Got my camera, first shots...thoughts?

[Francis E. Marchiona]

I took some pictures of my brother's black templar army, I play too but he paints better...anyway, it was as good a way as any to try out my new a550. How do you think they turned out?

It's my first time ever taking pictures with anything other than my phone, so if you think suck for any particular reason let me know

Thanks

 

[I X L R 8]

Oh they are gonna hate that.
The forum is pro canon and nikon.
Nothing wrong with Canon or Nikon.

In a day you'll have 400 people , all with different vision, in both eyes, viewing a photo you " uploaded" , on 400 different monitors, all adjusted differently, all types of monitors from the 90's until now, Seeing different things and then critiquing.

I wouldn't worry with it.
I just ask for advice when I get in a bind.
I'm fond of my a550.

BUY GLASSES!!!!!!!!!!!!!And NEW computer equipment.
Sony A550, Indoors, built in flash.

Wait wait!!!! It's out of focus!!!!! Because it's a Sony.
lol

I X L R 8 - Testing the limits of people who have no limits.

 

[LCARSx32]

I've never seen anyone on this forum bash someone for having a Sony camera. I don't know where you got that.

As for the monitor issue, yes, that's going to happen. But the only thing the monitor is going to effect is color. So when people give you advice about focus, subject, depth of field, or composition; it has nothing to do with the monitor they are viewing your pictures on.

Anyway...

Francis, welcome to the forum! I'm not seeing the pictures, so I can't comment on them. This might help you get them working:

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/photography-beginners-forum-photo-gallery/76568-how-post-pictures-use-forum-functions-pictoral-guide-using-tpf.html

 

[I X L R 8]

I took some pictures of my brother's black templar army, I play too but he paints better...anyway, it was as good a way as any to try out my new a550. How do you think they turned out?

It's my first time ever taking pictures with anything other than my phone, so if you think suck for any particular reason let me know

Thanks

Oh boy. Now I have become one of them!

Ok, for starters, you have 0 depth of field.
Nothing is in focus, other than the center of the photos.
Aperture setting for that subject should be at least 14 with a shorter focal length.

 

[I X L R 8]

I've never seen anyone on this forum bash someone for having a Sony camera. I don't know where you got that.

Oh really?????????????????
You must have missed it.
Here's one.

That makes no sense at all. PC's do not change focus based on how good they are how powerful they are if that was the case there would be a crap load of mixed results in Photography class and online. My Images are just as sharp on my PC as they are on a PC That's over 15 years old and running windows 95, so so much for that theory. Sony has a history for less than stellar focus I guess nobody but Sony has a good enough PC for them then. That's fine though, Sony can keep em.

The above is obviously not true, with exception to PC's changing focus.
Here are the reasons why.

There ARE a crap load of mixed results when people critique focus. Why, some may ask?
You're looking at a 4 meg file, blown up on a monitor, at the click of a mouse, from less than 2 feet away.

This should make sense, but if it doesn't please overlook it.

Number 2:
On the world wide web, , roughly 35 out of every 100 people have 20/20 vision. Even if that vision is corrected, it will still not be 100% of 20/20.
It will be close, with variances.
One of the reasons why all women are beautiful when viewing from 100 yards away.
There is an old saying.
She looks good from far, but far from good.

Number 3:
Lenses.
The quoted never mentions anything about lenses and is quick to put blame on the camera body.
I'm a rookie amateur. The photo on this thread was shot with a 14 year old Sigma 28-70mm-f2.8.
Imagine a new Ziess lens.

Number 4:
Yes, your viewing equipment DOES reflect what your eyes see, and if that equipment is not up to par, you CERTAINLY ARE missing something in today's age of DSLR's ( all of them). Fact.

And here's another for you.

Than again, alot of cameras look more appealing when you've got an A550, especially once you start handling them.


I don't want to sound mean but it's true. As a salesperson i see this all the time, sony just makes cheap (in the bad way) stuff. People come in and it goes something like this:

"hey can i check out the Sony A330?"

hands them said camera

"can I also see the D3000?"

hands them said camera

"Wow, the Nikon feels alot sturdier, why is that?"

ALL of the sony's, even the A900, feel like hollow plastic fisher-price toys compared to Nikon, Canon, Olympus, and Pentax. They even sound like their going to fall apart.

Here again. This is FALSE.
I handled the Nikon D5000, the Canon T1I and a few others.
They all felt about the same.
Oh and the A900 too, and trust me when I tell you it does not feel cheap.
They all feel like toys.
BECAUSE THEY ARE.
They're big boy toys. They aint cheap and they're fun.


I X L R 8 - Breaking the barriers of Internet communication.

 

[SrBiscuit]

lol calm down.

 

[bazooka]

What the heck is happening?

Anyway, Francis, I feel like your subject is getting lost in a sea of other figures that are the same color and contrast, even with the narrow DOF which I believe you chose correctly to use. The only one where the subject stands out is #4, but you missed the focus by a lot. I would recommend trying two things when you reshoot... space the characters out a bit more and find a light to shine on your main subject so he has some color, texture, and shape that will help him to stand out among the rest. With some extra light, I think your idea could really pop.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Wow! Thread derailment due to Axe Grinding.

 

[SageMark]

I haven't seen alot of bashing Sony, however there is definately alot of Cannon and Nikon shooters here. Ok,....with that said,...Sony sucks.

 

[inTempus]

Look on the bright side, we have a new Sony fanboy posting to give some of the Nikon and Canon fanboys fits. Such wildly off topic post as those above make for entertaining, albeit way off-topic, posts. Let's welcome our new thin skinned rebel rousing Sony fan.

 

[pgriz]

All I see on the OP post is red X's.

 

[TJ K]

Look on the bright side, we have a new Sony fanboy posting to give some of the Nikon and Canon fanboys fits. Such wildly off topic post as those above make for entertaining, albeit way off-topic, posts. Let's welcome our new thin skinned rebel rousing Sony fan.

lol new avatar :thumbup:

 

[pgriz]

OK, now I see them.

Canon, Nikon, Sony, pfttt. It's not the brush, it's the hand holding it that's important.


As a photographic exercise, not bad. As for comments - you're going to have to give us some more meat to chew on.

 

[carvinrocks2]

The photos do nothing for me. They are noisy, low light, low contrast, and some are out of focus. BUT, some of them are focused in a way that is neat, and with some work you could get some good photos of these mini statues.


As for the debate....

I go for Canon, and Nikon. I don't know why, but those are the two big names in the industry, and they are brands I can trust.

Owner of a Canon 300d, Nikon N2000, and a Canon Powershot SX 120 IS.

BUT, you can take decent pictures with almost any brand.

Just look at this picture taken with a Cobra no zoom point and shoot:

(Not prime example but it works)

 

[sleist]

Warning - pissing match overflow.
Please seek higher ground.