106 GTi
Though that rule goes out of the window when shooting moving subjects in most cases.
ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
Digital SLR
- Thread starter Eskiisbest
- Start date
Though that rule goes out of the window when shooting moving subjects in most cases.
at the same time you will also get more light on a 1.3 sensor anyway so will be able to shoot a lower iso.
end of the day you are better off with faster glass than whacking up the iso providing you can afford it
end of the day hardly any of us are pro's so it doesnt really matter when your just sticking photos in an album or keeping them on your pc with no one else looking at them
not really it all depends if your wanting to catch movement or not and how fast the thing your trying to shoot is moving
to freaze a car your looking 1/300 a second possibly at 1/50 it will be just a blur
but it all goes out of the window when you start including IS
end of the day 1/focal length has been arround since the camera was invented but i shake like an old man with parkinsons sat on a washing machine so i find it very hard to shoot at 1/focal length
i wouldnt shoot more than iso 200 for a good shot but thats just me same as i shoot in raw if im after results but if im after snaps then what ever iso and jpeg as i cant be arsed to do the pp afterwards if its just a silly picture
yes you can achieve fine results with jpeg hence i use it for snaps
i use raw for teh flexability of it you have much more control over the image you get at the end of it your not limited by white balance and scene settings.
also you have much more dynamic range and the images arnt compressed loosing fine details etc
im not saying im good enough to need it really but i find it better to practise so you can improve
it all depends what your shooting really and only on camera flash is bad unless your just using it for fill for say in a backlit situation
in gigs you have trouble due to fast movement and low light and you usually want to keep the colours of the stage lighting etc so you have to bounce flash and use difusers and other devices to soften the light but you will most prob be forced to up the iso but you will get noise its all a trade off as i said if you MUST get the shot then you do all you can to get it but in things like land scape and macro you have time so why spoil the image with a high iso
Shooting at ISO200 only is something that pro's in the studio do!
I've been DSLR'ing for 3-4years now and 50% upwards of my photos are above ISO200! Obviously if possible its more desirable to shoot at a lower ISO but that's rarely the case!
The more modern models and the 5D handle high ISO extremely well and if you speak to lots of pro's then you'll find hardly any of them shoot at ISO200 when on location shoots!
As for the 1/focal length for shutter speed I have often been productive at a lot less than that but I have the stance of a ninja so it's ok.
I've been DSLR'ing for 3-4years now and 50% upwards of my photos are above ISO200! Obviously if possible its more desirable to shoot at a lower ISO but that's rarely the case!
The more modern models and the 5D handle high ISO extremely well and if you speak to lots of pro's then you'll find hardly any of them shoot at ISO200 when on location shoots!
As for the 1/focal length for shutter speed I have often been productive at a lot less than that but I have the stance of a ninja so it's ok.
lol i know people who can too but i cant lol its almost like a have a vibrator in my pocket lol
maybe i like to shoot 200 or below because of my teacher i dunno but my results are alright lol
erm, your all talking about iso like its a new thing and only a digital thing, i have shot at 1600iso on medium format, i chose that because i wanted the film grain in the image, i also won a competition with the images and one of the things they said they liked about my image was the choice of film stock and the grain in the film...
also have pushed film to stupid high iso's the cross processed it to get different effects, if you know how to use it high iso's give very good arty effects...
depending on what im shooting for, i shot for some advertising the other day and i shot in tiff mode, which gives you even more controll over the colours and pp that raw does...
i think u should go experiment with iso's maybe on a film camera and see what it achieves before just using a digital, i shot at a lake today and used 1800iso and higher on my nikon d2x, simply cos it was overcast and horrible weather, but im processing it and blowing out all the midtones and just increasing the contrast on the shadows and highlights, so the image is mainly white with some dark shaddows in... i like it
also have pushed film to stupid high iso's the cross processed it to get different effects, if you know how to use it high iso's give very good arty effects...
depending on what im shooting for, i shot for some advertising the other day and i shot in tiff mode, which gives you even more controll over the colours and pp that raw does...
i think u should go experiment with iso's maybe on a film camera and see what it achieves before just using a digital, i shot at a lake today and used 1800iso and higher on my nikon d2x, simply cos it was overcast and horrible weather, but im processing it and blowing out all the midtones and just increasing the contrast on the shadows and highlights, so the image is mainly white with some dark shaddows in... i like it
Ex Ph-Quick
Right think SLR is a little heavy for me. Want a decent Digital camera i can take out on a night out. Wanna be able to take pictures at night without the flash and without bluring. Any ideas?
