|
RAW vs JPG is more about detail you can recover from the image when making the final JPG than it is about detail present in the final JPG. RAWs are way bigger than JPG so lack of archive space is probably the real issue.
|
#
¿
May 31, 2013 00:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 10:21 |
|
|
Golden hour is basically photography cheat codes. Vegas strip looks really nice at golden hour.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2013 00:31
|
|
|
I have noticed it when the sun is setting and a storm has just passed (the weather here usually moves from west to east). It happens from time to time, it just happened last week, actually.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2013 04:28
|
|
|
sweek0 posted:I've been really happy with my Nikon D5100 and 35/1.8 prime lens, and reading the Understanding Exposures book really helped me improve and think about my pictures. So ehh, thanks thread! The pictures you linked don't have any flash at all they are lit by stage lights. You could get a similar look from flashes if you set up for off camera flash, gel them, and mimic the position of the stage lights but I don't think that's what you're after. You want a real speedlight (nikon word for flash) that TTLs and articulates so you can use it as a bounce flash. The entry level model is the sb700. It replaces the sb600 and there are some tradeoffs between the two. Both will do the job you need so decide what is right for you. Here's a good comparison: http://speedlights.net/2010/09/16/nikon-sb-700-flash-specs-vs-sb-600-and-sb-900/. The sb910 (or the 900 it replaces) is the next step and it's an awesome speedlight so pick that up if you are bankrolled like Star Wars sex parrot. Oh and I forgot to mention. Bounce flash is at its best with a white 10-12 ft ceiling. You will not get the best results if you are shooting at a stage with a high, dark colored ceiling. In that case your best bet is off camera lighting but I get the feeling that's a little more than you were bargaining for. Besides, with any of the speedlights I mentioned you can grow into it later. Dren fucked around with this message at 15:00 on Jul 7, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2013 14:55
|
|
|
I forgot to mention that if you ever take shots of people lit with stage lights you should spot meter on them. If you do matrix metering (the default) the people will most likely end up overexposed.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Drag him to a store and force him to actually try the cameras out to decide what feels better to him instead of forcing you to guess at what his deepest menu desires are. Yeah, stop worrying about what store he's buying it from and him not using it to its fullest potential and have him go touch the cameras. He might be instantly sold on the stuff that point and shoots don't have -- good ergonomics, fast AF, and a viewfinder. And he'll be able to decide what menu system works for him, not that it matters on a DSLR because if you just want to take pictures you can set some basic stuff in the menus and pretty much never touch them again.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
I think even 300mm is short for birds but I guess it depends on how actively you want to stalk them. I would prefer to keep my rear end in my seat. 3D tracking AF is nice to have for birds.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2013 22:04
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:I have a stupid newbie question: you're probably comparing consumer grade telephoto zooms with pro grade telephoto primes. there are pro grade telephoto zooms too and they also cost a shitload of money.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:How did it make you think about framing more versus a zoom lens? I'm going to give you both a tip, 35mm is a focal point that is available on the kit lens. If the camera is being used for vacation photos, a zoom is more practical, and it's likely you'll want something wider than 35mm. Use the kit lens at first and if after a while you think you'd really like a prime, get it then. qft I never really got the whole "oh you are restricted to one focal length. really makes u think." advice. Yeah, if you are restricted to 35mm you'll have to get creative to make a shot work and/or just give up because it's not there. But with the 18-55 you can leave it at 35 all of the time. Then if you really need to you can go a bit tele or a bit wide. Plus, being a bit tele or a bit wide gives a shot a different look which opens up creative opportunities that aren't available with the 35. The 35 prime is a great lens. It's sharp, the large maximum aperture is nice indoors and it's a good lens for pictures of people who are relatively close to you. But for vacation if I could only have one lens I'd take the kit. Fwiw if I'm on vacation or w/e and I can only have one lens I take the 10-24.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
