• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Digital SLR / DSLR Camera Question / DSLR Thread 2

Damn!!!


The scientist in me is curious what the technical difficulties are from a manufacturing standpoint. Because of market forces, I'm sure they are compelling (or else the camera lens oligopoly has immense pricing power).
 
VeloceMoto said:
The scientist in me is curious what the technical difficulties are from a manufacturing standpoint. Because of market forces, I'm sure they are compelling (or else the camera lens oligopoly has immense pricing power).
Click to expand...

I get confused enough looking at lens construction insofar as # of elements and # of groups in each.
Need more time to study!
 
nismodan said:
I get confused enough looking at lens construction insofar as # of elements and # of groups in each.
Need more time to study!
Click to expand...

Don't bother with this. It won't mean anything to you unless you're an optical engineer, and that won't help you become a better photographer.
 
I was out taking some photos near the bridge today. Here's one. There was this little sliver of light that shone through... I was waiting forever for one of the surfers to hit the spot.
 

Attachments

  • DSC_2367.JPG
    DSC_2367.JPG
    238.6 KB · Views: 86
Welp, this thread inspired me to go buy a DSLR. Nikon D90 with the standard lens and the 55-200 VR lens and a 8gb card.

All I can say for now is WOW, the point and click is awesome, now I need to read and learn the features and how to use them. I bought this specifically because I spend a lot of time at the racetrack shooting motor-sports. Our little POS Fuji finpix wasn't cutting it.

This going to take time I can tell. I am going to the NASA 25 hour at T-hill with some friends. I hope to come back with tons of good stuff to show. So I have until then to learn to use it to get the shots I want.

If anyone has any pointers about lens filters or different lenses, I would appreciate them.

Christian
 
HondaFreak said:
Welp, this thread inspired me to go buy a DSLR. Nikon D90 with the standard lens and the 55-200 VR lens and a 8gb card.

All I can say for now is WOW, the point and click is awesome, now I need to read and learn the features and how to use them. I bought this specifically because I spend a lot of time at the racetrack shooting motor-sports. Our little POS Fuji finpix wasn't cutting it.

This going to take time I can tell. I am going to the NASA 25 hour at T-hill with some friends. I hope to come back with tons of good stuff to show. So I have until then to learn to use it to get the shots I want.

If anyone has any pointers about lens filters or different lenses, I would appreciate them.

Christian
Click to expand...

Awesome! Congrats dude!

I love mine. I have much more creative control over the shots with the SLR. As for lenses, believe it or not, the lens I have now, an 18-70mm (which is really something like 27mm-105mm because of the 1.5x crop factor) is pretty damn good, certainly good enough for me!

I have however convinced myself that I need a 50mm f/1.8. I expect it will be better in low light and allow for much shallower depth of field. Beyond that lens, other stuff would be nice, but I'm trying to be a photographer and not an equipment collector. Faster lenses, zoom lenses, faster zoom lenses, better quality glass, ...I've come to the conclusion that at this stage I can learn far more with what I've got versus buying more equipment. (also, I cannot afford more equipment :p
 
Hey everyone, so I'm just starting to get the hang of the whole aperture/shutter speed thing. Instead of shooting on full manual, I've elected to shoot this first week of ownership on "A" or aperture mode. It's nice, because it'll automatically choose the right shutter speed for a given aperture, and I think, ISO.

Can someone explain to me why I wouldn't want to shoot wide open all the time with my kit lens (18-70mm/3.5-4.5)?

From what I understand it's desirable because 1) lower aperture is better for low light, and 2) it adds a shallower depth-of-field (almost always desirable). The only real drawback I can see would be vignetting, but it doesn't really bother me.
 
Super-shallow depth of field isn't ALWAYS desirable, especially if you're trying to get anything that's pretty 3-D (in that the subject extends for a good distance backwards into the scene). Like that picture of the dog earlier in the thread.; it's a great picture, don't get me wrong, but IIRC the person who posted it mentioned that the farther parts of the head could be a little more in focus. I would say that it gets more difficult when the subject is farther from you or in motion, as well (100% personal opinion, this last part).

I hope that makes sense in text.

Edit: Not to sound like a dick, but 3.5-4.5 isn't all that huge anyway, so I'd bet that you could leave that wide open most always and do pretty well. I missed this part first time around.

Thought #2: Wide open aperture at 18mm could make for a weird landscape shot, unless you were really trying to get a specific section in focus.
 
Last edited:
nismodan said:
Full-open aperture will, in low light, mean a long shutter exposure, which can mean lots of blurring of either the objects being studied (if in motion), or of the whole picture if you can't hold the camera steady for that long.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I am not following you. I thought that was the whole point of having a wider aperture (lower f-number): to gather more light = faster shutter speed = less time with the window open = less blur.

