Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 493
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Nice shots Sam.. Amusing, I got a 400D 2 weeks before I headed away on my trip - xmas day..

I got a 17-85mm Image Stabilising lens with it becuase I probably couldn't hold it still I think lol.. Might get a longer lens next.. this one is excellant though and would def recommend it if you were looking for an upgrade..

get the 17-40 f/4L.
I got the 17-85 because it's providing me with a bit more long distance ability..

Both are good lens's but most dont understand the difference inbetween the different series of lens's

Image stabilised lens's are really only benificial on the longer zoom units, it does not feature in many lens's under 70mm as at this range you can generally keep the camera still enough for enven a 1/2 second shot. Also in time you will have less use for the IS feature. My only IS lens is a 70-200 F2.8 LIS and its great for motorsport as it takes awsome panning shots...

So therefore if you were to have a 17-40mm there would be no need for IS and therefore the extra money gets spent of L series glass instread. In a perfect work we would all buy 5d's with 28-300mm LIS len's but not all of us have 9 grand...

So a 400D fitted with either a 17-85mm IS or a 17-40mm L series would both be great choices...

To be honest, we sell way more 17-40mm L series than the 17-85mm IS... Mainlly because the quality of the L series glass, also most people would but a 70-200 LIS as their second lens, as 40mm x 1.6 = 64mm in real terms which is plenty for portraits, landscapes & some minor macro work. I probablly use my 17-40 more than any other lens i own...

I got the 17-85 because it's providing me with a bit more long distance ability.. I think a 17-40 won't give me enough zoom.. oh well.. each to their own.. i've been extremely happy so far with it..

Cool. I ditched the 17-85 and got the 10-22 efs - 24-70L - 70-200L IS - 100 Macro 2.8 and next is the 100-400L IS :( I think that gives me pretty good coverage :laugh:

I'm no guru but here's what I'd say about these pics :(

davos3.jpg

Wrong time of day for this shot. With digital (particularly SLR's) you can take some of the best pics in conditions where you'd swear there wasn't nearly enough light. You said you have a tripod so don't be afraid of long exposures. Remote or cable shutter releases aren't dear and are very handy.

mona.jpg

This second shot is more a composition thing than anything. I like the idea, (same as a lot of band photos where the group has a clear front-man or leader) except in those shots, as with this one, everything should have a fairly similar exposure. Mona's 33 is good (but half in its own shadow) while the Supra is overcooked on the front and in shadow on the side.

JAMES3.jpg

This shot would be perfect if shot at the right time of day. I like the angle but the lighting is wrong. You can see the far left of the shot in bright sunlight. Again, don't be afraid of long exposures and late-in-the-day shooting.

james2.jpg

You know you're gonna crash into a wall, right? :mad: Make sure you don't show up in your own pics.

davos.jpg

Not a bad angle or shot. You need to be careful with higher ISO numbers that you don't get too underexposed or your shots will be too grainy or noisy as was suggested for this shot. Remember that clean body panels reflect objects very well and that number plates can be evil with flash or can just plain old over expose themselves from the avialable light. Love the Nismo's and Federal's!

james.jpg

Shadows ruined this pic but that's not the only problem. Always be aware of your surroundings and make sure that nothing is growing out of the roof, boot or bonnet. The number of photos I've seen taken at Wollongong's South Beach where the car has a boot or roof mounted lighthouse is incredible :laugh:

Hope this helps you.

Adrian

Hey Adrian, thanks heaps for the feedback mate :laugh: appreciate it

this was the first time I have taken photos of cars that were not just parked at a cruise, and it was kind of rushed, but i definatly learned alot about sun light and shadows from this day :(

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • There's plenty of OEM steering arms that are bolted on. Not in the same fashion/orientation as that one, to be sure, but still. Examples of what I'm thinking of would use holes like the ones that have the downward facing studs on the GTR uprights (down the bottom end, under the driveshaft opening, near the lower balljoint) and bolt a steering arm on using only 2 bolts that would be somewhat similarly in shear as these you're complainig about. I reckon old Holdens did that, and I've never seen a broken one of those.
    • Let's be honest, most of the people designing parts like the above, aren't engineers. Sometimes they come from disciplines that gives them more qualitative feel for design than quantitive, however, plenty of them have just picked up a license to Fusion and started making things. And that's the honest part about the majority of these guys making parts like that, they don't have huge R&D teams and heaps of time or experience working out the numbers on it. Shit, most smaller teams that do have real engineers still roll with "yeah, it should be okay, and does the job, let's make them and just see"...   The smaller guys like KiwiCNC, aren't the likes of Bosch etc with proper engineering procedures, and oversights, and sign off. As such, it's why they can produce a product to market a lot quicker, but it always comes back to, question it all.   I'm still not a fan of that bolt on piece. Why not just machine it all in one go? With the right design it's possible. The only reason I can see is if they want different heights/length for the tie rod to bolt to. And if they have the cncs themselves,they can easily offer that exact feature, and just machine it all in one go. 
    • The roof is wrapped
    • This is how I last did this when I had a master cylinder fail and introduce air. Bleed before first stage, go oh shit through first stage, bleed at end of first stage, go oh shit through second stage, bleed at end of second stage, go oh shit through third stage, bleed at end of third stage, go oh shit through fourth stage, bleed at lunch, go oh shit through fifth stage, bleed at end of fifth stage, go oh shit through sixth stage....you get the idea. It did come good in the end. My Topdon scan tool can bleed the HY51 and V37, but it doesn't have a consult connector and I don't have an R34 to check that on. I think finding a tool in an Australian workshop other than Nissan that can bleed an R34 will be like rocking horse poo. No way will a generic ODB tool do it.
    • Hmm. Perhaps not the same engineers. The OE Nissan engineers did not forsee a future with spacers pushing the tie rod force application further away from the steering arm and creating that torque. The failures are happening since the advent of those things, and some 30 years after they designed the uprights. So latent casting deficiencies, 30+ yrs of wear and tear, + unexpected usage could quite easily = unforeseen failure. Meanwhile, the engineers who are designing the billet CNC or fabricated uprights are also designing, for the same parts makers, the correction tie rod ends. And they are designing and building these with motorsport (or, at the very least, the meth addled antics of drifters) in mind. So I would hope (in fact, I would expect) that their design work included the offset of that steering force. Doesn't mean that it is not totally valid to ask the question of them, before committing $$.
×
×
  • Create New...