# NAIAS 2004 pictures



## Mike 325xi (Dec 19, 2001)

I never thought I would see the day where I thought a Hyundai concept was really nice looking...and I like the Mustang...I haven't been able to say that since the late 60's body styles. :thumbup:


----------



## JetBlack330i (Feb 8, 2002)

Yeah, this is the first generation when the Mustang and Corvette grabs my attention. I think I will test drive them when available, for the first time in my life.


----------



## ___lk___ (Dec 21, 2001)

alee said:


> My point is it's 100% impractical... to the point where recommending a 50mm lens is just ridiculous.


whatever u say al....sure sounds like u got it all figured out. :tsk:


----------



## alee (Dec 19, 2001)

___lk___ said:


> whatever u say al....sure sounds like u got it all figured out. :tsk:


 Finally someone that understands.


----------



## The Roadstergal (Sep 7, 2002)

Great pics! Thanks! Got more of the sexy models? 

That Audi LeMans is the first Audi I've seen recently that has styling that doesn't put you to sleep. Cool. WTH is up with the Carerra GT's stick sift? :eeps: Sexy car on the outside, though. 6er. Oooh. Yes. Sexy. Love it. The VW Concept T is actually kinda cool. Is it an emissions disaster? The Phaeton is just screaming, "Don't touch anything under the hood. Take it to a dealer." :thumbdwn: The Chrysler looked better in the publicity shots - it's more ungainly in the pics you posted. The Cobra should have been new or old - this new/old fusion thing looks terrible. The Hydrogen RX-8 is cool; the Micro Sport looks very practical. The Vantage is sleek, but the nose is too big - wish they had pushed it in just a little. Me likey the Solstice! Man, that's nice! I don't like Corvette's direction - I prefer the current Z06. That F1 thing looks decent - where can I pick one up? 

Thanks for the pictures! :clap:


----------



## JetBlack330i (Feb 8, 2002)

The Roadstergal said:


> The Chrysler looked better in the publicity shots - it's more ungainly in the pics you posted.


It's the lens he used. :stickpoke


----------



## Pete Teoh (Jan 27, 2002)

The Roadstergal said:


> Great pics! Thanks! Got more of the sexy models?


You're welcome.  That's the only sexy model I saw. How about a sexy blonde Volvo chick instead?


----------



## Mathew (Feb 8, 2002)

rumratt said:


> BTW, is this a picture of Jetfire and Clyde?


Clyde is wearing the yellow jacket. :eeps:


----------



## Pete Teoh (Jan 27, 2002)

rumratt said:


> Let's get things back on topic. this thread is about zoom lenses.


:spank:


rumratt said:


> BTW, is this a picture of Jetfire and Clyde?


Neither. 



JetBlack330i said:


> It's the lens he used. :stickpoke


:spank:


----------



## Mike 325xi (Dec 19, 2001)

rumratt said:


> Let's get things back on topic. this thread is about zoom lenses.
> 
> BTW, is this a picture of Jetfire and Clyde?


I'm pretty sure clyde is the guy on the far right that Pete cut off in the picture...the one with the cool hat and mustache. :eeps:


----------



## Mike 325xi (Dec 19, 2001)

JetBlack330i said:


> It's the lens he used. :stickpoke


 :bustingup :bustingup


----------



## The Roadstergal (Sep 7, 2002)

JetBlack330i said:


> It's the lens he used. :stickpoke


:bustingup


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

Did you guys drive or fly up to Motown? Did you all go specifically for the show?


----------



## Pete Teoh (Jan 27, 2002)

I drove from here. I had to get up at 5:00 am this morning to meet the guys for breakfast at 7:30 am.  The other guys drove in from DC yesterday.


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

I was thinking of uploading pics tomorrow, but after seeing Pete's, I'm not sure that there's any point to posting most of them (most of them are nearly the same). I do have some good shots of some detail items (at least I think I do, I've only chimped so far).

Pete, it was great to meet you and put a stationary face to the name.  I think we all had a pretty good time today.

Plaz, Jetfire and I (plus a friend of Jetfire's...same guy that went with us last year) drove up to Detroit on Friday in order to go to the show today. Pete drove down to meet us in Ypsilanti for breakfast at this place.

