Getting MORE from your photos ! [Archive] - NissanPatrol.com.au Forum

04OFF

27th April 2014, 12:04 PM

Ok , so ive been thinking of perhaps starting a basic photography thread for a while, a members recent question has inspired me to "get off my butt" so to speak.

Many of you may know me for my pic thread HERE (www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/showthread.php?3822-04OFF-pics) , but for those that don't, im just a amateur photographer, just playing around having some fun, not taking it all to seriously, so im not proclaiming to "know it all" ,as I myself am pretty new to the whole photography thing, that's why I am opening the thread to ALL, including those that have more knowledge and experience than myself.

Id like this thread to be aimed at encouraging beginners/learners/newbs etc, its NOT a thread aimed at people that already know what they are doing to just post pics to show off how good they are, (pro's are more than welcome to ask/answer any questions tho) , im happy for photography "examples" to be shown from all photographers (inc the very talented ones), but please post them for a educational purpose, to ask or answer a question, or to explain a technique etc.

Even if experienced photographers would like to post a "random" pic, this will be OK, just as long as you post your camera/details/settings so other people can learn something from it, also feel free to post your tips or small tutorials on basic techniques (keep beginners with basic cameras in mind)

Everyone, feel free to post your own photos for critique (Please keep it to 3 per post, we don't want your whole album), the aim is for others to hopefully help with ideas/tips to improve your future images, if you already think its "perfect", or can't handle any negative feedback, your in the wrong place, ........to the jury, remember, the forum rules still apply, so no rude or harsh comments, but constructive criticism more than welcome.

Please don't post photos that have been heavily modified in the computer, while happy to talk about some post picture editing etc in this thread, would like to concentrate mostly on improving camera skills rather than PC skills.

Sorry for the long into, I thought it important to get the thread description clear, right from the start, im not wishing to be the only one posting all the tips and replies either (im hoping at least Fracster will join in soon, lol), so if any of you have ideas, questions, answers, go for it !

:wink:

04OFF

27th April 2014, 12:06 PM

Ok , and the question that started this thread.....

04OFF do you have any tips or settings for a beginner photo enthusiasts?

Well, depending on what camera you have, or what things you intend to shoot, I think you can't go wrong first learning a bit about "Composition".

Basically, Composition is how all the objects you are shooting are composed in the frame within the image, (or where all the stuff in the pic is situated in relation to each other, and the outside boarder of the pic)

Try and look at what things are in the "whole" frame, (not just concentrate on what the subject is), don't always put the subject dead in the centre of the pic, and keep a look out for ugly things that will appear in the fore and backgrounds, try and keep any Horizons straight/level (or make them so far off its obvious you intended it that way)

To keep it simple, start with your camera on auto, most cameras (even some phones) these days are quite capable of taking a pretty good shot, so hardware should not be the limiting factor for beginners.

Ok, to show you a small example about composition, the panoramic pic below was taken with my very basic phone (does not even have zoom), I took this pic with little thought , other than to tease a mate who was still at work (lol).

Anyway, look at the pic and what you see......

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j320/02ard/Rainbowbeach.jpg

OK, so now, get a white bit of paper, and cover about 10mm down the left hand side of the pic (covering the car), now all of a sudden the pic looks "cleaner", you don't have the white blob (the car) distracting you over to the left.

Now, if you slide your paper over to the right another 25mm or so (35mm total), you can also remove the campers in the background.

Personally id go even further, and take even more from the left side of pic, and you end up with this.......

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j320/02ard/Rainbowbeach2.jpg

So you can see, just by turning your head/camera to one side just a little more, you can remove distracting objects (in this case a little to the right) and improve the composition, and so the overall look and feel of a photo.

:wink:

pearcey

27th April 2014, 12:29 PM

Hopefully AJoz (Andrew) will help out with some tips as well
I for one will be looking for any tips I can get as I`m blxxdy hopeless with a camera.
Hope you have plenty of time as I think there could be quite a few question thrown at you
Good Luck mate

__brenno__

27th April 2014, 12:37 PM

A good place to start for beginners, is to familiarise yourself with the 'Rule of Thirds'. See here for excellent description and some good photos demonstrating the rule - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_thirds

As a lot (if not all) of the photos of your Patrols will be taken in lovely scenery and landscapes, following the rule of thirds will immediately improve your photos.

Hodge

27th April 2014, 12:51 PM

I've been admiring 04OFF's photos for a long time on this forum. This thread is an awesome idea, and I have a few questions I'll post up a bit later. We have a DSLR and even though it takes awesome photos out of the box, I'd love to get out of the AUTO mode and do some more manual focusing and exposure shots.
Watch this space.

threedogs

27th April 2014, 02:27 PM

TBH I've not taken many photos at all since the Digital revolution arrived, so not many Family or holidays
as photos were always "in" the camera and not in an envelope to share amongst friends. Time to
get out there and start taking pics again, you know what they say a picture is worth a thousand words and so
much more IMO. I have an Olympus fe 12MP so very basic, I'll dig it out and familiarise my self a bit more
and hopefully post some breath taking pics here lol, well at least I'm digging it out

wolften

27th April 2014, 04:40 PM

If it's OK with the OP, a simulator site helped me experiment with different settings and actually see what the camera was doing. Hope it's OK to post the link (http://camerasim.com/apps/camera-simulator/)

wildgu6

27th April 2014, 05:35 PM

Great Idea Steve,
Recently acquired a Nikon D3200 and have not yet been able to enjoy it for what it can do. If its not in auto its not shooting.
Sat for hrs trying to work it out but is to complex for my understanding.
Have taken some great shots IMO in auto but has taken some really crap ones to, would love to know how to get great shots in manual settings but have found I don't have enough time to fumble through the settings only to find I have screwed up the settings or missed the shot.

