steven_ford1

<p>I think I had a trapper keeper with something like this on it in the 3rd grade.</p><div></div>

<p>Nothing is more exciting than hearing the squeal of the UPS or FedEx truck brakes outside your front door.</p>

<p>Was asked to do some engagement photos for a friend, was really pleased with how they came out.</p><div></div>

<p>Obviously they had to make some ergonomics concessions to accommodate the swivel screen, but splitting up the playback and the delete button would be a major pet peeve for me.</p>

<p>Hopefully it is a smashing videographic success!</p>

<p>Experimenting with intentional camera movement while photographing. Like how this one worked out.</p><div></div>

<p>John, what speed cards are you using on your D7000? My only (minor) gripe with the D7k has been the buffer limit, which I sometime's tap out on while burst shooting birds in flight.</p>

<p>Jeff and Paul - great bird photos!</p>

<p>Went up to the Smokies for some fall colors, a fly fisherman was kind enough to oblige me with a photo.</p><div></div>

<p>Ok, first of all a disclaimer, as this "test" I did is about as unscientific as they come.</p>

<p>Disclaimer: I am not a pixel peeper, but I do like (and generally take) sharp pictures.</p>

<p>I opened up a RAW (unconverted) image from my D7000 and compared it to a RAW (unconverted) image from my D60. Both images were opened in Picasa. Both images were taken with the same lens (Sigma 150-500) at the same focal length (500) and the same aperture (6.3, or wide open at 500). Shutter speeds were slightly off (1/125 for the D7000, 1/100 for the D60). Both images were shot on a tripod, and both were of the same subject (a cardinal). Lighting conditions were slightly different, as they were on different days. The D60 image was shot @ ISO 400 and was properly exposed. The D7000 image was shot @ ISO 1000 and (sadly) I underexposed slightly (if I had been at 1/100s it probably would have been dead on). The sharpness of both images (pre any PP) is very similar. The D7000 image has a little more noise, which probably wouldn't be as noticeable if I hadn't underexposed. The image I took with the D60 (after some PP work) is one I'm very proud of and looks pretty awesome after being cropped 30% and printed at 8x12.<br>

Seeing this, I am very satisfied with the sharpness of the D7000, and I expect the better sensitivity of the D7000 will let me shoot and print up to ISO 1600 (versus my 400 to 800 limit on the D60) with out any qualms.<br>

I am now really looking forward to a release for ACR which encompasses the D7000's version of NEF because I think I got some pretty good images today and I think it's only going to get better the more familiar I become with the camera (it's a massive step up in terms of functionality compared to the D60, I'm still wrapping my head around the AF system).<br>

My only nitpick is the combination of the microphone and autofocusing during a video. If the focus changes at all, the only thing the mic hears is the AFS motor whirring. Not that I really plan on doing anything major video-wise where I'd be using the internal mic OR AF, but it still seems kinda silly : /.</p>

<p>Doug Santo and I must just be lucky I suppose, we both seem to have quality copies of the 150-500 Sigma. I love mine, especially on a tripod. Any of the bird photos I have posted in the Wednesday Photo threads were taken with the lens, and with good technique and a touch of sharpening in PP, the photos have looked great.</p>

<p>It is, of course, a very slow lens and I would never seriously consider adding any TC to it.</p>

<p>I "tested" mine out this morning with some bird shooting. Can't say much on sharpness without a raw converter (especially since I always seem to be shooting at very slow shutter speeds for a long focal length) but the better shots look fairly sharp on the LCD. I can't wait for an updated RAW converter to really test it out. Dynamic range on the 7000 really really seems to be top notch though, one cardinal shot was just BAM in the available light.</p>

<p>A little fall color I found today.</p>

<div></div>

<p>Another bird shot, this cardinal is ever so gradually getting more and more used to my presence.</p><div></div>

<p>Great pictures all! Here is a male ruby throated hummingbird who was kind enough to pose for me!</p><div></div>