To the others...

Yes, that was me that cut off with the cool hat and mustache in the yellow jacket with the haircut. To YOU I say, just wait until Jetfire posts at least one of several pics on his CF card! My feelings are clearly displayed. :flipoff:

:angel:

ps - JST, we walked 6 or 7 blocks in 2º weather last night to go that pizza place you suggested. Well worth it. :thumbup:


----------



## Mathew (Feb 8, 2002)

·clyde· said:


> Pete drove down to meet us in Ypsilanti for breakfast at this place.


Heart attack on a plate. Sounds like my kind of breakfast. :thumbup:


----------



## Clarke (Oct 21, 2002)

Thanks for the pics Pete;Is the Audi A8s new nose as objectionable in person as it is in the pictures I've seen? Does the Mustangs greenhouse seem as proportionally small in the flesh? I'm not sure why they did not cut down the door a little and give it a bit of the hip the originals had.Seems a little heavy sided to me,hard to really tell until seen in person though.


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

Very nice pictures, thanks for sharing them Pete ! :thumbup: 

OK, how did you guys like Audi's MMI ?


----------



## fatmanz3 (Sep 15, 2003)

Great shots Pete. And they were created under demanding conditions. I loved'em all. :thumbup:


----------



## Pete Teoh (Jan 27, 2002)

Clyde, it was a pleasure to finally meet you and Jetfire in person. I had a great time too. :thumbup:

Clarke, the A8L 6.0's nose does not seem as prominent in real life as it does in pictures I've seen. It's still a good-looking car, albeit rather plain in a classy/dignified sort of way. (Does that make sense?) I believe the new front fascia will only be on the 6.0 W12 version, at least for the 2004/2005 model year. The upcoming A6 will supposedly have the new design as well from the spy shots I've seen.

Yes, the Mustang's cockpit looks like it would feel quite tight on the inside. I didn't get to sit in one though.

Alex, MMI seems quite easy to learn. I haven't tried the original iDrive or the updated iDrive in the E60 so I can't give you a comparison.


----------



## F1Crazy (Dec 11, 2002)

The Roadstergal said:


> That F1 thing looks decent - where can I pick one up?


Try this contact:

Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro
Ferrari S.p.A.
Caselle Postale 589
Via Emilia 1163
I-41100 Modena, Italy


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

F1Crazy said:


> Try this contact:
> 
> Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro
> Ferrari S.p.A.
> ...


 

Tel them Alex sent you :str8pimpi


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

Pete Teoh said:


> I just got a Nikon D100 on Thursday.  I used it with a 18-35mm ED-IF Nikkor lens today. Most of the pictures were shot with camera set to ISO800.


That's precisely what I took to the SF auto show, along with an external flash and a monopod. I like that lens a lot, although the barrel distortion renders it unusable for architecture shots.

And yeah, a 75mm lens is too long for a car show (and sweeping generalizations about zooms vs. primes are a waste of time).


----------



## Pete Teoh (Jan 27, 2002)

I brought my trusty old SB-25 flash but didn't use it since ISO800 gave enough speed for handheld shots. I should look at getting a DX flash though since I believe the D100 doesn't do TTL flash with my old SB-25.


----------



## ___lk___ (Dec 21, 2001)

Cliff3 said:


> And yeah, a 75mm lens is too long for a car show (and sweeping generalizations about zooms vs. primes are a waste of time).


trying to school u noobs on why a 50mm *IS NOT* the same as ~75 mm on a dslr is an even bigger waste of time...till now, i just let that one go, and silently shook my head. (along w/ al's asinine "too sharp" comment) 

....and flash photos at car shows look ridiculous. the reflectors light up like a christmas tree, and the exhibit halls dont offer much opportunity for bounce (or did u bring along a brolly? :rofl: ). pete did the right thing shooting at higher iso. sorry if that's too sweeping a generalization.


----------



## bavarian19 (May 11, 2003)

glad to see the ci zhp with clears on it :thumbup:


----------



## Pete Teoh (Jan 27, 2002)

lk, a 50mm is not the same as a 75mm on a DSLR. It still has the natural perspective of a 50mm. However, your field of capture is equivalent to that of a 75mm on a film SLR. That means you will have to step way back from the car in order to capture it in entirety. I'm telling you that this is not at all possible with the way crowds are gathered around the vehicle. Do you simply not understand that? Look at this picture for example.