Sent from my iPhone using Motorculture mobile app

NissanGQ4.2

27th April 2014, 06:17 PM

Hi Steve,

I have a Canon EFS 18-55mm lens, that is currently getting stripped into pieces, when its time for me 2 put it back together could you guide me as 2 what bits go where please? :):):)

Hodge

27th April 2014, 06:42 PM

haha I'm in the same boat as NissanGQ4.2.
After reading the thread initially I thought I'd go find the dslr and have a play only to find that our 18-55 kit lens only has a bit of zoom play left and right, and there is bit of lens on the inside just loose. So that's fubar. Camera I believe is still ok. Ours is a Nikon D40X.

rd28ti

27th April 2014, 08:43 PM

hey 04OFF thanks for making this thread buddy,also thank you to anyone else giving advice and tips, very appreciated.
i have a cannon powershot SX50HS http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-sx50-hs.
had it for about 7 months, been trying to use as many different modes and settings as possible so this thread will be very helpful as to show me and others what and how the features or modes can help with photography.
heres a few shots i took on saturday night.

(trying to go for a 4wd action cover shot hahaha)
http://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2014/04/110.jpg

this photo i think is good but could use some tips with it if possible guys thanks
http://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2014/04/111.jpg

04OFF

27th April 2014, 09:12 PM

Hi Steve,

I have a Canon EFS 18-55mm lens, that is currently getting stripped into pieces, when its time for me 2 put it back together could you guide me as 2 what bits go where please? :):):)

haha I'm in the same boat as NissanGQ4.2.
After reading the thread initially I thought I'd go find the dslr and have a play only to find that our 18-55 kit lens only has a bit of zoom play left and right, and there is bit of lens on the inside just loose. So that's fubar. Camera I believe is still ok. Ours is a Nikon D40X.

oh dear, maybe we need a camera mechanics workshop thread as well (lol)

(trying to go for a 4wd action cover shot hahaha)
http://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2014/04/110.jpg

this photo i think is good but could use some tips with it if possible guys thanks
http://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2014/04/111.jpg

Ok so your first one obviously the front and top of the car is cut off because you standing too close, most likely because the flash won't cover a great distance ?, if so, its a easy experiment to find out at what distance your flash will still be effective, and that's to take your camera and car out to a dark location, try taking pics as you step backward a few metres at a time, take note of the maximum range that still works good, this may allow you to get back from the subject further, but still allow the camera to get a pic.

The other thing is the time/date stamp, always looks bad on any pic IMO.

Love how the driver has tongue out (lol)

The second one is really very good , of course still has the time and date stamp, I would normally like to see a little more room in front of the car, but.....you are showing the track behind, and this greatly adds to the pic, it also looks like a crappy overcast day, these can be difficult to get anything looking "nice", I think from the two pics you have posted, the first tip, is to just stand back just a little more.

Another thing that looks good on overcast days, is if you can put the cars headlights on.

NissanGQ4.2

27th April 2014, 09:38 PM

oh dear, maybe we need a camera mechanics workshop thread as well (lol)

Yeh think my shutter has stuck closed :(

04OFF

27th April 2014, 11:03 PM

Yeh think my shutter has stuck closed :(

So why are you pulling lenses apart then ?

Do you have a error code coming up on your camera ? Were you shooting in high speed mode when problem developed ?

kevin07

28th April 2014, 08:23 AM

menace 2

28th April 2014, 02:50 PM

I have a Nikon D40 and have played around with it a fair bit...these are by far not perfect photos but I submit them to show that a flash is so often not needed for a set shot...I try not to use flash at all at night especially indoors under in-candescent light...the colours come out more true...I also use a power flash pack on the camera if shooting action shots a night...it enables you to be further away and probably would rival my led driving lights ...lol
I also use a Canon A620 and A70 powershots merely for their size and ease to carry...they aslo can be played with regarding settings with good results

Although I try and consider everything , maybe you can pick any issues 4off and explain how to improve with the settings etc..

below:...no flash..with aperture adjustment , with slow shutter speed...this will enable the camera to take in or digest everything that is there as much as possible without lighting up everything
43870
43869
Below..canon power shot A70
F.2.8
Exposure .6 sec
Focal length 7mm
max aperture 2.968
no flash
43871

below for silhouette shots
Nikon D40
F.5.6
Iso 200
Max aperture 5
exposure 1/1000 sec
no flash
43872

Kevin 07..that lense is a macro lense..which is the next one I plan to also get for insect photos etc and maintain distance...what did you plan to do with it ??

hope any of this helps

kevin07

28th April 2014, 06:36 PM

I plan close ups and family shots or day to day lense until I come across a 50mm lense as well. but a macro no I cant get anything close hence the 50mm coming

menace 2

28th April 2014, 09:06 PM

I plan close ups and family shots or day to day lense until I come across a 50mm lense as well. but a macro no I cant get anything close hence the 50mm coming

the 105 will do that for you Kevin...they just allow you to stay at more of a distance to do it instead of being one inch away etc

kevin07

28th April 2014, 09:53 PM

I thought the 17 -85 would do it but its crap cant get anything close

NissanGQ4.2

28th April 2014, 10:17 PM

So why are you pulling lenses apart then ?