Also want it to actually take a picture when i click the button not flash about 8 times then take it like my ex samsung NV3
Also want it to actually take a picture when i click the button not flash about 8 times then take it like my ex samsung NV3
erm, your all talking about iso like its a new thing and only a digital thing, i have shot at 1600iso on medium format, i chose that because i wanted the film grain in the image, i also won a competition with the images and one of the things they said they liked about my image was the choice of film stock and the grain in the film...
also have pushed film to stupid high iso's the cross processed it to get different effects, if you know how to use it high iso's give very good arty effects...
depending on what im shooting for, i shot for some advertising the other day and i shot in tiff mode, which gives you even more controll over the colours and pp that raw does...
i think u should go experiment with iso's maybe on a film camera and see what it achieves before just using a digital, i shot at a lake today and used 1800iso and higher on my nikon d2x, simply cos it was overcast and horrible weather, but im processing it and blowing out all the midtones and just increasing the contrast on the shadows and highlights, so the image is mainly white with some dark shaddows in... i like it
i had already talked about using high iso's for effect
regarding teh second bit why not just shoot a longer exposure
Ex Ph-Quick
I don't mind it taking time to take the pic but why is it more of a issue in the dark it never blurs during the day?
Eskiisbest - Thats photography mate. Digital Photography = Recording of light to a sensor. To record the right amount of light the shutter has to open then shut in a certain space of time. If its in the day time the shutter will open and shut within something like 1/600s, but at night if it was at 1/600s then the picture would be black because so little light has gotten to the sensor.
So to get enough light to the sensor, the shutter has to stay open for longer (say 1/5s), resulting in things moving whilst it is open so you get blurred pictures.
There are several ways to try and stop the blurring:
1. The Aperture of the lens: the aperture is basically in lamens terms the size of the hole in the lens which lets light onto the sensor. It is measured in f stops. f1.2 being very wide (lets lots of light through), f/32 being very closed (lets little light through). So to be able to take a photo at a quicker shutter speed you need a larger aperture (smaller number).
2. Use a tripod: this stops any movement from the camera so no blurring occurs, but this is only good if the subject is still like a landscape or cityscape.
3. Use higher ISO: the higher the ISO the more sensitive the sensor is to light. ISO100 is often the default, ISO200 is twice as sensitive, ISO400 is twice as sensitive again, and ISO800 is twice as sensitive again, and so on.
I hope this helps without going into too much detail!
So to get enough light to the sensor, the shutter has to stay open for longer (say 1/5s), resulting in things moving whilst it is open so you get blurred pictures.
There are several ways to try and stop the blurring:
1. The Aperture of the lens: the aperture is basically in lamens terms the size of the hole in the lens which lets light onto the sensor. It is measured in f stops. f1.2 being very wide (lets lots of light through), f/32 being very closed (lets little light through). So to be able to take a photo at a quicker shutter speed you need a larger aperture (smaller number).
2. Use a tripod: this stops any movement from the camera so no blurring occurs, but this is only good if the subject is still like a landscape or cityscape.
3. Use higher ISO: the higher the ISO the more sensitive the sensor is to light. ISO100 is often the default, ISO200 is twice as sensitive, ISO400 is twice as sensitive again, and ISO800 is twice as sensitive again, and so on.
I hope this helps without going into too much detail!