It was shot at 35mm focal length and at the distance one would have to stand to get past the crowds that is the crop you're going to get. Try that with a 50mm and you will barely get the entire wheel in the frame.


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

Pete, are you claiming that you know it better than lk ? 

lk, I have a 2.1 MP Casio camera, bought it about 1.5 year ago, can it be considered as prime ?


----------



## Pete Teoh (Jan 27, 2002)

Yes, lk has not been man enough to post any examples of his superior photography skills as yet. At least I'm a newbie with 20 years of photography experience who dares to show his work.


----------



## JST (Dec 19, 2001)

·clyde· said:


> I was thinking of uploading pics tomorrow, but after seeing Pete's, I'm not sure that there's any point to posting most of them (most of them are nearly the same). I do have some good shots of some detail items (at least I think I do, I've only chimped so far).
> 
> Pete, it was great to meet you and put a stationary face to the name.  I think we all had a pretty good time today.
> 
> ...


Plaz? 

Glad to hear you enjoyed the pizza. I'm going to be looking forward to that (and the coneys) all week. Hopefully it'll be a bit warmer next weekend.


----------



## ___lk___ (Dec 21, 2001)

pete... here's what you're missing. the pic u just posted is the best shot i've seen so far from that collection. why? because it's INTERESTING, instead of just being a sleepy pic of some car in the middle of a frame, which is what a lot of the other pics are. the crop is what makes a shot, far from being a detraction. it all depends on if you're shooting for the art, or just trying to take a snapshot of a car....there are valid reasons for doing both, but everybody cares about final quality, which is (again) my point about zooms.

shooting exclusively w/ primes means the occasional shot u wished u could have framed at a different fl is more than balanced out by the scores of better shots u DID get because u COULD step around, and worked a little harder for the shot. and they are ALL sharper b/c u had the prime. wtf did u buy an slr for if u dont want to change lenses? :dunno:

wait for the shot, move around, examine the angles, learn about composition. what it is, and (more importantly) what it isn't. even if/when i dont want to switch a lens, especially at a static display like an indoor auto show, i'll just remember all the shots i want to get at a different fl, switch lenses and come back to them later...assuming i cared enuf about them.

some of u guys need to resist the urge to be p1ssed off at me for a little constructive criticism. i guarantee your next outing will be better if u take *nothing* but a prime lens, 50mm or whatever fl u would rather use. save that zoom for burning ants on the sidewalk.

david lee roth said it best: "if you want it, got to bleed for it baby."



Pete Teoh said:


> lk, a 50mm is not the same as a 75mm on a DSLR. It still has the natural perspective of a 50mm. However, your field of capture is equivalent to that of a 75mm on a film SLR. That means you will have to step way back from the car in order to capture it in entirety. I'm telling you that this is not at all possible with the way crowds are gathered around the vehicle. Do you simply not understand that? Look at this picture for example.
> 
> 
> 
> It was shot at 35mm focal length and at the distance one would have to stand to get past the crowds that is the crop you're going to get. Try that with a 50mm and you will barely get the entire wheel in the frame.


----------



## Bruce128iC (Feb 16, 2003)

Pete, awesome pics! Thanks for posting them. That 6 series convertible is SWEET!!!!! Definitely my next car if I can afford it. :thumbup:


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

A couple notes...

lk, at one point you made a comment about "just a couple steps back." There wasn't that kind of room. Seriously, an inch or two back in many cases would have made for someone sticking an arm, head, other body part between the camera and the car. It is not the time or place to practice craft if your goal is documentation or to obtain safety shots. I find it surprising that you are making comments about the difference of sharpness between a zoom and prime in a handheld ISO800 environment as if it makes a real difference (limited just to sharpness, and not including chromatic aberration, vignetting and the like). It doesn't. Any sharpness advantage is lost between camera shake and the noise at ISO800. Add the reduced resolution and moderate to heavy jpeg compression that we are seeing these images through and the argument becomes even more pointless. OTOH, I am completely befuddled by alee's "too much sharpness" comment. :dunno:


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

JST said:


> Plaz?
> 
> Glad to hear you enjoyed the pizza. I'm going to be looking forward to that (and the coneys) all week. Hopefully it'll be a bit warmer next weekend.