Do you have a error code coming up on your camera ? Were you shooting in high speed mode when problem developed ?

Don't mind me Steve, I have no idea what I'm talking about.

In Auto focus it doesn't focus anymore so won't take a photo
In manual focus when you look through the view finder it looks darker than what it should be and when you take a photo it also comes out dark unless your taking a picture of something bright.

I know its something 2 do with the lens as my other lens works fine.

I have been getting an error code 99 occasionally since it has failed.

Can't remember if I shooting in high speed when it failed but more than likely was

04OFF

28th April 2014, 11:14 PM

this is great as ever since I got a digital slr my photos have been crap ill be watching and getting involved closely I have a canon 550 with a efs 17-85 and a 70-300 and I cant get a good photo at all on the 17-85 and should be getting a 24-105 l lens in the next few months.

While I admit ,I really don't use my 17-85 a great deal, I do find it can be a pretty useful lens at times, I mostly find I grab it out when i may need to quickly adjust zoom for fast moving objects, ive found mine reasonably sharp, and certainly capable of some great images.

Perhaps you can take a couple of basic shots using the 17-85mm lens, post here and we may be able to see if we have any pointers or we may even see if there is a problem with your lens ?

I plan close ups and family shots or day to day lense until I come across a 50mm lense as well. but a macro no I cant get anything close hence the 50mm coming

Are you looking at a Macro 50mm or a fixed 50mm ?

I also have a "fixed" 50mm, again, don't use it heaps, but in low light, family portrait shots, or when you just want "Bokeh" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh) (basically where the subject is sharp but the background is blurred) its a great lens, but not so great for Macro, plus no zoom may have you walking lots to compose your shots (lol)

If your going for the Macro 50mm lens, then disregard the above

I thought the 17 -85 would do it but its crap cant get anything close

Again, are you talking about using the lens for Macro Photography here Kev ?

I have a Nikon D40 and have played around with it a fair bit...these are by far not perfect photos but I submit them to show that a flash is so often not needed for a set shot...I try not to use flash at all at night especially indoors under in-candescent light...the colours come out more true...I also use a power flash pack on the camera if shooting action shots a night...it enables you to be further away and probably would rival my led driving lights ...lol
I also use a Canon A620 and A70 powershots merely for their size and ease to carry...they aslo can be played with regarding settings with good results

Although I try and consider everything , maybe you can pick any issues 4off and explain how to improve with the settings etc..

below:...no flash..with aperture adjustment , with slow shutter speed...this will enable the camera to take in or digest everything that is there as much as possible without lighting up everything
43870
43869
Below..canon power shot A70
F.2.8
Exposure .6 sec
Focal length 7mm
max aperture 2.968
no flash
43871

below for silhouette shots
Nikon D40
F.5.6
Iso 200
Max aperture 5
exposure 1/1000 sec
no flash
43872

Kevin 07..that lense is a macro lense..which is the next one I plan to also get for insect photos etc and maintain distance...what did you plan to do with it ??

hope any of this helps

Hi menace, very true about the flash, while flash can be a extremely valuable tool, if you get it wrong, you will call it the devil :devilred: (lol), I also pretty much avoid it when ever I can, but sometimes it can really make a pic, others it can ruin.

As for your pics, (IMO) the first one is a little blurred, I would suggest everyone always try and use a tripod when shooting sunsets, this should remove any shake, plus your camera should also have a built in shutter release timer, this will allow you to press the shutter button, and the camera will have a few seconds to settle any movement you add by pressing the button, before snapping the pic for you.

Personally, Id have liked to have seen it without the foreground items (trees roof etc), I think "just" those awesome islands on the horizon, and the rest of the seascape, with those colours you captured, may have made for a very beautiful pic !

The second one im unsure about, I like the sun/person thing you have going on , I do suspect I would like it more if a little of the foreground (road, grass) was cropped off the bottom, perhaps id have tried a slightly faster shutter speed, this may have seen richer colours from the sky, and made the foreground/person darker, and so more of a silhouette adding to the effect ?

The third pic has nice a nice tone and texture, but the whole pic seems a bit tight, I think id like to see things wider/further back, to show the setting, and so give more of a "feel" to the place, id like to see more of the effect the light is having on the surroundings chair/floor etc.

