News For camera nerds only

[caLLous]

Moving up G?

 

[Wazzerphuk]

He's coming to the dark side

 

[milou]

A little too wide for me. This week (in the Outer Hebrides) I've used the 24mm almost exclusively.

 

[milou]

That was a reply about the 15mm by the way.

 

[old.user4556]

Very much looking forward to your Hebridean work .

 

[tris-]

I am just starting out with my first DSLR and have some questions, hopefully someone will be kind enough to assist:

1. When I take the picture, it just does not look like it does through the view finder, even if I use the depth of field preview before shooting. I don't believe anything is wrong with my camera, so am I just expecting something which cannot happen? Generally I am shooting with control over the aperture.

2. Further to 1 pictures are coming out soft and grainy on ocassion, even though I use the lower ISO settings and longer shutter speeds with low light. I have read that it could be the lens that comes with the kit (IS 18-50mm).

3. If the lens is the shitter, what is a good lens to go for to start with? I keep reading about a 50mm prime lens - would that be about right?

Thanks.

 

[Clown]

Longer shutter speeds mean that even the tiniest movements will make your shit blurry. Could be the kit lens but it's more than likely the low light scenario. That lens can take alright shots in the daytime and can be pretty sharp.
The 50mm 1.8 is a good first lens to have in your arsenal. Probably not so good for landscapes but I guess it depends on how far away you stand

 

[old.user4556]

I am just starting out with my first DSLR and have some questions, hopefully someone will be kind enough to assist:

1. When I take the picture, it just does not look like it does through the view finder, even if I use the depth of field preview before shooting. I don't believe anything is wrong with my camera, so am I just expecting something which cannot happen? Generally I am shooting with control over the aperture.

2. Further to 1 pictures are coming out soft and grainy on ocassion, even though I use the lower ISO settings and longer shutter speeds with low light. I have read that it could be the lens that comes with the kit (IS 18-50mm).

3. If the lens is the shitter, what is a good lens to go for to start with? I keep reading about a 50mm prime lens - would that be about right?

Thanks.

1. The viewfinder is "passing through" the light that the lens is seeing and is no way a representation of what the sensor is going to capture. Your exposure settings will decide what is actually captured (aperture, shutter speed and ISO). In addition, the dynamic range the human eye sees through the viewfinder is enormous (your eye is always adjusting too) so there is no way the camera can capture exactly what you see. For me, part of the challenge of taking a landscape shot is balancing the exposure correctly between filtration and exposure blending to present almost exactly what I saw (if it's the type of shot i'm taking). Do you have live view on your camera? That flips up the mirror on the camera (making the viewfinder redundant) and will display exactly what the sensor will capture so that you can fine tune your exposure. I am probably too reliant on live view, but it's a superb tool to nail the exposure.

2. Can you post some larger examples please (also, what camera?)

Grainy sounds like too high an ISO. What are you trying to photograph? What shutter speed are you using? The lowest ISO will generally give you the cleanest images (unless you've got a 7D, where ISO 160 is cleaner than ISO 100 for some stupid Canon reason).

Softness could be:

- missed focus, or not enough depth of field
- camera shake (using too slow a shutter speed handheld, need a tripod)
- using the lens outside of it's sweet spot (generally around f/8 on a lot of lenses, if you should wide open then the sharpness tails off rapidly)

3. Don't bother with new lenses until you work on your technique . What system are you shooting with? Do you shoot on auto mode? Once you go fully manual and are in complete control of the exposure and you camera, then i'd say spunk some cash.

HTH!

 

[old.user4556]

Adobe CS6 public beta is out for download.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/03/22/cs6-public-beta-release

 

[Wazzerphuk]

Adobe CS6 public beta is out for download.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/03/22/cs6-public-beta-release

Any new useful PP stuff in this?

 

[caLLous]

Did you even click it?

 

[Clown]

Thought this was pretty interesting. It's about JPG quality.
http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/jpeg-quality

 

[old.user4556]

The more reviews and samples I see of the D800, the more I like it. No, love it.