Oops...unclear...

"Plaz, to answer your question, Jetfire and I..."

I didn't think it felt that cold. I better not be getting acclimated to cold weather. :eeps:


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

lk, where did you get idea from that Pete went to the show to take art pictures ? If you are taking car pictures to post on an internet forum, you take the whole car instead of a section of it, unless there are some interesting details to shoot. If I take a rear fender and one single shot of a wheel and post it, people will definitely ask where the rest of the car is.

Unless you are attending on the Press Days, there's no way to move anywhere without getting blocked by other visitors. Ask me how I know. I went to the IAA Frankfurt Motor Show. Total attendance was 1 million visitors in 10 days. Imagine going back a few steps or so in such a crowd.


----------



## ___lk___ (Dec 21, 2001)

·clyde· said:


> A couple notes...
> Seriously, an inch or two back in many cases would have made for someone sticking an arm, head, other body part between the camera and the car.


see my david lee roth comment 



·clyde· said:


> It is not the time or place to practice craft if your goal is documentation or to obtain safety shots.


that's what a working pj says... my impression is pete's shooting for himself. the fact that he sprung for a D100 tells me he cares more about the art than the P&S guy standing next to him.



·clyde· said:


> I find it surprising that you are making comments about the difference of sharpness between a zoom and prime in a handheld ISO800 environment as if it makes a real difference (limited just to sharpness, and not including chromatic aberration, vignetting and the like). It doesn't. Any sharpness advantage is lost between camera shake and the noise at ISO800.


that's a bit like saying "if i cheat on my diet and have a burger and fries, i might as well have the cheesecake too".

iow, just b/c he's at higher iso's (burger/fries) doesn't mean that he can't/won't benefit by paying attention to other factors that could help him (primes, monopod, etc...)

CA doesnt appear to be an issue w/ that cam, that lens, or nikkor's 50mm f/1.8.. certainly we have little to fear from vignetting w/ the 1.6 imager cropping.

and if noise is an issue at iso800, he needs a better body! 



Alex said:


> "Imagine going back a few steps or so in such a crowd."


AB, the crowds are typically around the hottest cars, which are typically fenced in many feet away from crowds. if anything, he needs more REACH for those shots, and not wide angle. at that point, he's shooting at the tele end of an 18-55, which makes my point about using a simple 50mm even more valid.

there's always a shot to be had, no matter where you're standing, or what lens u have attached. the skill is being able to find THAT shot, instead of spinning a zoom ring and settiling for the same thing over and over. u never get much better by just spinning zoom rings.


----------



## Mike 325xi (Dec 19, 2001)

Pete Teoh said:


> Yes, lk has not been man enough to post any examples of his superior photography skills as yet. At least I'm a newbie with 20 years of photography experience who dares to show his work.


 :thumbup:

I think the pictures are great and thank you for posting them.

Alex said it very well...it is an auto show, not a subject for your own gallery exhibit. You could have taken the pictures with a throw away camera and taken it to K-mart to get the pics on disc and we would have been happy with the results and would have loved to look at the pictures of the *cars.*

I for one fully understand the convenience of a zoom lens, I use an Olympus E-10n (click) and am very happy with the quality of the photographs. I'm not a pro and if I was I would be using different cameras for different situations but a zoom instead of a bunch of primary lenses is the perfect combination for every day photography.

I often wonder what makes _lk_ so negative about everything. In the years on this board and roadfly I don't know if I have ever seen him post anything that wasn't a criticism...it must be tough to go through life as an expert / critic in everything  it apparently makes you miserable in life.


----------



## alee (Dec 19, 2001)

Alex Baumann said:


> Unless you are attending on the Press Days, there's no way to move anywhere without getting blocked by other visitors. Ask me how I know. I went to the IAA Frankfurt Motor Show. Total attendance was 1 million visitors in 10 days. Imagine going back a few steps or so in such a crowd.


----------



## AB (Jan 11, 2002)

alee said:


>


 :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


----------



## Mike 325xi (Dec 19, 2001)

:bustingup :bustingup :bustingup


----------