The fourth one is just awesome dude !, I like pretty much like everything about it , id be interested to see what it looked like if you could also see the boat, but not sure if it would be better or worse really, great job IMO :smiley_thumbs_up:

04OFF

28th April 2014, 11:28 PM

Don't mind me Steve, I have no idea what I'm talking about.

In Auto focus it doesn't focus anymore so won't take a photo
In manual focus when you look through the view finder it looks darker than what it should be and when you take a photo it also comes out dark unless your taking a picture of something bright.

I know its something 2 do with the lens as my other lens works fine.

I have been getting an error code 99 occasionally since it has failed.

Can't remember if I shooting in high speed when it failed but more than likely was

If you've cleaned the contacts, I bet its the aperture flex cable as it common problem with the 17-85mm, can buy replacement ribbon cables off ebay I think ?

Will be instructions on the net on how to do it, never done one myself, both my 17-85s are still sweet, but pretty sure the cable is in there "deep", so you will have fun with that one mate, lol :smile:

fracster

29th April 2014, 09:01 AM

If you want to do macro guys, get a macro dedicated lens. Anything else just does not cut it.

Autofocus on a macro lens is not really worth a biscuit, put it in manual focus and rock back and forward gently. Also, at such distances the field of view is minute, so you will need F11 and above, unless your camera body has great high ISO then you may need a ringflash. It all starts adding up quickly dollar wise.

I do not do a great deal of macro, but do look at other peoples stuff and know how they do it, it is a very difficult genre to get right.

As for camera modes, I shoot 90% of my stuff in aperture priority, but I live in a dark grey country most of the time. You guys get seriously good light, so Kev will have better experience than I, however, if I can help then I will post when I can.

wildgu6

30th April 2014, 07:41 AM

Hey Steve, just checked out your last lot of pics, bloody brilliant.
What settings did you use for stars in the night sky and what lens. Have tried same shot before with a big fail.

Sent from my iPhone using Motorculture mobile app

BigRAWesty

30th April 2014, 08:41 AM

While I admit ,I really don't use my 17-85 a great deal, I do find it can be a pretty useful lens at times, I mostly find I grab it out when i may need to quickly adjust zoom for fast moving objects, ive found mine reasonably sharp, and certainly capable of some great images.

Perhaps you can take a couple of basic shots using the 17-85mm lens, post here and we may be able to see if we have any pointers or we may even see if there is a problem with your lens ?

Are you looking at a Macro 50mm or a fixed 50mm ?

I also have a "fixed" 50mm, again, don't use it heaps, but in low light, family portrait shots, or when you just want "Bokeh" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh) (basically where the subject is sharp but the background is blurred) its a great lens, but not so great for Macro, plus no zoom may have you walking lots to compose your shots (lol)

If your going for the Macro 50mm lens, then disregard the above

Again, are you talking about using the lens for Macro Photography here Kev ?

Hi menace, very true about the flash, while flash can be a extremely valuable tool, if you get it wrong, you will call it the devil :devilred: (lol), I also pretty much avoid it when ever I can, but sometimes it can really make a pic, others it can ruin.

As for your pics, (IMO) the first one is a little blurred, I would suggest everyone always try and use a tripod when shooting sunsets, this should remove any shake, plus your camera should also have a built in shutter release timer, this will allow you to press the shutter button, and the camera will have a few seconds to settle any movement you add by pressing the button, before snapping the pic for you.

Personally, Id have liked to have seen it without the foreground items (trees roof etc), I think "just" those awesome islands on the horizon, and the rest of the seascape, with those colours you captured, may have made for a very beautiful pic !

The second one im unsure about, I like the sun/person thing you have going on , I do suspect I would like it more if a little of the foreground (road, grass) was cropped off the bottom, perhaps id have tried a slightly faster shutter speed, this may have seen richer colours from the sky, and made the foreground/person darker, and so more of a silhouette adding to the effect ?

The third pic has nice a nice tone and texture, but the whole pic seems a bit tight, I think id like to see things wider/further back, to show the setting, and so give more of a "feel" to the place, id like to see more of the effect the light is having on the surroundings chair/floor etc.

The fourth one is just awesome dude !, I like pretty much like everything about it , id be interested to see what it looked like if you could also see the boat, but not sure if it would be better or worse really, great job IMO :smiley_thumbs_up:

I can also add that a tripod is a must in some shots. The ability to have a steady camera for long shots is huge.
But also don't feel afraid to set a timer.
Wife was having a killer time getting a crisp shot on a staged shot she took a while back, and the combination of pod and timer made the shot..

https://m.flickr.com/#/photos/64084422@N08/9480944109/

Cuppa

30th April 2014, 10:29 AM

I consider myself very much as an interested & experimental long term beginner!

Most of the shots I’ve posted here were taken during our jaunt around the country when capturing what we were seeing became a significant part of our activities. I have plenty of results that I was happy with & many more that were duds. One thing contributed to the results I found pleasing more than anything else..... the subjects. Australia just has so much photogenic opportunities it’s hard not to take the occasional decent snap, particularly if you have the time to ‘get in tune’ with your surroundings.

