Moderator: E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC-05:00

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 5 posts | 
by OntPhoto on Fri Apr 29, 2016 8:53 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 7042
Joined: 9 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
https://www.audubon.org/magazine/may-june-2016/the-2016-audubon-photography-awards-winners
 

by richard bledsoe on Sat Apr 30, 2016 8:59 am
richard bledsoe
Forum Contributor
Posts: 237
Joined: 30 Oct 2004
Location: Arizona
Thanks for the link, good stuff!
 

by Mike in O on Sat Apr 30, 2016 9:28 am
Mike in O
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2673
Joined: 22 Dec 2013
Make sure that you look at the top 100
 

by Kim on Sat Apr 30, 2016 7:51 pm
Kim
Forum Contributor
Posts: 679
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Location: Victoria, Australia
Well worth the look thanks.

I was struck by the number of women in the winners circle and that some of the awarded shots were taken with the much maligned Tamron 150-600 lens.
 

by OntPhoto on Sun May 01, 2016 2:35 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 7042
Joined: 9 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
Kim wrote:Well worth the look thanks.

I was struck by the number of women in the winners circle and that some of the awarded shots were taken with the much maligned Tamron 150-600 lens.

Yes, outstanding images. The Tamron 150-600 is an underestimated and under-rated lens.  I hear it's a very good lens with maybe some softness at the long end.  That's the technical pixel-peeping end of things.  Guess what, a great looking image will be great looking no matter if you took the image with a Sigma 150-600 or Tamron 150-600 or one of the worse lenses on the planet. You may take the sharpest photo with the sharpest lens but if it doesn't have "it" then it is not going to matter.  It's content, composition, light, uniqueness and creativity.
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
5 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group