Maybe I don't need new gear as mucxh as I need new and deeper skills. B&W

[JBW]

Chinese Holly. Processed in Capture 1 Sony Pro 10.2 using a built in Sepia conversion as a starting point. C&C most welcome.

[xpatUSA]

Chinese Holly. Processed in Capture 1 Sony Pro 10.2 using a built in Sepia conversion as a starting point. C&C most welcome.

Certainly your existing gear worked well enough for that scene, Brian.

Interesting frosted appearance . . surface, lighting or both?

I'm in 'negative GAS' mode as we speak, if there is such a phrase. Just sold a S---a 17-70mm 'Contemporary' zoom, because my 17-50mm shoots just as well over most it's range (say 24mm upward) and it's a constant f/2.8 into the bargain . .

[Shadowman]

Nicely captured, good looking background also.

[JBW]

Certainly your existing gear worked well enough for that scene, Brian.

Interesting frosted appearance . . surface, lighting or both?

I'm in 'negative GAS' mode as we speak, if there is such a phrase. Just sold a S---a 17-70mm 'Contemporary' zoom, because my 17-50mm shoots just as well over most it's range (say 24mm upward) and it's a constant f/2.8 into the bargain . .

It did indeed. I have the top rated macro/portrait lens so unless I move into a new area of photography....

Both.

I like astrophotography but the reason I haven't posted any shots is that there have been no opportunities for shooting.

There have been opportunities for moon shots hence the thought of the zoom/prime.

[JBW]

Nicely captured, good looking background also.

I was surprised at how well the bg turned out in conversion

[rpcrowe]

Brian,
I'd be willing to guess that many of us do not get everything out of our gear that the gear is capable of...

[JBW]

Brian,
I'd be willing to guess that many of us do not get everything out of our gear that the gear is capable of...

I certainly don't

[DanK]

I'd be willing to guess that many of us do not get everything out of our gear that the gear is capable of...

Isn't that the truth! I often paraphrase what Ansel Adams purportedly said: the most important piece of photographic equipment is the 12 inches (sorry, all of you who aren't in the US or Myanmar: ~ 30 cm) behind the viewfinder." I've used this as an unserious justification for buying more equipment than I should: "now I can be certain that it's my fault, not the fault of my gear, that this image is so lousy."

[LePetomane]

I have been pretty good about resisting challenges to buy both photography and fly fishing gear. You can only use one camera or one fly rod at a time. I think Richard's point is well taken in that some of us (myself at the top of the list) do not get everything out of our gear.

[rpcrowe]

To paraphrase a comment that is reputed to a Nikon executive...

If you are shooting with ANY modern DSLR and lens and are not getting VERY GOOD to EXCELLENT imagery, it is your technique rather than the camera/lens that is at fault!

However...

IMO, "technique" also means knowing the limitations of your gear and not expecting results from that gear beyond its capabilities.

An example of this would be trying to shoot gymnastics in a badly lighted high school gym with an entry level DSLR and kit lens. You will probably not achieve decent imagery of the gymnasts in action while tumbling, etc. However, even with that entry level camera and kit-lens you can get some decent imagery of the contestants when they are not moving fast. Especially if you can be up close to the performance area and are using a monopod...

Technique also means that you cannot expect high quality images of individual football plays during night football games when you are shooting from the stands. However, even with entry level gear, you can get some very nice shots of the overall crowd...