zgrowler2 posted:Portraits and isolated subjects, mostly. I'll be on a college campus as a grad student for the next two years and there will be plenty of opportunities. I'm also a huge fan of bokeh and would prefer to get a lens that allows for that when the shots are properly composed. The ideal subject size for bokeh w/ the 35 is roughly action figure or coffee cup size. You could get some bokeh with an uncomfortably close portrait of an adult sized head but then you'd have an uncomfortably close portrait of a head. If you want bokeh for portraits either do it in post or save your money and buy a full frame camera.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2014 18:40
|
|
|
The thing about bokeh for portraits is unless you want to drop a good chunk of change you're not gonna get great portrait bokeh. You basically need a full frame body with like a 85mm or a 135 ƒ/2 and if you want a full length portrait with tons of delicious bokeh you need a 200mm ƒ/2 which makes beautiful pictures but costs more than my car is worth. I mean yeah you can get by with a 50mm on an FX body and if you don't mind your bokeh being kind of gross you can shoot a head and shoulders portrait with a far away background using the 35mm ƒ/1.8G wide open on a crop body. Or you could play with mirrorless cameras and tilt shift adapters for old, cheap manual lenses. But if you want that hot hot bokeh you have to drop some serious cash.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:Yeah, for sure. timrenzi574 posted:70D , 50 1.4 @ F2 - You definitely don't need a 200mm f/2 ok so both of these are tiny subjects framed closely I was saying if you want the hot hot delicious bokeh on a full length portrait (of an adult) you want the 200 f/2. You can certainly make do with a crop sensor and your platform's 2.8 zoom or a 50mm or even the 35mm to get some oof backgrounds but it's not gonna give you super amazing bokeh. My favorite bokeh is adapted lenses on crop mirrorless bodies, if I were buying my camera poo poo today I'd get a fuji and a t/s adapter for nikon.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
pretty sure the 3200, 3300, 5200, and 5300 all have the newer sensor and you're probably going to want that so don't buy a 3100 or 5100
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Yeah I saw the trick using the business card before, but that one seemed to rely on a white ceiling. Will definitely see what other tricks are possible and have a practise! for a lung you better be getting at least a D800
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
Yeah there is no reason to buy the D5x00 models unless you realllllllly want that flippy screen. Get a D3x00 if your funds are low or a used D7x00 if you have more money. The sensor on the D3300 is really good, probably a little better than the D7000. But the D7000 has more camera.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:Could use an eye fi sd card for the wifi part, but I'm not sure if that can transfer images to a smartphone. It can transfer images to an iPhone. hth
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2014 03:55
|
|
|
I tried using the back button for focus today and I didn't like it much mostly because A) now there is some extra poo poo I have to tell people who use my camera B) the button is kind of in an uncomfortable spot C) I am really used to half press for focus and I could count on one hand the amount of times i found the camera refocusing when i hit the shutter to be undesirable If I ever get a battery grip maybe I'll revisit using the button for focus
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:A, when you hand your camera to someone else, put it on auto anyway. I gave it another shot and I think my hands are too big to comfortably reach the button with my thumb, grip the camera, and hit the shutter. It's a D7000. Like I said maybe if I had a battery grip it'd be ok.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 15:32
|
|
|
Eugene Oregon posted:What is this back button people keep mentioning? 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
I read this guy's thing one time about all the different focus modes of the D7000, what each one was especially good at, and how he'd developed a little game to practice using each one so he'd be great at choosing the right AF for the right situation every time like some kind of AF ninja. I played with my AF modes a little more after reading that but what I found was that full auto AF does the right thing almost every time. So I only go in and override it in specific situations when it isn't correct. Anyway this back button thing seems a lot like the AF ninja thing. Sometimes it would be useful and it's nice that the option is there but most of the time I can let the camera do AF on shutter press because it works pretty well. I really don't like where the button is for my hand and there are other options for situations where I want to focus once then keep that focus such as flipping the lens or body to manual focus.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
