I want to learn

 

[Ekserb]

I have to agree here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I didn't get the point about macro lenses though. Was it a digital camera ? I don't have all that idea about using and exploting a camera yet, so I want to learn

A macro lens allows you to shoot extremely close to the subject and they typically are labeled with the ratio of image size to subject size at their closest focus. For example, a 1:1 macro lens can focus close enough that the subject will be exactly the same size on the sensor as it is in front of the camera. Most people find that a 110mm or 150mm macro lens gives them enough breathing room to get close shots of insects without being too close and scaring the critter away. I happen to own a 50mm 1:1 macro lens and it's very sharp, but the front of the lens is only about three inches from the subject at its closest focus.

There are also ways to get close by using two lenses attached by their filter mounts. I think this typically uses a telephoto lens shooting through a reversed wide angle lens, but I've never done it so I can't be sure. I do know it allows for very, very high magnification of the subject. Some people also use extension tubes between their lens and camera body that basically give you an extra bit of close-focus ability, but these will also wipe out your lens' infinity focus by not allowing the lens elements to get close enough to the sensor plane.

Bottom line: Macro lenses are fun!

 

[ShaiGirl]

Kahlo: wow, great pics with the macro lens!

Function curve: very nice cloud pics

Proactive boy: glad you joined here! I liked the duck.

tcwild: thanks for summarizing Ekserb's explanation on film prints & etc...

Ekserb: I like reading your posts here, as well as seeing your pics (be it model, animal, jeep, whatever! ) Thanks for the answering the question too re: the models and their clothes & make-up. I always try to read and understand your techy explanations, but somehow I get lost along the way. I read them anyway!

 

[Deleted member 1177770]

Thank You for the wonderful explanation Eskerb. I was just using a digital camera, Olypus model to be specific. I was using the close up photo mode and I think I was still not quite satisfid with my photo. I was only about 2 inches away from the dragonfly when I clicked the image.

I guess I have to get seperate lenses apart from the camera to get those levels of focus that you mentioned ?

Thanks Shai! I hope I can improve!

 

[Ekserb]

Ekserb: I like reading your posts here, as well as seeing your pics (be it model, animal, jeep, whatever! ) Thanks for the answering the question too re: the models and their clothes & make-up. I always try to read and understand your techy explanations, but somehow I get lost along the way. I read them anyway!

You're welcome and I hope I'm able to help in any way I can.

 

[Ekserb]

Thank You for the wonderful explanation Eskerb. I was just using a digital camera, Olypus model to be specific. I was using the close up photo mode and I think I was still not quite satisfid with my photo. I was only about 2 inches away from the dragonfly when I clicked the image.

I guess I have to get seperate lenses apart from the camera to get those levels of focus that you mentioned ?

Not necessarily. If you're not using a camera with interchangeable lenses, you can opt for a close-up or macro adapter that screws onto the front of the lens of just about any camera. While not as sharp as a dedicated lens, they can help produce some very large images of very small subjects.

 

[Deleted member 1177770]

Not necessarily. If you're not using a camera with interchangeable lenses, you can opt for a close-up or macro adapter that screws onto the front of the lens of just about any camera. While not as sharp as a dedicated lens, they can help produce some very large images of very small subjects.

Ah, guess I still have a lot to learn about photography! I just keep clicking and when I begin earning, I hope to improve on the equipment I own.

Thanks Eskerb! I'm sure I'll be bothering you with queries

 

[Ekserb]

Ah, guess I still have a lot to learn about photography! I just keep clicking and when I begin earning, I hope to improve on the equipment I own.

Thanks Eskerb! I'm sure I'll be bothering you with queries

No bother at all!

 

[Kahlo]

This one is my favorite. I love the colors and composition!

Thank you. I've been dying to turn it into a painting or maybe a mixed media work.

I shoot with a 300mm telephoto zoom lens that has macro capabilities(1:2) between 200-300mm. I bought it when I was in the market for a telephoto lens. The macro setting it fun, but at that length is a pain as well. You have to be pretty far away from what your shooting. With a lens that long and such a tight focus it's hard to get any decent shots without using a tripod. I also have a .45 wide angle with macro. I'm not really a fan of it. There really isn't a whole lot of difference when using my digi cam. When I use it on my film cam it does create a nice fish eye effect though. I don't use my film cam often though.. LOL

 

[Ekserb]

Thank you. I've been dying to turn it into a painting or maybe a mixed media work.