<p>Okay, took a few weeks off from the Wednesday posts, come back and it's as awesome as ever. Some of the ones that stuck out to me are:<br>

Tiffany Brook - awesome eyes on that baby!<br>

Matthew Brennan - Great color and reflection in the previously dry landscape.<br>

Dave Wilson - flip that photo over, scale it up, and sell it as a previously "unknown" Monet, great capture!<br>

Alexander Kleppesto - great lighting on the hands, gives something we see everyday real interest.<br>

Elliot Bernstein - great colors, perfect springtime type photo.<br>

Eric Blair - great door photo, I envy people with good looking doors close at hand.<br>

P Watson - great landscape, go back and nail the highlights and sell it for lots, I never find the right landscape to line up with the right sunset or sunrise.<br>

William Pahnolus - congrats on catching the hummer!<br>

Mark Cooper - Oh that's awesome I went to school at a St. Rose, run by Dominican sisters. Congrats on getting published!</p>

<p>My shot for the week, meant to be a test shot for a flash setup prior to doing some light painting, but instead I caught my friends sneaking a quick kiss in the dark.</p><div></div>

<p>4th of July fireworks over the statue of Vulcan in Birmingham, AL</p><div></div>

<p>Better late than never?</p>

<p>From Father's day canoe trip down the Cahaba River.</p><div></div>

<p>My dad and his dog.</p><div></div>

<p>I'm looking at getting a set of Cokin P filters, and am wondering what you guys would recommend as your basic/must have set for landscape photography. Obviously, a circular polarizer, some ND and some Grad ND filters come to mind, but ND filters of how many stops etc? If you went into the field to shoot landscapes and only had 3 or 5 filters, what would you want them to be?</p>

<p>Picture I wanted to post last week, before I had to battle the virus. Photo's survived, virus did not (hooray backup drive!).</p>

<p>I'd call it an unexpected encounter.</p><div></div>

<p>Mark Gordon, unless you or the singer is going for a specific type of rebellious attitude or something, you might suggest the next one you photograph picks a chord other than G for their photo. Check her left hand.</p>

<p>Unless you or she were totally going for a bit of rebellious flare in the photo ;).</p>

<p>@ Isaac</p>

<p>Yanno, I never even thought to use the lock function as an indicator of full or not, I always just put them in separate pockets in my pants/bag. Interesting idea.</p>

<p>Pelicans patrolling the beach in formation. These guys made a regular sweep every 20 minutes, you could've set your watch by them. And I <em>still</em> managed to clip the one guy's wing D:</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks to everyone who commented on my picture last week. A really exceptional Wednesday's worth of pictures posted above me, Alexander Kleppesto's eyes along with Roberta Davidson's seashell really stuck out to me.<br>

<br /> Went to a friend's wedding at the beach last weekend, took lots of pictures of the couple, their family, the friends etc etc, but the picture that's really stuck with me is the one of the person who was but wasn't there. The groom's father lost a short but vicious battle with cancer almost 10 years ago, and could only be at the wedding in shirt, hat, and spirit.</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks for all the comments on my water collision, and to answer Roberta Davidson, the drops are about 8-10 a second. They make a very recognizable and pleasing plop plop plop sound when they're timed right.<br>

<br /> Spent a whole day at a wildlife refuge, futilely taking woefully out of range shots of osprey and herons, only to find this guy hiding in a bush at a local duck pond the next day. This particular green heron was very patient with me, allowing me to get within 10 feet of him. He probably thought all the foliage was deterrent enough (and he was right!).</p><div></div>

<p>I have the Sigma 150-500mm and have been both frustrated by it, and very impressed and surprised by it. A lot of it boils down to how good my technique is and how attentive I am to my movements both on and off a tripod. Shutter speed really does determine how sharp the lens is, so having to start at 6.3 @ 500mm is a bit limiting. But in decent light with a little lick of sharpening, it does pretty well for $1000 vs $5000 and up.</p>