jim_ngo1

NYC is a great place to photograph street scenes and architecture. The 24-70/2.8 is good

for the street scenes, but you may want to also bring something longer if you like to shoot

architecture. I brought only a 28-135 IS and I found myself wishing I had my 70-200/2.8

at times. There are amazing views of the major skyscrapers (like the Chrysler building)

from all over the city. Grand Central Station is also a good place to shoot both street

shots and architecture, but you will definitely need a tripod inside the station. Times

Square is always interesting and challenging. Mulberry Street (the Italian area) and

Chinatown are also interesting. And, of course, the subway. You will want your flash for

that.

I have an EOS 3 and a 420EX and I agree with Walter. The fill flash is a little too bright, even though I center the subject and use FEL to get an ETTL reading before recomposing and shooting. I usually dial down the FE compensation a half stop. But then again, I usually shoot slide film where I prefer slight underexposure, so perhaps my eyes aren't well calibrated ;-)

This question comes up occasionally. Look <a href=http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=000eFG>here</a>.

Arrgh. Some recent 35mm rolls of Neopan 1600 came back from the lab with water marks. Any advice on how to clean them? I was thinking of agitating a few minutes in 1:25 diluted vinegar followed by a bath in distilled water and hung dry. Yea, nay, or anything else?

Sometimes that works, but these days it may not work. The security person may tell you to run it through the machine anyways.

<center>

<img src="http://www.webfreedom.com/jango/photos/painting.jpg">

<p><i>Portrait of a Painter</i>

</center>

Yes, I also use the st-e2 to drive a 420ex. I haven't heard of a Sigma that will master the canon speedlites, but I could certainly be wrong. A 550ex would also master, of course, but it's kind of a waste of a good flash to have it mounted on camera when you could move it off camera, opposite the 420ex, and use the st-e2 instead. This is where I'm headed. Anyone have a 550ex they'd be willing to part with for a good price? ;-)

<center>

<img src="http://www.webfreedom.com/jango/photos/ruben.jpg">

<p><i>My friend Ruben on Angel's Landing in Zion National Park</i>

</center>

I do a combination of travel and street photography. Though I've spent a big chunk of change on a Canon 70-200 f/2.8L, I have to say that the most important lens in my bag, that I will always have with me, is my 28-135 IS. When I have to leave the bag behind, this is the lens I choose.

Robert,

Those are great shots. The barber's own pulpit.

<center>

<img src="http://www.webfreedom.com/jango/photos/haircut.jpg">

<p><i>Just a little off the top.</i>

</center>

Anabel Williams talks about portraiture with direct sunlight in her book. Basically her tips are: Place subject under top shade, use reflected light, and have the subject look away from the camera so that the shadows are more flattering.

I have both of these lenses. I use the 28-135 IS a lot when I am traveling. It has good range for a single lens, especially for the price. I'm also very pleased with the shots from this lens. The 75-300 IS is a pretty decent lens if you can manage to stay around f/8 and somewhat shorter than 300mm. It's also sharper than the non-IS version of the same zoom that I had prior, at least in my experience. Sure, it's a little soft at 300mm, but what sub $500 300mm zoom isn't? When you need 300mm, sometimes getting a soft shot is better than not getting a shot at all. If you are not expecting National Geographic quality images, then you'll be fairly satisfied.

 

That said, if you had to choose only one, then definitely go for the 28-135 IS first. It's a good all-around performer.

<center>

<img src="http://www.webfreedom.com/jango/photos/kissmy.jpg">

<p><i>Canon EOS 3/Tamron SP 20-40/Fujifilm Sensia 100</i>

</center>

<center>

<img src="http://www.webfreedom.com/jango/photos/pottery.jpg">

<p><i><b>Selçuk, Turkey</b>

<br>Canon EOS 3/Canon 28-135 IS/Fujifilm Sensia 100</i>

</center>

<center>

<img src="http://www.webfreedom.com/jango/photos/red_umbrella.jpg"><br>

<i>Paris, France.<br>Yashica T4 Super/Fujifilm Superia XTra 400</i>

</center>

<p>I'm glad somebody asked.

Hi Duc,

 

Just to add to Emre's remarks, please resize your postings a little smaller. I don't go larger than 800 by 600 pixels, which usually fits within a browser window that's on a 1024 x 768 size monitor.

 

And, welcome to photo.net.

I think you need to cull through your images. Between the two albums, you have 550 shots. Maybe *you* are interested in all 550, but not many others will be. Pick out your best for a single album that we can look over in a few minutes.

<center>

<img src="http://www.webfreedom.com/jango/bna4ever/110.jpg">

<br><i>Canon EOS 3/Canon EF 28-135 IS/Fuji Neopan 1600</i>

</center>

<center>

<img src="http://www.webfreedom.com/jango/photos/howardhenry.jpg">

<br><i>Howard Henry, homeless</i>

</center>

Welcome to street photography. It's thrilling, sort of like hunting. If I can take the metaphor a little further: You wait around, shooting small game until you can bag the elusive big kill. Sometimes you get it, sometimes you go home empty handed. But it's more fun than shooting sunsets because things can happen so fast. I've lost more opportunties than I have taken advantage of. But the nice thing is that you'll get another, you just don't know when.

<center>

<b>On The Bus</b>

<p><img src="http://www.webfreedom.com/jango/photos/AmberOnBus.jpg">

<br><i>Paris, France</i>

</center>

<center>

<b>L'Amour</b>

<p><img src="http://www.webfreedom.com/jango/photos/carriage_bw.jpg">

<br><i>Salt Lake City, Utah</i>

</center>

Personally, I like long focal lengths for portrait work. I use, depending on my mood, a 100/2 or a 70-200/2.8 @ 200mm if I have the room. I've even used a 75-300 IS @ 300mm, which is great for people who have big noses :-)

The question is only half-jest. I guess you would need at least a release from some immediate family member.

 

As for my opinion, I don't think I would have a problem with it, but I have not seen it. In fact, I love anything that challenges the viewer. In this case, the photographer is merely showing what goes on tens of thousands of times a day in the U.S., but behind closed and locked doors so that we don't expose our precious little children to those ugly, displeasing things. I don't want to go on a rant, but I feel that we, in our plasticized playstation world, often forget that people die, sometimes horribly, and we will all-too-soon cease to exist ourselves.

 

To get back to photography: I like using the camera to capture life--joy, pain, sorrow, all of it, which is why I'm drawn to this forum (mountains and flowers don't have emotions and just don't hold much interest for me anymore). It may sound paradoxical, but death is a part of life.