Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Other Digital Cameras Fuji Digital Cameras 
Thread started 06 Jan 2013 (Sunday) 14:29
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

STICKY: Fuji Users Unite - Post your comments, questions and images here

 
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
19,400 posts
Likes: 1505
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Post edited 10 months ago by bobbyz.
     
Jul 22, 2018 19:16 |  #7786

That's why rumors say Canon will be coming out with new 300/400mm f2.8 with new paint scheme and making sure price is higher than Sony.:)


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
7,133 posts
Gallery: 87 photos
Likes: 1015
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Jul 22, 2018 21:19 |  #7787

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18668225 (external link)
Oh, I always take notes, Alan, hence why I frequently have an issue with some of the things you post ;)

Firstly, the way you're talking yourself into buying things seems really odd to me. You're aware that it'd be a (in your eyes) huge compromise to miss out on that 35mm equivalent range and you're already not impressed with the f2.8 DOF on APS-C (seems silly to me to fret over DOF in a UWA lens, but I digress), so why would you desire it at all? If it's just a third "fun" system, why do you need so many lenses for it?

It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but let us continue...

If this is how you feel then why do you shoot with Fuji at all? It seriously baffles me...

Also, aperture matters far more for light gathering than it does for DOF purposes when it comes to a UWA lens. I don't know of many people who use a UWA zoom for shallow DOF shots (if anything, a wider DOF is an advantage in a UWA lens).

Given that your X-T2 has the same resolution files, this seems a pretty moot point.

Show me a cheaper f2.8 zoom lens that's the equivalent of 12mm on the wide end. I'll wait.

You again don't seem to grasp how DOF works when using a UWA lens...

You're right, those profiles are easy to create... the issue is that when using a zoom lens you'd have to create one and tweak it for every single setting on the zoom. Those distortions do not stay the same at every FL. To go even further, adding in perspective distortion makes things even more complicated.

Are you speaking from experience here or through assumption  :p ;-)a

Also, this argument you just made defeats about 80% of other arguments you've made in the past. I think I'll save it to my desktop for future citation ;)

What does this have AT ALL to do with the cost of the lens? You just said most people don't need it... nobody is debating that. The people who DO need it are willing to dish out the cash for it, as Kim already said. The same can be said of the Canon 11-24mm.

You literally just said Fuji should have developed all of their zooms to be f1.8, then admitted that people using APS-C don't want extra weight and size all in the same paragraph. Slow down for a moment and think before you post ;)

I can think of exactly 0 people who use a 300mm equivalent lens for portraiture. I'm sure there are people out there who do it, but I sure don't know any. I do however know several wildlife and sports shooters who use one quite frequently.

Tedium aside, here's some more shots from that airshow day with my X-Pro2 and XF 55-200mm

I really wish I would have had less DOF at 55mm, f7.1 just looks AWFUL, doesn't it? :lol:

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/LCEd​S7  (external link) July2018 52 (external link) by Lucas (external link), on Flickr

I thought this dude's tattoo with the little girl on his back was pretty awesome

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/27ou​LUz  (external link) July2018 44 (external link) by Lucas (external link), on Flickr

I don't know Lucas, you sure must have a lot of spare time on your hands being concerned about me and my gear ownership. You should concentrate on your own photography. If your IQ is good enough for your standards that is what really counts and truly is no concern to me whatsoever or any POTN member. You can conduct your own personal tests if you do not believe others. Take the initiative in testing your own gear. Just admit that there are better and worst gear you own.

If you do not believe the Canon 5dmk4 has noticeable difference in IQ over the 5dmk3 that's something you'll need to figure out yourself if your really that concerned. I Have gratitude in what I own and the successful accomplishments I've earned. I was pleasantly surprised learning that the 5dmk4 was a great improvement over the 5d3. If you have a problem with Canon you've already stepped away. No need to concern yourself. I wont put any effort in proving to a dedicated fuji aps-c shooter the IQ of a 5dmk4 they will never own. It's illogical to even ask "show me the difference". I own it and I appreciate it so let it go....... If your really desperate in better performance there is a world of Canon, Nikon and sony that can offer you something "different" but I'll leave that to your investments in photography.

For my standards f/2.8 constant aperture aps-c zoom does not meet my needs as it provides f/4 dof (FF equiv). 16-55 and 50-140mm are great lenses but doesn't meet my preference. The only lenses really I admire with fuji is the 16mm with f/2 FF equivalence and the 56mm f/1.2 that gives me f/1.8 FF equiv. Those are Fuji gems.

