I tried messing with it but the jpeg artifacts were too much
[Reply]

Well i guess I'm gonna bite the bullet and buy a shoe mount flash for my camera. Gonna grab a refurb Canon 430EX ii. Sigh
[Reply]

Ok just got my tax return and it's pretty much been spent. :-)

Canon 50mm f/1.4
Canon 70-200mm f/4 USM L
Canon 430EX ii flash
3 UV filters
Defuser for flash
Lens hood for 18-135mm.
[Reply]

Well there you go...now you have everything you need until you become completely discontented again. :-)
I fell into the trap of 'normal' lenses in fast versions, but with the crop factor, they were not as great a buy as
I was hoping for. I bought the cheap 50 1.8 from Nikkor and learned the lesson with the DX lens, got the 35mm 1.8,
so it was a tie, win-loss. Congrats on the new gear. That lion won't know what hit him.
[Reply]

OK Sharkie, here is what I see. It appears to be a late evening shot owing to the light on the deer's face,
so you were already somewhat under the gun for light at what I imagine is full zoom for the FZ28. Because
of the performance of those cameras in low light at full zoom, that is actually a fine shot. You can't be blamed
for the dead vegetation in late winter, and to get the deer in that kind of contrast required the grass to
get a little hot in exposure. The ONLY thing about that shot that I would do differently is MAYBE pan right
a hair to give the deer a little lookspace. But this is not TV, so in point of fact, it is also quite well-framed.
What you are experiencing is what anyone with a DSLR-bodied P&S is going through. You are chasing
what Panasonic cannot give you, and that is perfectly crisp low light photos.

I scoured the review pages in a hunt for the perfect performer in any light. It was only after looking
at a chart of sensor sizes did I understand the full range of what they had been hiding from me for
so long. The literature and tech-speak had me convinced they could actually do it. But the sensor is
about the size of a half a hit of acid. About the size of a pencil eraser. You are lucky, the FZ28 was
born before they tried to cram 14 Megapixels onto that tiny square.

What you can do with that photo is bump the contrast a little, bump the saturation a little, and put
a timy bit of blur on it to merge some of the fine noise grain. PM me, or better yet, see a few pages
back where Justin tried to offer me some software that fell off the back of a truck. Download said software
and PM me for any instructions on how to use it to accomplish those functions.
[Reply]

OK Sharkie-baby, I did what I said I would do and here is the difference.

i UPPED THE CONTRAST, I hit caps lock, lol, I upped the saturation, I hit it with a tiny bit of blur,
I also used the Stamp tool to pick up a portion of that busy, viney background and used it to
cover up a portion of the background where there were leaves and debris hung up in the dense
scrub that was bothering me. I also cropped it to suit my own taste.

I think what I would say to remember that no camera is capable of consistently putting out pics that
need NO post-processing. EVERY photo could stand a little dab'll do ya. There is no shame in post-
processing, UNLESS you are in a contest that does not allow it. You shoot a bird on your porch rail
where you do not have to extend to the very end of your zoom range, in a time of day where the light
is strong enough to help you, and you will not see the one issue I had with the photo as being 'perfect',
and that was a little noise.

Hell, come to think of it, I could fix the grass, too....and did. In the second photo
[Reply]

I loved the 50 I had when I had a nikon.
[Reply]

I was not clear when I wrote that, but I was not gonna correct it unless someone commented.
When I bought a lens for the infamous FX camera, lol, I bought the 1.8 50mm Nikkor.
NOW of course, there is no real use for it, :-) except at an effective 75mm equivalent.
But I DID ponder what would happen if the KKK did take my baby away, and I picked
up a DX lens in 35mm, wich effectively got me to 50 again (52mm, anyway). NEITHER
of them end up being a waste, since a 70mm equivalent lens in 1.8 is still VERY useful.
But I hate the whole concept of crop factor. Sad that both companies went SO FAR
down that road before finally going full frame. Diabolical, in fact. :-)
[Reply]

I had a 50mm F1.2 Nikkor that was an awesome piece of glass back in the day when I was shooting F3's. That and the 105mm 1.8 were my two favorite lenses for candid Portraits.

I wish I had kept some of the old "big glass" teles that I had...hindsight is 20/20 :-)
[Reply]

Yeh. This 50mm f1.4 is gonna rock. It gets here today.
[Reply]

Image
[Reply]

Man that Blue Angels camoflauge gets more convincing everyday.
[Reply]

I think I have come around to you guys' way of thinking on this Adorama deal.
They are a lot slower than B&H, but I have gotten a little too much sauce from B&H this month to feel
good about giving them any more money for used gear. I will re-evaluate the sitcho later on in the year.
For now I am too pissed to mess with em.
[Reply]

Brad check out keh.com they're a great place for used gear as well
[Reply]

"Santa" came and brought me this a few minutes ago...

Image
New lens by emopunker2004, on Flickr
[Reply]

I am done buying gear, mon frere'. Dass fo sho. I just had to bit(h and get it out.

I got off my lazy a55 and went out to shoot a couple of girls as a favor for my old friend from TV days.

[Image
Brass Knuckles by MemphisBrad, on Flickr]

Image
Karen W. by MemphisBrad, on Flickr

Image
Ashlee K. Thomas by MemphisBrad, on Flickr
[Reply]

Very Nice Brad.
[Reply]

Picture of my cat with her toy with the 50mm

Image
IMG_1561 by emopunker2004, on Flickr
[Reply]

Image
[Reply]

That's the 4th Tactical fighter Wing at Seymour Johnson you got there Hugh! If I had stayed on at that
assignment back in my F-4E days, I would have seen the very first F-15s come in. But I got out at 4 years.
I will recognize that arrow logo til I pass on in from this world. Very Nice and THANK YOU!
[Reply]