Digital photography

[kehaan]

Would like to add that it will also be used for 720p or more, video recording of mostly iPhone games/Apps for my blog.

I am using a Mac.

I have mostly borrowed an old DSLR from KonicaMinolta(?) with 6megapixel or used my iPhone 4. The camera is mostly going to be used for recording, but also pictures at travels. And pictures for auctions.

But it also need to be fast and have an good autofocus to be used at my aquariums. The old DSLR i have borrowed have an very slow autofocus, so most of the pictures where the taget is moving gets bad. For auctions it have problems with focusing at an very close distance of items. So the new one have to be better for that.

Thanks

[Shareida]

Hmm. Moving targets getting blurry has (almost always) nothing to do with the autofocus. Most DSLR's lenses have a rather fast AF. That´s the exposure time. Higher Iso/Lower aperture let's you increase the exposure times. Close distance focusing is limited by the lens it self. And if you plan on taking mostly video... just buy a digital video camera. A DSLR is too pricy to be used solely for that.

Edit again. Auto Focusing things behind glass is almost impossible. Switch to manual.

[Mekh]

I tried the 18-200 myself... Well... not THAT bad, but wide open it lacks sharpness. For casual "snapshots" okay, but crisp pictures with a tripod, no thanks.

I have a 18-200 that I use for "casual" snapshots, when I can't be bothered to grab extra lenses with me. Walks with the wife in the city and stuff like that.
It's a nice lens for this use, especially at it's price, but.... It's not the sharpest lens around


Choice of lens depends completely on intended use imo... Is it for facebook sized photos or for A3+ (European standard paper size... No idea about US sizes)

If photos will only ever be shown or printed in small size, then the sharpness of the lens is not as important as getting a lens that is decently fast and so on...

[Shareida]

I hated the chromatic aberration the most on that 18-200. Blue and pink lines on edges ftl.

Check the bird's head to see what i'm talking about.

[Demoder]

I hated the chromatic aberration the most on that 18-200. Blue and pink lines on edges ftl.




Check the bird's head to see what i'm talking about.

Except that image isn't taken with the lens you're refering to, and it's only apparent because the image you see cover about 8% of the original image.
It's a good example to describe what that is, though.

[Shareida]

Except that image isn't taken with the lens you're refering to, and it's only apparent because the image you see cover about 8% of the original image.
It's a good example to describe what that is, though.

I was aware of the image being cropped. That or, a lens similar in quality to the 18-200

[Iriche]

I have a 18-200 that I use for "casual" snapshots, when I can't be bothered to grab extra lenses with me. Walks with the wife in the city and stuff like that.
It's a nice lens for this use, especially at it's price, but.... It's not the sharpest lens around


Choice of lens depends completely on intended use imo... Is it for facebook sized photos or for A3+ (European standard paper size... No idea about US sizes)

If photos will only ever be shown or printed in small size, then the sharpness of the lens is not as important as getting a lens that is decently fast and so on...

I totally agree here, I use the 18-200 for streetphoto when I am lazy and don't want to think, then I just bring that, else I just bring a 50mm, 16-35 or a 70-200 if I want to limit myself and having to think creatvie.

[Demoder]

I was testing my Canon 50mm f/1.8 tonight. Saw 2-3 stars in the sky and decided to see if I could photograph them.


This particular image is a stack of two photos.

[Shareida]

I was testing my Canon 50mm f/1.8 tonight. Saw 2-3 stars in the sky and decided to see if I could photograph them.

This particular image is a stack of two photos.

Would be nice to see the exif data too

Camera model, Iso, Shutter speed? I'll take a wild guess. Canon 300 to 500 (maybe 1000) line, under 15 secs Shutter speed, Iso 800 or higher, likely 1600.