Lucas have fun with your own personal gear. There is always room for self improvement and hardware. It's your photography........If you have interest in other gear or just want to create argument to pass time I suggest renting or buying and test for yourself.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | 50-140 | TT685
Sony A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Osa713
Goldmember
Avatar
1,357 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 892
Joined Jun 2011
Location: Houston, TX
Post edited 10 months ago by Osa713.
     
Jul 22, 2018 21:49 |  #7788

If two of fuji's best performing lenses don't meet your needs maybe its time to dump Fuji all together? :oops:

Idk the 2.8 to F4 conversion on full frame doesn't bother me at all but I don't approach photography with that technical aspect, At f2.8 both my 16-55 and 50-140 are stupid sharp and very good in low light. :-D

Resized for social media because the original file is too large to post here. Granted this is at F9 because the makeup artist needed more in focus but you get the idea...


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


LIGHT>LENS>BODY

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
7,133 posts
Gallery: 87 photos
Likes: 1015
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Jul 22, 2018 22:12 |  #7789

Osa713 wrote in post #18668359 (external link)
If two of fuji's best performing lenses don't meet your needs maybe its time to dump Fuji all together? :oops:

Idk the 2.8 to F4 conversion on full frame doesn't bother me at all but I don't approach photography with that technical aspect, At f2.8 both my 16-55 and 50-140 are stupid sharp and very good in low light. :-D

Resized for social media because the original file is too large to post here. Granted this is at F9 because the makeup artist needed more in focus but you get the idea...
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by Osa713 in
./showthread.php?p=186​68359&i=i84231841
forum: Fuji Digital Cameras

I admire your work. I wish I could see her left eye. You stop down your aperture so that’s great for your style and studio environment.

That image is like f/14 FF dof. Plenty of detail !

No question the 16-55 and 50-140mm is sharp wideopen. In some framing situation the f/2.8 in the crop world still is visibly different as it's more like f/4 full frame equiv.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | 50-140 | TT685
Sony A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,499 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 3540
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
Post edited 10 months ago by EverydayGetaway. (4 edits in all)
     
Jul 22, 2018 22:38 |  #7790

AlanU wrote in post #18668345 (external link)
I don't know Lucas, you sure must have a lot of spare time on your hands being concerned about me and my gear ownership. You should concentrate on your own photography. If your IQ is good enough for your standards that is what really counts and truly is no concern to me whatsoever or any POTN member. You can conduct your own personal tests if you do not believe others. Take the initiative in testing your own gear. Just admit that there are better and worst gear you own.

Unfortunately for you, I have all the time in the world this week, I'm on vacation ;)

I'm not "concerned" with what you shoot in the slightest. To be blunt; I'm annoyed with your constant need to misinform people on stuff you flat out can't prove, you just state the same baseless arguments constantly, to the point where you contradict yourself constantly. Unfortunately the less informed and newer members see your long paragraphs and use of industry terms as proof that you must actually know what you're talking about, which you very often don't seem to... so it's very misleading and disingenuous... that concerns me.

AlanU wrote in post #18668345 (external link)
If you do not believe the Canon 5dmk4 has noticeable difference in IQ over the 5dmk3 that's something you'll need to figure out yourself if your really that concerned. I Have gratitude in what I own and the successful accomplishments I've earned. I was pleasantly surprised learning that the 5dmk4 was a great improvement over the 5d3. If you have a problem with Canon you've already stepped away. No need to concern yourself. I wont put any effort in proving to a dedicated fuji aps-c shooter the IQ of a 5dmk4 they will never own. It's illogical to even ask "show me the difference". I own it and I appreciate it so let it go....... If your really desperate in better performance there is a world of Canon, Nikon and sony that can offer you something "different" but I'll leave that to your investments in photography.

I'll say it one more time; if you make a claim (such as, "The 5D4 was a great improvement over the 5D3") then the burden of proof is ON YOU to support that claim, not anyone else. Telling people to "try it yourself" is very obviously a non-argument. I hope you're not a salesmen, because that sales pitch is going to leave you hungry.

I don't know why you assume I have some "problem with Canon"... I love Canon. It was not an easy decision to switch from Canon to Sony, but they made it clear a while back that they weren't going to take mirrorless more seriously. If they get their act together and give us a decent mirrorless system maybe I'll go back there one day, I have no brand loyalty, but I'm also realistic about pros and cons of systems and don't sensationalize things based on what I paid for them (something you clearly do, very often).

How you think it's "illogical" for me to ask you to back your statements is baffling. What's illogical is your constant need to interject your assertions without any support for the assertions.

When did I (or anyone, for that matter) ever even suggest they were "desperate in better performance"? Again, what are you talking about?