I shoot with a 300mm telephoto zoom lens that has macro capabilities(1:2) between 200-300mm. I bought it when I was in the market for a telephoto lens. The macro setting it fun, but at that length is a pain as well. You have to be pretty far away from what your shooting. With a lens that long and such a tight focus it's hard to get any decent shots without using a tripod. I also have a .45 wide angle with macro. I'm not really a fan of it. There really isn't a whole lot of difference when using my digi cam. When I use it on my film cam it does create a nice fish eye effect though. I don't use my film cam often though.. LOL

One of my very first lenses (back in the mid-eighties) was a 28-85mm zoom with macro capabilities at the wide end of the zoom. It was such a hassle to use because you had to zoom out and push a button in the lens barrel to unlock the macro feature. At that point you had to use the zoom ring to focus! The "mind of Minolta" must have a bad night before it thought up that design. My current 50 macro has nice labels on the lens so you can see the macro ratio as the barrel extends. The lens more than doubles its length at the closest focus.

 

[functioncurve]

CG took this pic the other night. She wants to steal my thunder even here, on the non-erotic thread.
Anyway, she told me that this is the biggest and hardest full moon of the year.

 

[Ekserb]

CG took this pic the other night. She wants to steal my thunder even here, on the non-erotic thread.
Anyway, she told me that this is the biggest and hardest full moon of the year.

That's a good moon shot!

 

[functioncurve]

That's a good moon shot!

Thank you Ekserb! I had to steal a little bit of FC's thunder, but he can have it back now.

 

[functioncurve]

That's a good moon shot!

I can take "moon shots", too!

 

[Ekserb]

I can take "moon shots", too!

Hey, hey. Me, too! (I was getting jealous of all the great moon photos, so I ran out back and took this a few minutes ago.)

This is a 100 percent crop. In other words, the pixels you see are the pixels that are on the sensor and I cut off a LOT of dead space around the moon. Sadly, 200mm and a 1.4x converter are not enough for great astrophotography.

http://web.me.com/pdbreske/literotica/PICT2643.jpg

 

[functioncurve]

Hey, hey. Me, too! (I was getting jealous of all the great moon photos, so I ran out back and took this a few minutes ago.)

This is a 100 percent crop. In other words, the pixels you see are the pixels that are on the sensor and I cut off a LOT of dead space around the moon. Sadly, 200mm and a 1.4x converter are not enough for great astrophotography.

You still got some neat details though!

 

[Ekserb]

You still got some neat details though!

I do love my 70-200 ƒ2.8 Minolta G lens! Worth every penny of that $1800 price tag.

 

[functioncurve]

I do love my 70-200 ƒ2.8 Minolta G lens! Worth every penny of that $1800 price tag.

$1800? Is that all?

 

[Ekserb]

$1800? Is that all?

I was going to reply with a "at least it's not as bad as what Sony now charges for the same lens," but it looks like Sony lowered the price to the previous Konica Minolta level. It's available at B&H for $1800. Sony used to charge over $2000 for this lens.

EDIT: Oops. I forgot the $480 teleconverter that I also used for the moon shot.

(I really need to start making some money with this photography hobby.)

 

[Deleted member 1177770]

Really good shots CG and Eskerb btw both of you are talented FC and CG!

Again please pardon my ignorance , to get a real good shot of anything in the sky do we have to use lenses or is a good shot possible from a normal camera using zoom.

And are you guys using tripods outdoors too to get the shots ? Since using my normal camera whenever I try to capture shots on full zoom the camera is very sensitive, even a slight movement results in a blurred photo.

 

[Ekserb]

Really good shots CG and Eskerb

Again please pardon my ignorance , to get a real good shot of anything in the sky do we have to use lenses or is a good shot possible from a normal camera using zoom.

And are you guys using tripods outdoors too to get the shots ? Since using my normal camera whenever I try to capture shots on full zoom the camera is very sensitive, even a slight movement results in a blurred photo.

I was talking about this very recently with a co-worker who was trying to take pictures of the full moon and kept getting a big white blob. What he didn't realize and what most people forget is the surface of the moon is as bright as a beach at midday. It's nothing more than grey dust and direct sunlight. The light we see here is very bright compared to the rest of the nighttime sky, so exposing as you would any other night scene will overexpose the moon.

Try a shutter speed of 1/250 second and a lens aperture of ƒ8 to get started. This will give you a decent exposure, but you can adjust up and down for better results if you find it's too dark or too bright. If you don't have manual settings, make sure to center the moon in the frame so the camera's exposure system will (hopefully) use the moon as the base for the exposure. (If your camera has different "scene modes," do not use the Night setting. This setting will normally force a long shutter and increase likelihood of blur and overexposure.)

The good thing is, these relatively short duration shutter speeds will help minimize motion blur when using the longest zoom setting of your camera. The more you zoom in, the more likely the camera will use a quick shutter and the more likely you'll get a useable shot.

A tripod is fine, but if your camera has a really, really long zoom lens, you'll have to recompose the shot every few minutes because the moon has moved from where you had originally aimed. If you can get the camera to use a quick shutter, you'll probably find that you won't need a tripod. Just brace your body against a tree or something.

Be sure to share your results!