I learned a bit about composition as I went but still couldn’t easily describe what makes a good composition & what doesn’t, but I know it when I see it. Another thing which made a difference was looking at the world around me from a photographic perspective. i.e. Even without the camera in my hand, evaluating what I was looking at in terms of ‘Ooh, that’d make a good shot’. Add to that an appreciation that different light conditions can totally change a shot (“Ooh, I think I’ll come back when the sun is just poking over that hill to try getting a pic of that”).

I had two cameras, one bought whilst away after the first was destroyed after being dropped down a cliff in Karijini NP. Very different cameras with very different specs, but to be honest each have contributed to my favourite shots, which in itself suggests that the ‘machinery’ is only part of the story. The first camera was a point & shoot ‘ultra compact’ (Sony DSC T1 (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/sony/dsc_t1-review/)), an excellent little camera. Apart from it’s quality, it’s main feature was it could be carried in a shirt pocket meaning it was always available within a few seconds. It’s main limitation was having only a 3x optical zoom (digital zoom was a bit longer, but digital zoom is never as good as optical). Following it’s unfortunate demise I decided to replace it with a camera with better zoom capability, particularly for ‘getting closer’ to wildlife & to assist with better framing of subjects. To this end I bought a ‘Superzoom’ camera (Canon SX10is (http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=3789&review=canon+powershot+sx10)) which although having higher specs cost less than the tiny Sony. This gave me 10x optical zoom (& 20X digital zoom) without the need to carry a variety of lenses around. A DSLR was out of my price range at the time (still is) but the main issue was one of size. If it can’t just slip into a pocket then I find that I have to go out on ‘photographic expeditions’ as opposed to going out to explore my surroundings with the ability to capture it photographically. This is a significant difference. There is no doubt in my mind that the larger camera changes how the user experiences their surroundings. With the Canon if I could I would often prefer to walk twice. Once with the camera & once without. Of course this also often meant missing wildlife shots, but it was a compromise I preferred, rather than seeing everything through a viewfinder or on a screen. If I wanted that I might just have well stayed home & watched TV. Just my preferences, but perhaps worthy of consideration for anyone thinking of buying a camera?

Whilst I rated the diminutive Sony very highly, I consider the Canon ‘ok’. It’s main downside, (& I suspect most ‘superzooms’) might be similar, is that it doesn’t handle low light situations very well. This can be ‘got around’ by using slower shutter speeds combined with a tripod & the camera’s timer, but of course necessitates lugging a tripod as well as the camera around. Ok in some circumstances, but often not convenient.

Although I’m not in the market for a new camera at the moment, I would welcome any advice on a future purchase which would give me the greater flexibility of portability & low light capability, whilst retaining a decent zoom capability & as broad a range of aperture priority (depth of field) as possible. (I tend to use aperture priority over shutter speed priority whenever I can).

Cuppa

04OFF

30th April 2014, 07:26 PM

Hey Steve, just checked out your last lot of pics, bloody brilliant.
What settings did you use for stars in the night sky and what lens. Have tried same shot before with a big fail.

Thanks bud, assume you are talking about this pic ?......

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j320/02ard/IMG_5092Large.jpg

Details are...

Canon 50D
Sigma 10-20mm
Exposure 178 sec
ISO 320
F-stop f/3.5
Focal length 10mm
Metering Mode Centre Weighted Average
Exposure program Manual
White Balance Auto

You obviously need a Tripod and a Remote Timer (depending on your camera), it helps to have a very dark location so the sky is not lit by city lights etc, even kilometres away lots of light will very quickly wash out the night sky background , and wont help "bring out" the stars (you can see this happening on the right above the trees), in my pic, this light helps highlight the profile of the trees a little.

To speed up the process ,I often use a Hot Shoe bubble level to ensure the horizon is level, well, it actually lets you get only the "camera" body level in reality , but that's normally a good place to start.

IMO, This is far from my best pic with stars, and I normally would have lit the trees for a much better pic, I was a bit rushed because I had someone "waiting" for me to finish, so we could go to meet some other people further up the beach, I had to lay in the sand to compose the pic, of course getting covered sand, normally not a problem, but not so great when you have to touch your camera gear :smile:

kevin07

1st May 2014, 07:54 AM

If you've cleaned the contacts, I bet its the aperture flex cable as it common problem with the 17-85mm, can buy replacement ribbon cables off ebay I think ?

Will be instructions on the net on how to do it, never done one myself, both my 17-85s are still sweet, but pretty sure the cable is in there "deep", so you will have fun with that one mate, lol :smile:

my fingers are fat and clumsy so I wont delve into that one but what should I clean the contacts with

kevin07

1st May 2014, 08:02 AM

if and when I could get a 50 mm it would be a dedicated macro just for the intricate stuff that you come across in this wide land of ours. but first I will get the L lense that should help me a bit ill put some photos up after this weekend see how things go with time. thanks kev

04OFF

1st May 2014, 08:27 AM

my fingers are fat and clumsy so I wont delve into that one but what should I clean the contacts with

Id try a clean dry lint free cloth first, you could try a tiny drop of alcohol (that does not mean you drink some RUM, lol ) on the rag if a dry rag does not work, be very carefull as the contacts are easy to damage.

You can also get proffessional Metal Electric Connection Cleaners like Deoxit.

