|
I am in no way interested in getting deep into photography, but I am getting deep into fostering kittens. I think I'm pretty good at raising the little tykes but I am terrible at getting good shots of them for the adoption page. At the moment I'm shooting with my Samsung S22 Ultra on full auto mode, but most of my pictures turn out noisy, blurry, or both. I know enough about photography to know I'm fairly limited by the size of the lens and the compactness of the sensor. I don't need high-megapixel images, they're going on an adoption web page but I'd like to get pictures that are clear and sharp without investing a bunch of money into something that will be used for pictures of kittens 99% of the time. Can you recommend either a good used camera that can be picked up cheap that can pull in more light to get good pictures of them even if they're moving (they're always moving) or a good tutorial about getting more out of what I have? Kitten tax: 
Gangringo fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Oct 25, 2023 |
#
¿
Oct 25, 2023 22:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 07:32 |
|
|
Thanks for the tips. I'll work on my lighting. Unfortunately I used to have an older Sony mirrorless camera I inherited from my father but it got stolen from a storage space.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2023 18:18
|
|
|
I wanted to say I took all your advice, also dug down into the deeper settings on my cell phone camera and my pictures have improved a lot.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2023 02:58
|
|
|
I randomly went down a YouTube rabbit hole and found some content creators singing the virtues of getting a 10-ish year old Sony mirrorless camera and one or two lenses as essentially a packable point and shoot. My main concern is I want to get less blurry/smeary shots of animals in sub-optimal lighting conditions than my phone camera can get. I used my father's Sony alpha camera from that era for a while before it was stolen  and I was amazed by its ability to take "real" looking photos in such a compact frame. He was a Canon nut though and used adapters to use his old manual Canon lenses so I didn't get to use the fancy autofocus.What I'm asking is will I get a noticably better, sharper (perceived, not megapixels) image of my dog doing cute things around dusk with a NEX-5R or similar with a kit lens or 50mm prime than my Samsung phone? It looks like I can put that together for under $300 which is about as much as I'm willing to throw at this. Is there a better solution in that price range?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2023 18:47
|
|
|
I mean, if there's something that can deliver similar quality in the same form factor as the Sony alphas, especially if the lenses are cheaper I'm all ears.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2023 21:00
|
|
|
So after recommendations here and on reddit I bought a used Sony A6400. Well actually I bought a used NEX 5N with several lenses that someone asked way too little for, realized it wasn't nearly enough for what I wanted to do, and bought an A6400 the next weekend. Anyway, my question is about branding on Sony lenses. I get that a smaller sensor means a cropped image and a smaller field of view. This makes sense putting a full frame lens on an APSC camera. When a Sony lens is branded as, say a 50mm APSC lens is that crop taken into account, or is it really a 75mm lens? Are a 50mm E and FE lens going to have the same field of view on an APSC camera?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2024 06:37
|
|
|
That makes sense, I just wanted to be sure.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2024 07:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 07:32 |
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:I think lenses designed specifically for APS-C might be less girthy?? I'm not sure about that. This is the case for the most part, and it's the reason I went with APSC instead of full frame. Beyond being cheaper there is a real portability and maneuverability advantage.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2024 16:44
|
|