The 35mm 1.8G is a great lens at a great price. It's quality is top notch and nothing else in the dx lineup even comes close to it in terms of value. The 50mm 1.8 AF-D is just ok in terms of quality. The focus speed isn't as fast as I'd like thanks to the screw drive motor (I have a D7000) and it will miss focus a lot at 1.8 on subjects that move. I'm not a big fan of the focal length either. 85mm or longer would be better for a posed portrait and 35mm or shorter is better for indoors/everyday type stuff. But for ~$100 it's not very expensive to get one to play with.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2014 16:05
|
|
|
Get her either a used RX100 or a newer revision of that same camera if you feel like dropping more cash. RX100 ticks the boxes of portable, does ok at not being blurry in indoors/night, nice image quality. It even has a flash you can tilt toward the ceiling to use as a bounce flash. DSLRs are dumb.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
Since you mentioned that your hobby is taking pictures of your model ships you might be interested in macro photography. The point and shoot you have will probably be a better macro camera than your new D3300 unless you get a macro lens. The 18-55 has a maximum reproduction ratio of 0.36x (in manual focus at 55mm), whereas all of the nikon macro lenses have a maximum reproduction ratio of 1:1. http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/25559/what-is-the-maximum-reproduction-ratio-of-a-lens posted:The reproduction ratio means the largest that you can make a subject on the film/sensor compared to its real-life size. In the case of your lens, it means that the image on the film plane will be 1/7.4, or 5/37 of the actual size of the object when it is as close as you can possibly focus the lens. Don't rush out and buy a macro lens though, the 18-55 might be good enough as is and you might be able to make due with a reversing ring.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
I have one of these and it is the poo poo http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00D6Y0U8E/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 I didn't look for UHS-II cards though so maybe those exist and are better. edit: yep they exist and are better but they cost a good bit more
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
Geektox posted:UHSII has faster write speeds but I'm pretty sure only the X-T1 supports it so far or at least that was the case back when it released Are you sure? The Amazon reviews mentioned people using them with a D610. Faster continuous write speed is pretty much the only reason to spend more money on an sd card aside from buying brand name stuff so you don't get junk. That UHS-I card I got gives me noticeably faster continuous write speed when my buffer fills up which is great for shooting anything unpredictable like kids.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 14:10
|
|
|
The Locator posted:For my main purpose (my ship stuff) the Nikon with the 18-55 kit lens is going to work out really well I think. I set the camera on a tripod, set the self timer to 2 seconds so that I wouldn't be bumping it on the shot, and put the camera in auto with flash off, and from 6' away it gets this: You might want an ML-L3 (infrared remote trigger) so you don't have to do the 2 second delay thing. They're $15.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2014 04:31
|
|
|
It should be don't buy a t5 or a superzoom.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Even the D50 I'm shooting with from 2004 or 2005 has the ability to spot meter. It's quite ridiculous the stuff they left off. Its why I'm deciding to put my money where my mouth is when I upgrade next year, and get a D7xx rather than a 3/5 because I can't trust manufacturers to not leave things off that I'm used to (like the AF screw...) Mid level camera models are traps. For what they cost you can get a used prosumer model that is a better camera. D5300 w/ kit is $600. You already have lenses and a used D7k body is ~$550.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
Fwiw I don't think dslr video is really worth doing for casual users. A smartphone, a good p&s, or like a nikon 1, pretty much anything with a smaller sensor than a dslr. Smaller sensor means more is in focus at once so there's less likely to be missed focus.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:They're actually surprisingly usable. You should still never buy one.  for home movies they are actually quite good 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 14:40
|
|
|
LogisticEarth posted:I have a probably annoying "Canon or Nikon" question. I'm looking to get a newer DSLR camera body probably in the semi-pro/prosumer range and am trying to decide which company to go with. The tricky part is that I currently use my wife's old used Canon EOS 10D, for which she has one OK 28-75mm f2.8 lens, for which I forget the manufacturer. On the other hand, my father used to be a part time photographer back in the late 70's through the early 90's and has several decent Nikon lenses, as well as an old Nikon film body. I could probably purchase many of the lenses off of him for cheap, if he doesn't just give them to me outright. Don't know what you intend to shoot but get your dad's film body and lenses and shoot film with them.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2015 11:22
