Post a "HDR" picture of your Subaru

[UltimateLurker]

It'd be amazing if you glued it to the front of a P&S...lol.

[inthenameofweez]

Obviously not my car but...

First attempt. Give me pointers!

[ctrent86]

Originally Posted by UltimateLurker

I love the Nik 50 ƒ1.8 (for its sharpness) and the Sig 50 ƒ1.8 (for the way it renders oof areas), wouldn't trade them for the world. I also love my Nik 80-200 ƒ2.8 for the compression and creamy bokeh, but will end up selling it for the Nik 200 ƒ2 (same compression, more bokeh, and sharper). I'll also be using an 85 ƒ1.4 soon, and I'm sure I'll love it, it's not called the "cream machine" for nothing.

Thanks for the info. The 50 1.8 is my next purchase and I am debating between a 70-300 3.5 or a better quality 70(or 80)-200 lens with a better f stop range.

For the image above great car but the people in the background are distracting.

[UltimateLurker]

Any lens with an f-stop higher than ƒ2.8 is a waste of money IMO.

[ctrent86]

What about for interior low light?

[UltimateLurker]

The lower the light, the lower the f-stop needed. I use ƒ1.4 to 1.8 almost exclusively in low light.

[ctrent86]

That is what I was researching so niffy fifty 1.8 is going to be scooped up next. I do not think with a body like a d60 and my skills, a huge difference between 1.8 and 1.4 will be realized in 95% of situations again for me. Plus there is a hefty price difference.

[UltimateLurker]

It's not a question of skill, but more a question of use, as it takes no more skill to use 1.4 than any other aperture, but you might not need it. The more inexpensive the camera, the lower f-stop lens needed to make up for the terrible high-iso performance as well. If you can afford the 1.4, by all means, get it, if not, the 1.8 will serve you well, I guarantee it.

[ctrent86]

Thanks for the info. It is greatly appreciated.

[UltimateLurker]

It's no problem, Sylon and Armin helped me with the same information in the beginning.

[inthenameofweez]

Look at mine?... Lol.

[Imfasterthanyourevo]

HAHA that 200mm f2 is like 5g's. That's more than all my lenses and camera. BUt I'll get it eventually.

[ctrent86]

More like 2g's

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-70-200mm-Nikkor-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00009MDBQ/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1257717840&sr=8-2

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-70-200mm-Nikkor-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00009MDBQ/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1257717840&sr=8-2

Have to pay to play...

[UltimateLurker]

80-200 ƒ2.8: $1,100
70-200 ƒ2.8 VR: $2,400
200 ƒ2 VR: $5,100

I have the 80-200 now, because I don't need the VR (I always use it with a tri-pod), but will be replacing it with the 200 ƒ2, which I would get without VR if they made such.

[clbd39]

Originally Posted by ctrent86

Thanks for the info. The 50 1.8 is my next purchase and I am debating between a 70-300 3.5 or a better quality 70(or 80)-200 lens with a better f stop range.

For the image above great car but the people in the background are distracting.

the important question on that comment is, do you need the VR with the 70mm or not, if not save the extra grand for a new body or better glass!

The VR was great when I took pics of a Softball Night game but the lens is slow (atleast at night) and would not benefit you if you don't need the VR

I used my 50 mm f/1.8 with my D40x but it was frustrating and hit or miss, once I upgraded to the D80 it's on my camera (other lens is the kit 18-135mm) 75% of the time, it's almost laughable how great of a lens 134 (or whatever it is now) bucks can buy you

Originally Posted by ctrent86

More like 2g's

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-70-200mm...7717840&sr=8-2



Have to pay to play...

they're talking about the 200mm f/2 not the 70-200mm VR f/2.8

[Imprezademics]

There are some awefully nice looking "Subarus" in this thread.

[UltimateLurker]

Hey man, don't hate, non-subaru content goes back to the very first page...lol. Besides, I've contributed MANY Subie shots .

[Imprezademics]

Im not hating. Most, if not all the cars in here look amazing. Im just going by what the thread title says... I was just throwing that out there.

[BoneJj]

alright, I just spent a while on this thread, at least the last hour, so hot...

I was also hoping that I would run into some photos of a 08+ WRX, with all the body options like the 09+

If anyone could possibly direct me to a link or send me a PM of an HDR of a 09+ WRX that is SWP (satin white pearl) I would really appreciate it. I pic mine up here in a few days (been waiting a good 3 months now). I don't have the capabilities to do HDRs with my camera. It's just a simple Canon S3 IS and only saves in .jpg format.

I would greatly appreciate it if someone could point me in the direction of said SWP 09+ wrx shots. I would like to have some great desktop images for work and well myself as well.

Thanks in advance for any possible help you guys can provide.

PS: I did find some STi SWP images but that's not the same.

[DarkKnightBaku]

some nice pics you guys got got a little more time than i do for sure

[cjx17]

[platnumn]

i keep experimenting, need longer exposures and better focus.

[Ryan314]

^psychedelic

[Sirius Lock]

Originally Posted by AlpineE30M52

Nothing should make you like ebay headlights... But you DO drive a MKIV Jetta VR soooo..... Who knows?

I drove a 98 Impreza until it hit a truck :P This is more of a temporary car until I can afford another impreza. This Jetta was an amazing deal, $5400 for perfect leather seats, I'll take it.

[UltimateLurker]

Originally Posted by platnumn

i keep experimenting, need longer exposures and better focus.

Very cool concept sir.