AlanU wrote in post #18668345 (external link)
For my standards f/2.8 constant aperture aps-c zoom does not meet my needs as it provides f/4 dof (FF equiv). 16-55 and 50-140mm are great lenses but doesn't meet my preference. The only lenses really I admire with fuji is the 16mm with f/2 FF equivalence and the 56mm f/1.2 that gives me f/1.8 FF equiv. Those are Fuji gems.

If that's the case then why stay with the system? Why buy into it in the first place?

AlanU wrote in post #18668345 (external link)
Lucas have fun with your own personal gear. There is always room for self improvement and hardware. It's your photography........If you have interest in other gear or just want to create argument to pass time I suggest renting or buying and test for yourself.

I have lots of fun with my personal gear, but I haven't "created" any arguments, I'm just asking you to back your claims ;)

I should add: I genuinely hope I'm not offending you with these posts, I promise you that is not my intention. It just seems like a really simple thing to me; if you can't or won't back a statement with examples of why you feel that way, then you shouldn't make the statement in the first place. Instead you could simply change your wording. For example; I love my XF 35/1.4, I can't really quantify why it's my favorite lens, it just is. I don't make any bold statements over it, I just say that "to me, there's just something about it". That type of statement is harmless... but when you come out swinging stating things as fact... facts are provable... so prove them.

Also, for future reference; if you want to address things I've said to you in other threads, do so in those threads.

Osa713 wrote in post #18668359 (external link)
If two of fuji's best performing lenses don't meet your needs maybe its time to dump Fuji all together? :oops:

Idk the 2.8 to F4 conversion on full frame doesn't bother me at all but I don't approach photography with that technical aspect, At f2.8 both my 16-55 and 50-140 are stupid sharp and very good in low light. :-D

Resized for social media because the original file is too large to post here. Granted this is at F9 because the makeup artist needed more in focus but you get the idea...

Is that Jessica Rabbit? Awoooga! :)


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // XF 60mm f2.4 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // Rokinon 21mm f1.4 // XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 // XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 // Rokinon 85mm f1.4 // Zhonghi Lensturbo ii // Various adapted MF lenses
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bond_Savingsbond
Senior Member
Avatar
893 posts
Likes: 94
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
     
Jul 23, 2018 01:25 |  #7791

Forced myself to get out and take some photos today.

IMAGE: https://farm1.staticflickr.com/833/41773760840_a8b631e077_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/26Dp​rHS  (external link) Sunday Adventure002 (external link) by Camtography (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1827/29711213488_8c6b76bfc9_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/MgtJ​Dw  (external link) Sunday Adventure004 (external link) by Camtography (external link), on Flickr

Edited using ON1 Photoraw.

So far, I am finding that the speed on On1 on my Laptop is similar to Lightroom.

Also, I decided to cancel my B&H order that was misplaced up, and reorder the XF90mm through Adorama.

I am hoping that I can pick up a 23 F1.4 or the 16 F1.4 as my final lens before October.

Anyways, lets see some more photos folks! I need to be inspired again.

500px (external link)
My website (external link)
CAMTOGRAPHY (external link)
Fuji X-T2, xf18-55, Samyang 135 (heavy), Nikon 105(dirty), Vivitar 75-205, Helios 56(Fixed),Pentax 50 F1.9 (dirty)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
benji25
Goldmember
Avatar
1,032 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 97
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Twin Cities
     
Jul 23, 2018 01:44 |  #7792

Some from a recent-ish wedding:

IMAGE: https://farm1.staticflickr.com/933/42865759494_70c8d73e86_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/28iU​dSS  (external link) Grangruth0651 (external link) by Ben Modica (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1802/42865758714_730916fe09_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/28iU​dDq  (external link) Grangruth0652 (external link) by Ben Modica (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm1.staticflickr.com/861/41775649370_1ac050f94f_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/26Dz​87J  (external link) Grangruth0642 (external link) by Ben Modica (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1826/42865758434_d2b919c862_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/28iU​dyA  (external link) Grangruth0653 (external link) by Ben Modica (external link), on Flickr

Website (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
clipper_from_oz
Goldmember
Avatar
2,541 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Likes: 11179
Joined Sep 2005
Location: Melbourne Australia
Post edited 10 months ago by clipper_from_oz. (2 edits in all)
     
Jul 23, 2018 04:23 |  #7793

water liliy Hoi An Vietnam


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Clipper
5DSR,5DMkII,Fuji XPRO1,X-T1&X-T20,Fotoman 6x17cm Large Format Panorama Camera,Mamiya Universal 6x9
Canon EF 16-35mm f4 L, 17mm TSE f4 L,50mm f1.4, 24-70 f2.8 L, 70-200mm F4 L, 85mm f1.8, 100-400mm II L,
EF 400mm f2.8 IS II L, Fujinon XF18mmf2, XF35mmf1.4, XF60mm f2, XF18-55f2.8-4.5, XF55-200f4
Rodenstock, Sinar& Nikkor LF lens for Pano (75,95,150+210mm)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
19,400 posts
Likes: 1505
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Jul 23, 2018 04:40 |  #7794

I need to get out and shoot but this summer weather in China is killing me after getting used to California weather.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Avatar
3,074 posts
Gallery: 326 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 3175
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Ireland
Post edited 10 months ago by Two Hot Shoes.
     