You could wrap your clean rag around a pencil that has a eraser on the top (obviously using eraser end), that way you don't need to worry about fat fingies :)

kevin07

1st May 2014, 12:32 PM

Id try a clean dry lint free cloth first, you could try a tiny drop of alcohol (that does not mean you drink some RUM, lol ) on the rag if a dry rag does not work, be very carefull as the contacts are easy to damage.

You can also get proffessional Metal Electric Connection Cleaners like Deoxit.

You could wrap your clean rag around a pencil that has a eraser on the top (obviously using eraser end), that way you don't need to worry about fat fingies :)

thankyou lol

pearcey

9th June 2014, 10:40 PM

45537455384553945540
G`day O4Off
Would like an opinion on these taken by my 10 yearold grandson only know that the lens was 18 to55 all other setting I have no idea. Every time he and I go out he grabs the camera and fires away and there will be photos like these every time. Im thinking of a future trade maybe.
Thanks for any comments
Cheers and Beers Pearcey

04OFF

10th June 2014, 12:40 AM

The only one im not real keen on is the tractor stack, the candid girl shot is very good , hat man is not bad, but lighting not as good as the girl (try converting it to B&W ?) , tyre track perhaps could use a crop then it would come to life, all bloody excellent from a 10 year old tho mate :thumbup:

clubbyr8

10th June 2014, 08:30 AM

My 2c worth... :)

Get the camera off auto. On auto the camera makes a lot of assumptions (guesses) on exposure, light balance, speed etc. I shoot AV (aperture priority) most of the time unless I'm trying to really freeze the motion of the subject. AV mode allows me to control depth-of-field which is important in most of the shots I take (bokeh). I never shoot jpeg because I don't like in-camera processing. Shooting RAW allows the camera to capture maximum detail, sure the files are bigger, but memory cards are relatively cheap, it also allows me to set white balance to auto, as it doesn't really matter when shooting RAW as it's easily changeable in processing. Downside with RAW is you have to process the images, but once you get used to it, it's a very quick process. I try to set my ISO to 100 most of the time (depending on which lens I'm using and the light conditions), there's a lot less "digital noise" at 100 on my camera (Canon 7D). I also use (mostly) lenses that have IS (Image Stabilization) because I shake a bit (unless I'm using a tripod).

Learn your camera. Experiment with it, find out it's strengths and weaknesses (they all have them). Learn the art of photography, it's way more than pointing a camera and clicking a button, but above all, have fun with it. The beauty of digital photography is the results are instantaneous, if you don't like what you took you can delete it and try again. And in my opinion, good glass is a better investment than an expensive body.

Practice, practice, practice............ :)

pearcey

10th June 2014, 09:45 AM

clubbyr8

10th June 2014, 10:45 AM

Thanks guys
clubbyr8 he would have just used the settings that were last used, it could have been any where.They were more than likley on some high speed settings as I shoot alot of motor sport and air craft.
these were all taken in the middle of a paddock where I was helping a mate with a bogged tractor and the young feller just grabbed the camera out of the truck and starts shooting.
O4OFF the little girl is his 6year old sister and a bit of a posser.

Pearcy, I actually wasn't commenting on your grandson's pics (which are excellent for a 10 year old), I was just making a general comment on what I believe is a way to improve anyone's photography skill. Apologies if my post came across that way.....

pearcey

10th June 2014, 11:42 AM

[QUOTE=clubbyr8;513925]Pearcy, I actually wasn't commenting on your grandson's pics (which are excellent for a 10 year old), I was just making a general comment on what I believe is a way to improve anyone's photography skill. Apologies if my post came across that way.....
No worries mate.
I like most others on here are always looking for ways to improve our skills and professional advice is most welcome. My talents with a camera leave a lot to be desired so any help is appreciated.
I am lucky enough to have 2 grand kids who have interests outside the computer or phone.
Finding hidden skills can be hard these days and if one shows some skill out side the norm, it may help these kids find a worthy job or be directed towards the use of their talents in the future.
Again thanks for all advice and keep it coming
Pearcey

lhurley

24th August 2014, 07:06 PM

Thread digging.

We just bought a Canon 70D with a 18-200mm lens.

It's quite an upgrade from my old Nikon D300. Been playing around with it this arvo, trying to get used to it. Have to say, so far I'm pretty damn happy with it. Been mucking around with the settings, think I need a tripod sooner then I thought.

First question, low light action or moving shots. What sort of settings should I use. Trying to avoid the flash, but not against it.

04OFF

24th August 2014, 11:04 PM

Mmm, Lachlan, without knowing what you are shooting, and just how dark it is, its hard to suggest individual settings, but in general, low light and action are pretty much hard work for a camera, as speed requires light, so flash is normally required when the camera is doing the adjusting (auto modes)

At night time with no flash, for the camera to capture anything, you will need a longer exposure time (risking blurry pics), or a higher ISO (or both) if you wish to retain some speed to capture action, at higher ISO you will start to loose some quality,(but this is better than no pic at all, and if you don't need to crop the shot may still be OK) use a low/wide Aperture/F stop to allow maximum light to the sensor, and try to use minimal zoom, you may still find if its too dark if you have the flash off, as the camera will not be able to focus itself (because it can not see without the pre-flashes) so you may even have to resort to manual focus (very hard for a moving target).