[Demoder]

Would be nice to see the exif data too

Camera model, Iso, Shutter speed? I'll take a wild guess. Canon 300 to 500 (maybe 1000) line, under 15 secs Shutter speed, Iso 800 or higher, likely 1600.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/savaged...in/photostream
I forgot to adjust ISO speed after having taken some photos indoors in what appeared to be a dark room.
Image was shot with (ISO 6400, aperture priority (f/1.8). 0.5s shutter speed(auto))

[Iriche]

15 sec shutter time on stars would leave a small trace of them, they move quite fast

[Shareida]

15 sec shutter time on stars would leave a small trace of them, they move quite fast

That's why i said likely under 15s. Because no trails. The camera doesn't handle that high ISO too well. that's why I tipped on an amateur DSLR.

60D it is.

I think an ISO 1600 should do the trick, with 3 sec Shutter speed. Should leave no trails still, but will require the 2 sec delay, and a tripod tho.

Edit again. Don't auto focus either, focus on a distant light source manually, and get some scenery in there

[Shareida]

Taken last year during midnight sun end May... at 2 AM in fog.

[Demoder]

Attempt #2:

Exposure: 10s ISO: 250 Aperture: f/1.8

Will be experimenting with a timelapse in a couple of days.

Taken last year during midnight sun end May... at 2 AM in fog.

That's a really nice photo!

[Mekh]

[IMG]
Taken last year during midnight sun end May... at 2 AM in fog.

I like it too... Seems like you used a quite small aperture?

[Shareida]

I like it too... Seems like you used a quite small aperture?

F 20/ISO 400/25 s

Was using my 24-85 3.5-4.5 Lens. The picture was taken in south Iceland, near a camping place, where our Camping wagon is, So i was seriously drunk as i took that picture. The camera is laying on the damp ground. Using an F20 makes it easier to get everything sharp. The focus is laying around 5m from the Lens. I had another try before that with an F8, but there the colors were not as punchy, and the fog not as visible. I had to tone down the Color saturation in Photoshop actually. Note to self (use manual white balance next time)



Demoder. I wouldn't recommend trusting the camera's EV meter. Especially for night shots. If the cam says 10 seconds at an F1.8 and Iso 250, go 2 or even 3 stops down in exposure. A night sky is black, with stars.

I would try 5 secs and 2.5 secs with same ISO and aperture. Then post process in Lightroom. I did try night shots too, but now i have to wait until august to be able again. (Doesn't get dark here until then)

[Mekh]

F 20/ISO 400/25 s
...snip...
Using an F20 makes it easier to get everything sharp.
...snip...

Yeah, allthough difraction can cause some general blur at very small apertures.

I guessed on the small aperture due to the star-shaped lights... I've recently taken to try and use small apertures "creatively" for that very effect...


Not the best pictures, but some I've taken recently where I was looking specifically for that effect from the lights.

Exposure 1.3 second | ƒ/8 | ISO 400



Exposure 20 second | ƒ/20 | ISO 100

[Shareida]

Pretty well shot pics there, Mekh. Love how the colors get saturated by that, even before post processing.

Yeah, allthough difraction can cause some general blur at very small apertures.
I guessed on the small aperture due to the star-shaped lights... I've recently taken to try and use small apertures "creatively" for that very effect...

Didn't even know that. Might have to try my lenses one by one to know when that effect kicks in.

[Demoder]

Demoder. I wouldn't recommend trusting the camera's EV meter. Especially for night shots. If the cam says 10 seconds at an F1.8 and Iso 250, go 2 or even 3 stops down in exposure. A night sky is black, with stars.

I would try 5 secs and 2.5 secs with same ISO and aperture. Then post process in Lightroom. I did try night shots too, but now i have to wait until august to be able again. (Doesn't get dark here until then)

Yeah.. Started taking photos back in january, and haven't really aimed the camera up towards the stars before (other than the moon anyway ). And now that it's spring, soon summer.. I start getting an interest in that. Will have the same situation as you when it comes to night shots soon.

Still, there's plenty to take photos of at any time. Just have to be a little creative... Wonder how much more nature I can take photos of in an urban area like this.

As for trusting the camera... Lazy photographer at 4am is lazy, mkay? I usually go full-creative mode, but decided to play with the aperture-priority mode.

[Iriche]

I personaly don't think the sky should be black. It is a meh photo to watch if it is just black with stars on