Jul 23, 2018 05:52 |  #7795

A couple from last wedding with the wonderful56/1.2, first one @ f/4 to get enough focus the second wide open to make more blurry bits


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Fuji: X-PRO2, X-T3. 16/1.4, 18/2, 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 90/2, 16-55/2.8, 50-140/2.8.
Pelican, Ona, ThinkTank, Matthews Grip, Elinchrom

Gear & Discounts (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)
Coffee & Fujis (external link)YouTube (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
7,133 posts
Gallery: 87 photos
Likes: 1015
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Jul 23, 2018 08:30 |  #7796

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18668228 (external link)
Just saw Sony's new G Master 400/2.8 is...... $12,000 (Canon's is only 10k!) Not overpriced, probably.
Oh and the 70-200/2.8 GM is 'only' $2600

Sony glass is expensive but that is understood when photogs dive into the system.

The one hiccup I have with my aps-c Fuji 50-140 f2.8 is that it produces f4 FF equivalence. A cheaper Sony 70-200 F4 can be equivalent to Fuji’s top tier 50-140mm in that respect. Only if I can get a fantastic deal on a Sony 70-200 f4 version I may consider it but that limits ultimate versatility of that zoom range. I’d rather stop down a FF f2.8 zoom to f4 when I need it vs stuck at f4 wide open.

The GM 70-200 2.8 is a good lens but just as prone to ugly nervous bokeh as Fuji’s 55-200 and 50-140mm. But the GM lens still provides a very nice range for FF.

Adapted 70-200 f2.8 IS mk2 Canon glass i already own is still beneficial in producing great iq for portraits. On a 5dmk3or4 I do not miss a beat. Win win for adaptation of the canon glass to Sony. I’m not interested in fringer or steelring to adapt my canon glass to Fuji.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | 50-140 | TT685
Sony A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
soeren
Whoops Im not updated
583 posts
Likes: 241
Joined Nov 2017
     
Jul 23, 2018 08:33 |  #7797

I think the problem here is the lack of understanding that DOF is not an issue for a lot of photographers


If history has proven anything. it's that evolution always wins!!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FarmerTed1971
fondling the 5D4
Avatar
6,059 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3348
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Portland, OR
     
Jul 23, 2018 08:49 |  #7798

I love shooting narrow DOF and don’t feel at a loss coming to Fuji from Canon FF.

I am, however, still getting the strange wormy artifacts when processing in LR. I’d really like to have a definitive answer to why this ‘ugly nervous bokeh’ occurs.


Getting better at this - Fuji Xt-2 - Fuji X-Pro2 - Laowa 9mm - 18-55 - 23/35/50/90 f2 WR - 50-140 - flickr (external link) - www.scottaticephoto.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
urbanfreestyle
I am a squirrel who loves rubbing bottles and I have Nuts in my drawers, too!
Avatar
2,046 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 226
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Exeter, Devon
     
Jul 23, 2018 09:13 as a reply to  @ FarmerTed1971's post |  #7799

can you post a sample for us to look at?


Facebook (external link)
Canon 1D Mk IV | Canon 50mm 1.8 Mk1 | Sigma 'Bigma' 50-500 | Fuji XE1 | Helios 44/m | 50mm 1.4 | Manfrotto 055CX PRO3 | 3LT Mohawk ballhead | Lubitel 2 med format camera |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
benji25
Goldmember
Avatar
1,032 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 97
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Twin Cities
     
Jul 23, 2018 09:35 |  #7800

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #18668595 (external link)
I love shooting narrow DOF and don’t feel at a loss coming to Fuji from Canon FF.

I notice a tiny difference coming from Canon FF to mirrorless. But my clients would never notice and the other benefits of shooting far outweigh the slight difference. Plus I have been eyeing the GFX to cure my larger format needs.


Website (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,459,613 views & 8,499 likes for this thread
Fuji Users Unite - Post your comments, questions and images here
FORUMS Other Digital Cameras Fuji Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is jenncharlotte
775 guests, 349 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.