Using the on board Flash with a 18-200mm, (sorry i don't know the camera or lens) but I would suspect the lens would create a shadow in every shot you take ?, so using flash may be less than ideal for any pics, in this case its a external flash, or a different lens (and so your spending starts, welcome to photography, lol)

:D

lhurley

25th August 2014, 10:41 AM

fracster

26th August 2014, 12:20 AM

Thanks steve, i was playing around in manual mode (camera and lens), i try to stay out of auto unless im doing a super quick shot.

You are correct, at no zoom, the lens does cast a shadow, only very slightly if the ground infront of the camera is further away.

Only way im going to learn is by playing, so i think we need a photography trip.Get an off camera flash mate. Some are wireless,some need a lead from the cameras hot shoe to the flash itself.The onboard pop up flash is usually crap at most things.

I only know the Nikon system which has an inbuilt wireless system, but wireless flash triggers are cheap enough.

The use of flash in photography can get very complicated and expensive, but to get you started it should not cost too much:

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/YONGNUO-YN560-III-YN-560lll-Wrieless-Trigger-Speedlite-Flash-for-Canon-Camera-/150983681372?pt=AU_Flashes&hash=item232754255c

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Yongnuo-RF-603-wireless-flash-trigger-Canon-C3-for-1D-5D-II-7D-50D-40D-30D-20D-/160745378273?pt=AU_Cameras_Photographic_Accessorie s&hash=item256d2bd1e1

04OFF

26th August 2014, 07:44 PM

Only way im going to learn is by playing, so i think we need a photography trip.

Yes , im sure something can be arranged with regard to a trip, its long over due. :biggrin:

katwoman

22nd December 2014, 04:35 AM

clubbyr8

22nd December 2014, 07:02 AM

Try something like this.....

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/RS-60E3-Timer-Remote-Shutter-Release-For-Canon-EOS-1200D-Camera-MC-C1-/251499907372?pt=AU_Cameras_Photographic_Accessorie s&hash=item3a8e90092c

04OFF

22nd December 2014, 08:59 PM

I have a Canon 1200D EOS. It does not have the bulb feature. Do you know if there is any way I can get my longer exposure shots ? Is there something after market ? I want to have a play with star trailing. ( I think that is what it is called)

Pretty sure a 1200 should have bulb mode Kat ?, you will need to have the camera on "manual" mode to gain access to the bulb feature tho, and as above a remote trigger is the most preferable way to do long exposure shots.

katwoman

22nd December 2014, 10:03 PM

Pretty sure a 1200 should have bulb mode Kat ?, you will need to have the camera on "manual" mode to gain access to the bulb feature tho, and as above a remote trigger is the most preferable way to do long exposure shots.

Thx. Time to read the manual, I think. Got 3 weeks of doing nothing now, so I'll have a better look

04OFF

22nd December 2014, 10:21 PM

Yeh , just quickly try this.........flick the shooting mode control knob to "M" , then keep adjusting/extending the exposure time value till you get to 30 sec, then the next one should activate "bulb" ?

fracster

23rd December 2014, 09:57 AM

I don`t know diddly about Canon, but sometimes one has to RTFM,even us blokes do it now and again......:biggrin:

FNQGU

17th May 2015, 09:15 AM

lucus30

17th May 2015, 11:57 AM

We just bought an SLR. I think I'll be using this thread a bit

LaughingBeagles

17th May 2015, 12:45 PM

Coming late to this thread.

I studied photojournalism at Uni. Why? Because my wife bought me a Cannon 550D and I had no idea how to use it. On top of that, my late father left me all his camera gear (also Cannon) and again, I had no idea what it was. To me an F Stop was something from a TV series.... no... wait... that was F Troop, and DOF was something you did with your hat.

The first thing I learnt was to never again use my "auto" setting. You want to be able to control your camera and your shots and not have them controlled for you by some guy in a Chinese factory. The second thing I learnt was to make sure my camera was set up to take "RAW" shots and not JPG. This is for a few reasons:

1. Camera RAW allows you more freedom to correct and adjust your shot post production
2. Camera RAW allows you to imbed info in the final result such as copyright, your details etc.
3. Camera RAW embeds details of the gear you were using including what lens and how it was set up.

So class one, day one was switch to Camera RAW and switch to Manual - even before starting to learn what F stops, Depth of Field ISO settings or any of that other confusing jazz was.

If you are really keen on taking great shots that you control, then I recommend you do the same - switch to manual and change settings to shoot RAW not JPG - you might as well; if you have gone to all the trouble of spending your hard earned on a great camera, make it work for you.

Just a note - I took photojournalism, which is all about telling a story with a camera. Scene / portrait shooting is a very different kettle of fish, but I can confidently say I learnt much (including that taking photojournalism was perhaps not quite what I wanted to achieve!).

Anyway, I am still learning every time I take my camera out so am by no means a pro - or even a semi-pro. More like a sometimes confused ameture who takes the occasional good shot. If I can help in this thread in anyway, that would be great.

