Tokina 11-16 f2.8 , finally got a UWA lens
#1
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Meriden, CT
Posts: 2,065
Total Cats: 1
Tokina 11-16 f2.8 , finally got a UWA lens
I had a hard time choosing between the tokina and the canon 10-22, but ultimately the constant 2.8 aperture, superior build quality, included lens hood, and $200 cheaper price won me over. I've only snapped a few shots with it so far and can already tell it'll be on my camera a lot! I've played with the 10-22 before, so I new what to expect with the UWA lens, but I'm still so impressed with how close you can get to something and still get everything in the frame. Any who, on to pictures for those that share the camera addiction
About 12" away from the taillight...
Lens hood was literally about 1" away from the top of the bottle....
About 12" away from the taillight...
Lens hood was literally about 1" away from the top of the bottle....
#6
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Meriden, CT
Posts: 2,065
Total Cats: 1
It has been out of stock forever even now. I happened to find it on mpex.com, then today I saw it looked like B&H had them again....O well, I had to fork up $9 more since shipping wasn't free like on B&H. I suggest you get one as well, its worth it!
#11
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 7,930
Total Cats: 45
Damn you people, making me feel inferior with my old *** D50. When I got mine it was about to be outdated within several months with new models but I couldn't wait. Paid something like $800 for my inferior old garbage!!! Seeing that $700 price is killing me actually. Maybe I can go ***** myself out and make some quick money.
#12
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 7,930
Total Cats: 45
Damn it. Yet again my D50 lets me down, though it was user error. I went to Barber Motorsports Museum earlier today and took some nice shots, but forgot I had messed around with my camera recently and had it on ISO1600, so everything is pretty grainy. I should have check that, since I was wondering why my shots were so well lit at such a high shutter speed. Oh well, it was still fun. I should go more often considering I live less than a mile from the track.
#15
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,688
Total Cats: 4,113
The auto iso feature on my new camera is weird. I'm used to having to manually do it, so I'm getting some shots at 1200-3200iso with the flash.
The above picture in P mode was:
Focal Length 125 mm
Aperture Value f/7.1
Flash Compulsory Flash, Return light detected
ISO 1250
Shutter Speed Value 1/60 sec
full size is fairly grainy : http://www.boostedmiata.com/gallery2...1/DSC_0158.JPG
The above picture in P mode was:
Focal Length 125 mm
Aperture Value f/7.1
Flash Compulsory Flash, Return light detected
ISO 1250
Shutter Speed Value 1/60 sec
full size is fairly grainy : http://www.boostedmiata.com/gallery2...1/DSC_0158.JPG
#16
The auto iso feature on my new camera is weird. I'm used to having to manually do it, so I'm getting some shots at 1200-3200iso with the flash.
The above picture in P mode was:
Focal Length 125 mm
Aperture Value f/7.1
Flash Compulsory Flash, Return light detected
ISO 1250
Shutter Speed Value 1/60 sec
full size is fairly grainy : http://www.boostedmiata.com/gallery2...1/DSC_0158.JPG
The above picture in P mode was:
Focal Length 125 mm
Aperture Value f/7.1
Flash Compulsory Flash, Return light detected
ISO 1250
Shutter Speed Value 1/60 sec
full size is fairly grainy : http://www.boostedmiata.com/gallery2...1/DSC_0158.JPG
Does any of the grainyness go away if you shoot in raw?
#17
Elite Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 5,987
Total Cats: 359
I get this a lot as well, I change some setting to my liking (ISO, WB, flash exp, whatever) and then forget to switch it back to normal. The "Restore to defaults" shortcut works well for this, but what if the "default" values ("standard JPEG" instead of say, "fine JPEG + RAW") are not really your ideal values?