|
|
|
Crack posted:Of course with used pentax that big weather sealing advantage is also a disadvantage as the slightest off-smell will make me suspicious of the previous owner taking (golden) showers with it to share with the internet. If that's even at the very back of my mind I'm not going to take as many photos. I went through 5 used Pentax bodies that reeked of piss before I gave up on weather sealing and got a Nikon, so yeah, this is a legit concern. There must be a golden shower forum out there recommending pentaxes.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2015 17:19
|
|
|
Dren posted:I went through 5 used Pentax bodies that reeked of piss before I gave up on weather sealing and got a Nikon, so yeah, this is a legit concern. There must be a golden shower forum out there recommending pentaxes. j/k guys I would never buy a used pisstax, I know better
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
murk posted:Currently I have a coolpix p7000. It has been nice for learning, manual controls for everything.. shoots in raw etc. I have mostly shot landscape, architecture, mushrooms\plants, night exposures. I haven't done much wildlife(it does seem appealing), no sports and very little portraitures. I am looking at upgrading for xmas. For a while I struggled between a d5100-5300 and a d7000. I have decided a d7000 would be a better choice. I will likely buy used\refurbished from Cameta\b&h\adorama. It looks like a refurbished d7000 can be had for $450 - 500 bucks. My upper budget is $700 leaving me $200-$250 for lenses. I was thinking of picking up a 35mm(should effectively be 50mm?) prime and perhaps an entry level telephoto(something in the 50 - 200/300mm) range. Does anyone have any recommendations on lens that would fit in my budget? I assume they will be used\refurbished from one the above vendors. Thanks for any guidance you can provide! With the stuff you're talking about shooting I don't see the need for a telephoto. I think you'd be happier with the 35 and an 18-55. The 18-55 gives some versatility you might appreciate and I can almost guarantee you'll use it more than the tele. If you really want a tele maybe wait a while and pick up the 55-300 or one of the 70-300 options. None of the consumer level teles are great but the 300s are better than the 200s and you'll maximize your reach/$$.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2015 12:09
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:I'm actually slightly ashamed that the stock 18-55 VR lens tends to be my walkabout for now, but the top end of 55 is a bit limited. Isn't the 18-105 and 18-140 variants essentially the same quality but with better reach? I'd probably go for one of those, they seem well liked. I might plump for one before I upgrade to more expensive glass in a similar range. I don't have any experience with the 18-105 or 18-140 but so long as there is nothing glaringly wrong with them and they're not too much more expensive than the 18-55 then he should consider them too. The thing I was trying to convey is that with a 35 and a 55-200 he'll be missing a walkabout type lens.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2015 13:53
|
|
|
Nomenclature posted:Thanks, I'll look into them. Do lights affect mouse fight behavior? You can fix the 6400 ISO problem with some lights.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
windex i am thinking about not buying a new camera or even reading about new gear that comes out, can you make some recommendations in the neighborhood of $0?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:SD memory cards are cheap and generally reliable. Stick with Class 10 (as you've already decided, good) and get two from a reputable brand. A "reputable" brand is one you've seen before and a quick google doesn't come back with a page full of failure. I say get two because why not? Get two because the D7100 has dual card slots. Not all class 10 cards are equal. Pretty sure they can list class 10 for anything above 10mb/s, and there are much faster cards now. https://www.sdcard.org/developers/overview/speed_class/index.html For instance, I have a UHS 3 card listed at 60 mb/s and a UHS 1 card listed at 80 mb/s. They are both fast.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
akadajet posted:I've gone through 3 sigma lenses and they all had inconsistent auto-focus. The optics were wonderful but if you're missing focus more than half the time it's no fun. plus it's ~35mm equiv (the best focal length) and those cunts at nikon haven't made a cheap aps-c 35mm equiv
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 10:21 |
|
|
windex posted:Lol, in most places outside of the US and Canada there are no straight lines in structures and even internal walls or comparing one building to the next is pitched off center from "level", so the horizon indicator is useless. Lol, straight lines in structures in the US and Canada.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2016 17:33
|
|