Some of my photos. Here you go, Egg.


Yes, it does. And that’s what I used for my photos.
Like I said, it’s what I use the most. Probably because I started with Lightroom so I’m more familiar with it than the other editing software that I have.

And I don’t have the latest version, either. I DLed mine for free so my version is a few years old but it still does the job.


I’ve been using PhotoShop since it came out back in the early 90’s… Gotten used to all those tools.

When I first started out I was shooting film with my SLR, then developing the black and white film and printing out 8x10’s. I would scan in my photos and open them up in PhotoShop… then retouch them, or trace over them as reference for illustrations.

Still pretty much stuck in the Adobe world - I use Illustrator, PhotoShop InDesign, Animate and Acrobat pretty much exclusively.


I used to use Photoshop many years ago.
When I decided to take up photography, I needed an editing software and I did some research and Lightroom was recommended to me over Photoshop so I went with Lightroom.

Lightroom is made by Adobe, also.


I’m so ghetto. I use Picasa3.


Anyone ever try aperture?


I was going to try it but it’s been discontinued.



Just updated my shit and got a Nikon D7200. I’ve been tasked with shooting stuff at work, so it seemed like a good time to buy, certainly since they have an older Canon there, and I am a Nikon guy.


Excellent camera. I had a 7100 at one time a few years back but it was toouch camera for me at the time.


I got it yesterday and did a few test photos, but have a project today, so I’ll see how it goes in vivo. It’s light years ahead of my D40X and I’m already very pleased.


Are you using prime lenses?


One of the reasons I bought a Nikon is because i have used them since I studied photo in college. I have a pile of lenses and the D7200 has very good backwards compatibility. My primes are a 28 and a 50 (based on style and subject matter, no telephotos), but for work I need flexibility so I’m using a 18-55.


You should find yourself and 18-135 Nikkor and/or a Tamron 18-200. Readily available used stock that is affordable.


I’ve had good luck with Tamron in the past. Going to work a bit with what I have for now and see what the job demands are before I spend more, as the D7200 itself was a bit of an extravagance.

Pretty sure I will mostly be doing closer quarters stuff. I picked up an older Nikkor 75-300 AF in a thrift store for $15 a few years back. Finally had a chance to see if it works–and it does, though its focus is slow as shit.


You guys use Nikon so Canon lenses aren’t your thing but I just picked up the Canon EF-100mm 2.8 L macro when I was in Hawaii. (It’s a few hundred dollars less in the US than it is in Japan, I don’t know why…)
What a great lens! The L series is the pro line so the bokeh is super creamy and it takes really beautiful photos even on my M5. The only disadvantage is that it’s big and heavy, at least for me, since I’m so used to the micro four thirds/mirrorless lenses.

That’s it for me though. The 100mm completes my gear for Canon and I’ve got everything I want for my Olympus so I’m all set.


As far as micro 4/3, I selling off my Olympus Pen EL 7 and 3 lenses and getting a Panasonic Lumix LX 100. It’s a fixed lens, but a zoom, good in low light, and has electronic viewfinder. The Pen lenses, to get a low aperture, are cost prohibitive and I am unhappy with its low light performance (because of the lenses I have) so out it goes. Great camera though, and I barely used it.


I don’t like the pen series. As the got into newer models it seemed like they were trying to compete directly with the fujifilm x models. Fuji at least learned that people want a viewfinder over a fixed 2-3" screen. I also think that the pen’s had a dark screen and made it difficult to get a good idea of what you were shooting until after the shot was taken. So, there’s that too.


And not Canon and Nikon are both going into the Mirrorless game with very impressive cameras. I think that they probably waited several years and learned from the Sony A series cameras and improved upon the tech considerably.


I guess that the point of mirrorless is a smaller size camera than a DSLR, but they end up not being pocketable anyway so what’s the point. The Lumix LX 100 is a little bulky, but smallish and doesn’t require extra lenses or the sale of a car to afford a 1.8 lens.

So that’s my ‘street’ pictures choice, and reminds me of older grab and go fixed lens rangefinders with the added benefit of very usable zoom range.


I have a Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III. It was recommended to me by @Monkey when I was moving on from a point and shoot to a camera with interchangeable lenses. I love it. When I got my Canon M5, I thought of selling the Olympus because I didn’t think I needed two cameras but they are so different and the Mark 3 is so easy to use I decided to keep both. They are both really good cameras and I use them for different purposes, different moods.
The Olympus macro lens (the less expensive version) is really sharp and the x2 on the camera comes in really handy. And the IS on my Olympus is fantastic! All my macro shots are hand held but they are really sharp, thanks to the in-camera IS, auto-focus is really fast, too.
And I love the EVF. I find it much easier to use than the one on the M5.

What Olympus lenses do you have? I do a lot of flower macros so I use the 30mm macro lens the most but the 25mm and 45mm are both really sharp (even when shooting wide open). The bokeh on both lenses are really nice, too. Not as creamy and smooth as the Canon, I don’t think, but it’s still very nice.