Faster lenses, wider apertures like 1.8, 1.4, 1.2... you don't need a flash in certain low-light situations. At least that's what I'm led to believe.
 
Last edited:
HAH!
You're totally right.

Wow...where was my brain this morning?!
 
Haha :p So to bring it full circle, I can pretty much shoot wide open all the time, unless I want to shoot a landscape. EDIT: or when artistic desire necessitates. :nerd
 
Last edited:
VeloceMoto said:
Haha :p So to bring it full circle, I can pretty much shoot wide open all the time, unless I want to shoot a landscape. EDIT: or when artistic desire necessitates. :nerd
Click to expand...

Also: Most lenses (and especially dumpy kit lenses) are quite a bit sharper when you close down the aperture a bit. Every lens has its aperture "sweet spot" where it performs its best. This is almost never wide open.
 
TylerW said:
Also: Most lenses (and especially dumpy kit lenses) are quite a bit sharper when you close down the aperture a bit. Every lens has its aperture "sweet spot" where it performs its best. This is almost never wide open.
Click to expand...

+1 Even some of the high dollar lenses need to be stopped down a bit to achieve their best optical performance. So it's always a balancing act between shutter speed, depth of field, ISO (and associated noise) and sharpness. There's a lot of factors to consider at any given time, and part of the art is deciding which you want to optimize at any given moment.

For a wedding, I may shoot a lot at f/4 on an f/2.8 lens, but if I need more power out of my flash, I can open up a stop to f/2.8, sacrificing a bit of depth of field, or I can bump my ISO up a stop, slightly increasing noise, or I can turn my flash up (not always possible with remotes) and lengthen my recycle time.

Natural light, restaurants, etc, I'm often shooting wide open at f/2.8 and adjusting ISO to keep a reasonable shutter speed. Sometimes I just have to hold really still and ask my subjects to do the same for a moment. Handholding at slow shutter speeds is quite possible with practice. This was shot under outdoor light at Skip's a month ago, at 70mm and 1/15th of a second.

p409223091-4.jpg


Keep practicing, and enjoy!
 
cycle61 said:
+1 Even some of the high dollar lenses need to be stopped down a bit to achieve their best optical performance. So it's always a balancing act between shutter speed, depth of field, ISO (and associated noise) and sharpness. There's a lot of factors to consider at any given time, and part of the art is deciding which you want to optimize at any given moment.

For a wedding, I may shoot a lot at f/4 on an f/2.8 lens, but if I need more power out of my flash, I can open up a stop to f/2.8, sacrificing a bit of depth of field, or I can bump my ISO up a stop, slightly increasing noise, or I can turn my flash up (not always possible with remotes) and lengthen my recycle time.

Natural light, restaurants, etc, I'm often shooting wide open at f/2.8 and adjusting ISO to keep a reasonable shutter speed. Sometimes I just have to hold really still and ask my subjects to do the same for a moment. Handholding at slow shutter speeds is quite possible with practice. This was shot under outdoor light at Skip's a month ago, at 70mm and 1/15th of a second.
Click to expand...

That's really great! I love it. That was shot at 2.8? If so, I am soooo buying that 50mm f/1.8. I hate flashes.

Actually, after reading some things on flash gear and techniques, perhaps I am getting ahead of myself. Direct, harsh, built-in flash is ugly. I am finding out however there are many different things to make flash work well, such as buying a real flash unit, bouncing it off the ceiling, using a diffuser, etc. I was looking at some photos today taken with a diffuser and the results were fantastic and didn't have that characteristic, unnatural washout flash that is so common on point-and-shoots.
 
Bounce flash is an awesome step up from direct. You can spot it in an instant once you know what to look for, but the vast majority of people will just like the pictures.

I don't use it much because I'm used to shooting off-camera flash, and I turn into a left handed retard when I actually put it on top of the camera. :laughing

The telltale give-away is the dark shadows in the eyes, caused by all the light coming from above on the ceiling. The little bounce card built into the flash can alleviate this a bit. :thumbup
 

Attachments

  • bounceflash-100.jpg
    bounceflash-100.jpg
    69.3 KB · Views: 78
Last edited:
cycle61 said:
Bounce flash is an awesome step up from direct. You can spot it in an instant once you know what to look for, but the vast majority of people will just like the pictures.

I don't use it much because I'm used to shooting off-camera flash, and I turn into a left handed retard when I actually put it on top of the camera. :laughing
Click to expand...

But the on-camera units that do bounce flash are so expensive! $$$
 
haha :toothless

Hey, where can I go in San Francisco to buy lenses? Preferably near downtown.

Gotta get that 50mm f/1.8 before the holidays and buying online is going to take a while to ship, given Thanksgiving.
 
Wolf/Ritz camera? They suck if you actually want to talk to someone who knows photography, but if you just need to buy item x they will probably have it, or be able to get it in a few days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top