Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

User Profile

Collapse

Profile Sidebar

Collapse
Avatar
JakTrax
Junior Member
Last Activity: Yesterday, 20:29
Joined: 2020-12-07
Location:
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
  • Source
Clear All
new posts

  • Unfortunately there are hundreds of amazing shots that never find their way onto the front page. There's no way the top five is indicative of the quality of what's being uploaded each day. Recently we saw a load of side-ons — some in very mediocre light — making the top spot. I'm a big fan of side-ons and they're not easy to perfect, without Photoshop, but the only way a standard side-on should be making the top is if it features a newsworthy or otherwise interesting subject.

    I just don't get why any hobbyist would go to extreme lengths to get views — it might be perfectly 'legal' on sites such as this but there's an underhand and selfish element to it. It's typically psychologically indicative of a sociopath or someone lacking self-esteem.
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • There are some really elitist comments here, suggesting that 'standard blue sky shots' can't be of quality. Some of us do them because we like them, not because they're easy. Some of us would much prefer to satisfy our own criteria rather than that laid out by viewers. Tell you what, put your digital camera down, get yourself a 35mm camera, and go out and shoot some prefect side-ons. Then be sure to show us your results. You'll never take Photoshop for granted again!

    Much of what appears on the front page here doesn't get there on merit. Quality is subjective, just bear that in mind.

    This over-competitiveness is ruining the hobby. Everyone enjoys getting their work viewed but if an image of mine only gets 50 hits in 12 months, so what? I've removed myself from much of the social side of the hobby because too many people are now getting into arguments because they are constantly under the impression that everyone wants to steal their thunder.

    Karl
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • The Canon EF 100-400L II is the daddy of the DSLR long lenses, period. It stands alone, with nothing to match it exactly (and that transcends brands). The Sigma and Tamron 150-600s are pretty good but they're not 'true' 600s (about 580mm by most accounts), and they aren't as sharp as the Canon. Be aware that, while the two Sigmas (C and S) and the Tamron are similar optically, the Sigma 150-600 S has better AF and stabilisation, which at longer focal lengths and/or narrow apertures could be the difference between nailing and failing the shot.

    The Sigma 100-400 is apparently excellent for the price. But there's the key phrase: for the price. It's not the EF 100-400L II, but it doesn't claim to be. It's very comparable to the MkI, which is a lens I'd avoid due to its many known issues, including those outlined above (as well as frequent failure of the IS unit, which can render the lens unusable until it's fixed — about $300-400).

    Bottom line? If you want the...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • The most reliable indicator here is the tower, and it's spot on in the image with the lattice overlay. Runways and taxiways are rarely level but the last time someone built a leaning tower was in Pisa! The only time a horizon is reliable is if it consists entirely of water!

    JP's screening process is fundamentally flawed if it judges level based purely on the horizon.
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

No activity results to display
Show More
Working...
X