The dynamic range captured in this new 36 megapixel sensor is just unbelievable; 14.4 stops of DR makes it a landscape photographers dream, the best sensor ever tested by DXOMark. High ISO is also equally impressive. I think the crop mode is massive plus to the unit, I can imagine there are a lot of APS-C camera lens owners who don't want to give up their lenses on moving to a full-frame body. The ability to continue to use them in a 16 MP crop mode is just a superb benefit.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en...rand2)/Canon/(appareil3)/436|0/(brand3)/Canon

An explanation of the benefit of increased DR (the second vid is most practical) - http://testcams.com/blog/2011/05/03/nikon-dx-vs-canon-aps-c-dynamic-range/

I have to say this, but you'd be mad not to consider it given the price if you were looking for a full-frame upgrade.

 

[milou]

My pal Jon http://jonswainson.co.uk/ has just received his D800. I'll wait a couple of days and then ask him what he thinks.

 

[old.user4556]

Great stuff, looking forward to getting some "in the field" opinions.

Also champing at the bit to some in-depth 5D Mk3 reviews!

 

[old.user4556]

Gah! I knew it was too good to be true.

http://www.techradar.com/news/photo...s/nikon-d4-and-d800-prices-rise-in-uk-1073556

 

[old.user4556]

This is the fucking sex:

http://www.petapixel.com/2012/03/26/upgrade-your-leica-m9-p-to-white-for-just-23705-more/

 

[old.user4556]

Some early reports of high ISO issues on the Mk3 (amplifier glow). DPReview have even chipped in on the thread to acknowledge it.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=41026375

 

[Wazzerphuk]

wtf does he mean by h1 and h2 iso?

 

[milou]

Sensitivity ranges from ISO 100 - ISO 25600, which is expandable up to 51,200 in H1 mode and up to 102,400 in H2 mode.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

Ah ok - they're modes on camera I take it, and not firmware upgrades?

There's a reason they set the normal ISO limit to 25600 then

 

[milou]

Rumour: http://www.techradar.com/news/photo...release-entry-level-full-frame-camera-1073990

 

[Wazzerphuk]

If that's true they better announce or have stronger rumours before the mk3 comes out. If they do a cheaper one with more mp and no video, for example, that'd suit me down to the ground.

I mean, 22mp, what are we, paupers?!

 

[Clown]

This is why you should make me a mod.

http://www.bjp-online.com/british-j...e-controversial-awards-ceremony#ixzz1qIs0hSv9

So I can always win the photo competition.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

Yeah I read about that a little while ago, absolute shambles.

 

[old.user4556]

DPReview have their hands on preview and RAW studio samples up so you can directly compare against other bodies.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos5dmarkiii/10

From what I can see, the 5D Mk3 has a tiny amount less noise at higher ISOs than the D800 (wedding and sports photographers rejoice), but the D4 is definitely the high ISO king.

Looking good, I'm just downloading the RAW at ISO 100 now to see what shadow noise and dynamic range is like.

 

[milou]

I think this is a fair comment:

I think Canon's main competition against the 5DIII will be 5DII. It's 90% the same camera as the 5DIII and offers, for practical purposes, the exact same IQ but at a much cheaper price. Unless you really need the better AF or 6 fps the 5DII is a much better value for the money. If you already have a Mark II and don't need the AF or FPS improvements there is no compelling reason to justify spending the money on the Mark III.

 

[JingleBells]

Random question of the day: I managed to lose one of my 58mm lens covers at the weekend (I moved to a different side of the circuit between races assuming the cover was on the lens when I put it in my bag), I wandered into Jessops at lunch and they want £8 for a replacement! Now Amazon has several for a lot cheaper, including one with a string to stop it getting lost:

Are they worth having, surely that means the lens is dangling around and smacking into your hand? There's various other types, does anyone have any preference/disaster stories with any?

 

[Moriath]

a cover is a cover is acover afaik

 

[milou]

An official one might be nice if you want to sell the lens later but it's cosmetic only really. A large format photographer I know uses Haagen Dazs ice cream lids over his lenses as they cover quite nicely the Lee filter threads that are never removed.