namnguyen

<p>105 2.5 is my bet. Same lens that Steve uses for the famous Afghan girl portrait.<br /> Isnt that picture from the same trip to Afghanistan too?<br>

He uses Nikon btw.</p>

How come no one has mentioned the 70 180mm?

No longer available, but may serve the OP well for portrait and macro. You can probably get a used mint for ~ $1200, roughly the same as the 85mm 1.4.

Just remember it's 5.6 and 1:2.

hey weeks ago I had the exact problem with my now 2-month-old weather-sealed D200, but it was after I poured a whole lot of water onto the thing. The camera read Err - malfunction. Tried what the manual said but wasnt successful so I put it into a seal bag filled with moisture absorber. 24 hours later it was working like a monster again.

Try if it works for it!

thanks to you guys really much! that's what I called "constructive critics". and sorry for havent been able to get back soon enough!

let me answer some of your questions

I have added some new pictures to tell a more completed story. they all have description now, too.

I have a tendency to either have no grain at all, or a lot of grain, so I only shoot with ISO 200 400 and 1600. and the night before the wedding day the lighting was NOT at all sufficient.

like this one image

was shot at 1/50s f/1.8 ISO 1600 and still underexposed by 1 full stop.

Be assured that I'm not trying to excuse myself. :)

Ni, again, thanks for the idea of "lacking in compositional awareness". that helped a lot! but about the use of wide angle, just as Kelvin said, it was almost impossible to get a 36mm angle without heavy distraction. and about the idea of me using a tele and shot from a distance - first, that was my intention: a pure journalistic approach, second, people would start posing and being serious if I got close enough, third, the crowd... :)

special thanks to Marc, "In building a story line using stills, not every photo has to be an award winner" was enlightening.

Kelvin Phan, you summed up everything for me. :) really appreciate it!!

Matt, sequence of the shots in the set was carefully arranged. As I said, I was there for 2 days, so those first night images were of the preparation day, not the actual wedding day. People eventually party for 3 days in some places. The first day was for preparation - food, decoration and dress... They slaughter buffalos, pigs and chickens. That's when a lot of people showed up to help. So party it up! :)

The big day, of course, is the day to get drunk. :)

The last day, after the couple had been married, party to "finish up the wines".

That was fun!!

There are also poor people, who live with 1200$ a year, so being able to afford a wedding was already too much. It would cost a fortune just to have beautiful decoration, not even talking about renting a restaurant. So everyone was crammed into tiny spaces of her and his houses. Street and road were narrow and in disorder...

Please be open here, dont ask me question like "they can not even afford decoration, why spend so much on all the fancy parties?". Costly but tradition has it that way.

Again, I'm not bashing anyone as "not understanding" or excusing myself. I'm just trying to give you guys a better idea about what a traditional Vietnamese styled wedding should look like. Thanks much for your opinions and your time.

thanks!

well, my equipment was only my old D70 and 24 85mm AFS + 50mm 1.8 Nikkors, and a SB 600.

it was a very crowded quarter, since hundreds of people came (it's tradition in Vietnam and some other places that the whole village shows up to bless the couple).

I did not have my film camera with me, since I cant process BnW films in VietNam, they dont even sell the chemicals.

I shot about 900 images, those 25 were summed up as I tried to tell the story. I'll probably be uploading more. There were a lot of BnG shots, as well as portraits of the bride herself...

Some people said I did not know how to take wedding photos.

Well, I simply don't think so!

Here is the link to my first and only wedding so far.

I trust you guys here to judge.

Comments and constructive critics are welcome!

I have the 24 85mm AFS and am fine with it being a little shot at wide-angle. But the fact that it 4.5, which is 1.3 stops slower than those above, annoys me a little!

My other main concern with this lens is it still not sharp enough. (I shoot portrait with 60mm macro and I know what sharpness is). So will I be satisfied with the Tamron or the Tokina, given maximum opening?

I wont buy if their f/4 is about the same as mine 5.

thanks to all of you :)

that was right, Tokina hasnt hit the market yet. I guess I'll go to a camera store and take a look at the Tamron then.

Or should I wait for the Tokina to come out?

I'm in need of a better mid-range zoom and I see now there are Nikon 17 55,

Tokina 16 50, Sigma 18 50 and Tamron 17 50mm. All of them DX lenses and 2.8.

The Nikon is just out of question due to over-price. (Though I know it's good

glass). So NO!

I heard stories about horrible construction of the Tamron. NO!

So, any one here has experience with the Sigma and the Tokina? Would you guys

help me choose? I appreciate it real much.

Thanks!

Nam

wait

Kodak 400UC - arent you talking about Kodak negative 400 Ultra Color film?

I dont know how this happened, but I do anything but portrait with this type of film. Even in an overcast day, the skin tone of the model is horribly awful.