Ex Ph-Quick
Awesome Keydogg thats pretty much spot on one more question do you know a good compact that have a wide lens and can increase the ISO on?
cheers
Just so you know a "wide" lens is different to a lens that has wide aperture
Some of the best compacts nowadays are either Lumix or Canon Ixus, but any decent make will produce good snaps like Sony or Samsung or fujifilm
You never show me your workerm, your all talking about iso like its a new thing and only a digital thing, i have shot at 1600iso on medium format, i chose that because i wanted the film grain in the image, i also won a competition with the images and one of the things they said they liked about my image was the choice of film stock and the grain in the film...
also have pushed film to stupid high iso's the cross processed it to get different effects, if you know how to use it high iso's give very good arty effects...
depending on what im shooting for, i shot for some advertising the other day and i shot in tiff mode, which gives you even more controll over the colours and pp that raw does...
i think u should go experiment with iso's maybe on a film camera and see what it achieves before just using a digital, i shot at a lake today and used 1800iso and higher on my nikon d2x, simply cos it was overcast and horrible weather, but im processing it and blowing out all the midtones and just increasing the contrast on the shadows and highlights, so the image is mainly white with some dark shaddows in... i like it
D
dick
canon ixus are brilliant.
I've taken precisely 3 RAW shots in my life, just can't see the point in it at this level to be honest. Whilst I'm still in the early stages of learning I prefer to try and get 99.9% correct in camera when I get the shot, shooting JPEG gives me far more room on my cards to experiment, and as I do minimal editing it makes next to no difference when I get my shots home.
A silver Honda
I've been considering this cam as i have a budget of around £350 max.
I was about to start a new thread but found this topic. I'm also an SLR noob but i'm very keen to just buy one, do a bit of reading and get stuck in.
What about lenses/filters and flash add ons? Would i be quite limited in future by the D40? I'm interested in doing macro stuff as well taking wide angle type shots, I wanna try a bit of everything really.
I would be mainly doing automotive stuff (local motorsport, car shows etc) maybe some landscape and i've got a mate who models and she wants me to take some pics for a her portfolio so i might try doing some portrait stuff too.
With the different styles of photography do you need a camera with specific features to achieve a certain style or is it more to do with the 'add ons' you use?
Cheers for any advice or recommendations
I've been considering this cam as i have a budget of around £350 max.
I was about to start a new thread but found this topic. I'm also an SLR noob but i'm very keen to just buy one, do a bit of reading and get stuck in.
What about lenses/filters and flash add ons? Would i be quite limited in future by the D40? I'm interested in doing macro stuff as well taking wide angle type shots, I wanna try a bit of everything really.
I would be mainly doing automotive stuff (local motorsport, car shows etc) maybe some landscape and i've got a mate who models and she wants me to take some pics for a her portfolio so i might try doing some portrait stuff too.
With the different styles of photography do you need a camera with specific features to achieve a certain style or is it more to do with the 'add ons' you use?
Cheers for any advice or recommendations
The D40 can only auto focus with AF-S lenses, luckily Sigma HSM lenses work so you won't be that resricted, heres a nice long list of lenses that work. (its an old list, probably more now.)
http://www.nikonians.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=read_count&om=16715&forum=DCForumID201
I'd say you'd be happy with the kit lens though, it can focus fairly closely for ''macro'' and used correctly can create fairly shallow depth of field for portrait type shots and is wide enough for car and landscape.
If I was to buy the D40 now I'd take the kit lens and pick up a Sigma 30 f/1.4 HSM, can work well in low light, has a massive f/1.4 aperture and which gives a traditional 50mm field of view on a digital body, don't ask me to explain why lol
For flash the SB-600 looks fairly good.. http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/cat8.html
My 50mm collects dust, 28mm + 85mm ftw :hail:
I can't afford new glass. lol. 50mm FTW because aside form the kit lens that's all I have lol.
I know how u feel mate. Wish I could afford more glass! I have canon kit lens and sigma 55-200mm 4-5.6 at the mo which arent the best in crap weather
.I want the 28-75 2.8 tamron next, at £230 its a bargain!
There is very little non-specialist photography that you won't be able to do brilliantly with what you have. You also learn a hell of a lot more if you are restricted in terms of what equipment you can have...I stuck with a superzoom camera for a few years to learn the ropes, once I had exhausted the capabilities of that the transition to a DSLR was easy, all my techniques worked but the results were so much better instantly.
A quick browse through these...
http://www.flickr.com/groups/nikkor50mm18/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/50mmlens/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/canonef50mm/
...should give you enough inspiration for a lifetime of shooting with a 50mm.
Similar threads
