Various Scottsdale/Phoenix Car Photos

Discussion in 'Car Pictures' started by dahldrin, May 21, 2007.

  1. awesome pics man
  2. oh shiit, the r8 pic......
  3. I am bored of rally cars. I need some exotic shootings or track days at least <A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/sad.gif"></A>

    Nice pics pat
  4. Nice shots man. I rented 70-200IS last summer during ALMS, also had my 17-55 to use in paddock and such. I noticed quite a difference from the first time I put 70-200 on my camera, you just can see the clarity and natural colors through the viewfinder, it is amazing. As much as I love wide angle lens, I found myself using 70-200 most of the time.

    Just have a quick question regarding flash, how often do you find yourself using one shooting cars or racing events? I was thinking whether I should get one now, or just keep saving for 70-200...
  5. Since I've bought a 70-200 2.8 sigma and a 35 F2 I can't use anything else.

    Once you have tested a nice lens you simply cannot go back.
  6. Thanks guys.

    Did the SLR shoot earlier tonight... god damn it. I don't know if it's the lens, me, or the cheap C-PL I'm using, but a LOT of them are misfocused/blurry. This sucks. My 17-50 Tamron shots turned out MUCH sharper in general than the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS shots.
  7. nice setup for the SLR <A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/amazed.gif"></A>!

    I love the neck thingie (how do you call that? <A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/confused.gif"></A>) with on it <A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/grin.gif"></A>

    I'm going to order that lens too..
  8. You have to get used to the focal and select the constant focus mode.

    I had a lot of misfocused pics with my 70-200 too but the more I use it the less I have bad pics.

    Show some exemple for the sharpness because thats not normal.
  9. Most of my issues aren't actually with misfocusing, though some clearly are. Thing is, I had zero problems focusing or with sharpness with the 70-200 f4 non-IS when I rented previously. I've NEVER had this much of an issue with a lens. If they aren't misfocused or blurred, they're soft and the bokeh is "nervous". Even with my 50mm f1.4 at very wide apertures I've never had such consistent problems with focusing/sharpness. I still think there's a chance it's the C-PL causing the problems, but I used the same brand C-PL on my 17-50mm during the shoot and all of those came out very sharp with no focusing issues. That shot I posted was taken with the 17-50 (which is probably pretty obvious).
  10. Do you mean the cactus? I think they're always nice to include them as they're pretty unique to AZ... the saguaros are actually only in a very small part of the world.
  11. that would be cactus thingy <A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/wink.gif"></A>

    PS- good job on getting the lens basman, the IS will HELP you out tons.
  12. wut? huh? ooh, no, with the thingie I meant the strap of the camera around your neck <A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/tongue.gif"></A>

    and with the setup I meant the cactus, the one rock in the middle and the moon. Just the way the car is put in this interesting landscape <A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/wink.gif"></A>

    edit: and thanks, the bank account took a hit, but I'm all excited about it. Have to wait a week for it to arrive <A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/sad.gif"></A>
  13. Have you gotten a ride in allans SLR yet?
  14. No, I didn't. <A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/sad.gif"></A> I was hoping to last night, but it never really worked out. I was hoping he'd offer... I felt a little uncomfortable just asking. I might be meeting him out at the strip this Saturday, so maybe then.
  15. Its probably CPL, there is no point of having crappy piece of glass in front of $1500+ lens. Try to screw it off and see if it makes a difference? Unless something is wrong with the lens itself... because when I had 70-200 2.8IS it did everything perfectly, I didnt even mind the extra weight lol.
  16. Like I said, I think it may be the C-PL, but I did shoot without it and I still wasn't impressed, honestly. I'm taking it out to shoot a Jarama in about two hours, so we'll see how it goes. Also, as I think I mentioned, the filter is the same make/model (just a different size) as the one I used on my 17-50 the same night and all those shots turned out great/sharp. And it seems like it's too soft for it to be just the filter, but we'll see.
  17. *psyched about those Jarama pictures*
  18. can't wait. Although, id be surprised if he shot in the day time <A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/wink.gif"></A> but that won't happen so I'm expecting dusk pics.
  19. Daytime = wrongtime.

    Ended up rescheduling the Jarama shoot for tomorrow (Friday). I'll at least post a couple samples tomorrow night or Saturday morning/afternoon.
  20. #1198 dahldrin, Mar 20, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  21. Next page...
  22. Whatever happened to that dude and his famous 200+ MPH run?

Share This Page