Pete

LaughingBeagles

17th May 2015, 01:28 PM

Just bouncing this thread with a question.

I'm slightly confused on the variety of uses of a dedicated f2.8 lens. The one in particular that I am looking at is the beaut little Olympus 12-40mm PRO lens (http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=1641) for use with the Olympus OM-D E-M5 II MICRO 4/3rds camera. I know a the basics of using an SLR, and for years used a Nikon F90X before the world went digital, but I've never used a constant aperture lens before.

I want to use the lens for most situations really, but particularly for landscapes and people shots. I know it is a nice sharp lens and should give decent results with bokeh and low light situations but can these lenses be used when I want a large depth of field too?

Any thoughts?When you say large DOF, I take it you mean long DOF? (ie everything in focus and no blurred background?). F2.8 tends to give you a shallow DOF so it might not suite what you are looking for. Also, it's a good lowlight F stop so it it's great for indoor use / low light outside but I wouldn't use it for big bright shots (for example a drive along a beach in the middle of summer) - well, not without adjusting the shutter speed and ISO to compensate (faster shutter and lower ISO).

I guess it comes down to what you want to use it for.

Believe it or not, one of my favorite lenses is a little EF 50mm F/1.8 Canon lens I picked up for about $100 or so. Does everything you outlined above and has never let me down.

fracster

17th May 2015, 07:38 PM

:

1. Camera RAW allows you more freedom to correct and adjust your shot post production
2. Camera RAW allows you to imbed info in the final result such as copyright, your details etc.
3. Camera RAW embeds details of the gear you were using including what lens and how it was set up.

Pete

1.Getting it right initially sorts that problem.
2.So does jpeg
3.So does jpeg.

Your course tutor should have said that both jpeg and RAW have their uses. Yes,RAW does hold more data and does enable you to alter your final shot more,especially in shadow areas. Do I use RAW? Yes, when doing weddings and landscape. I use jpeg for pretty much everything else. Why? Because I loathe post processing shots, pissing about in photoshop and the like.

Ask sports photographers who wire shots to newspapers on the fly what they shoot, it won`t be RAW.

Ask any wedding photographer what they use, it will be RAW.

Both have their uses, saying that you must only shoot RAW is wrong and daft to be honest.

fracster

17th May 2015, 07:41 PM

LaughingBeagles

17th May 2015, 08:04 PM

1.Getting it right initially sorts that problem.
2.So does jpeg
3.So does jpeg.

Your course tutor should have said that both jpeg and RAW have their uses. Yes,RAW does hold more data and does enable you to alter your final shot more,especially in shadow areas. Do I use RAW? Yes, when doing weddings and landscape. I use jpeg for pretty much everything else. Why? Because I loathe post processing shots, pissing about in photoshop and the like.

Ask sports photographers who wire shots to newspapers on the fly what they shoot, it won`t be RAW.

Ask any wedding photographer what they use, it will be RAW.

Both have their uses, saying that you must only shoot RAW is wrong and daft to be honest.

Thanks for your "robust" response. Makes me just want to get involved all the more.... (not). Anyway, I think I'll leave this thread alone - you've got it all covered. ;)

FNQGU

17th May 2015, 08:44 PM

Thanks guys - your advice on all things photographic is appreciated by all. Please keep it coming.

I worked out the lens today, and it is a little ripper. Can't wait to play around with it some more.

04OFF

17th May 2015, 08:46 PM

@ FNQGU, that looks like a great lens to me for landscape, as for you unanswered question, I honestly think you will find a better answer reading the comments posted in the link you provided, as these are people that own and use the lens, in reality, its impossible to judge any lens purely on its specs, so unless someone has actually used it in practice, I doubt they will really have much to offer in the way of accurate advice on what the lens is (or isn't) "really" capable of.

@ LaughingBeagles, I have to agree with Fractster on the Raw v jpeg thing, when I first started out, I shot 100% raw, mostly because I thought ,if I do manage to accidentally take best shot in the world, I want it to be the best quality my camera can produce.

Whilst I 99% of the time do shoot on Manual mode, I now "only" ever shoot jpeg , although Ive never shot a Wedding, I can see clearly why raw would be worth while for such a important paid job, but in the reality of my every day shootings, pretty much agree with everything Fractser said above about raw v jpeg, and I personally feel, I want to hone my skills creating great shots with the "Camera", NOT my PC. ;)

I should add, this is my unprofessional "opinion" only, and as with any form of "art", you do what you feel happy and comfortable with, and do what you need to do to create something you like, I don't think there are any hard and fast rules, just what suits your style, that's what makes Photography great, the same camera can do different things for different people. :p

LaughingBeagles, please do NOT leave this thread alone, yours and everyone else's opinion is greatly appreciated here, it great you take/took the time to reply, and I thank you for that, people will all always have a difference in opinion, and other people can learn much from "different" views, please do not take Fractsers passionate response (or anyone elses, including mine) as anyway aggressive, im sure Fractser would be dis-heartened to find you may feel that way about his post, I can assure you (without conversing with Fracster) it would not be his intention to put anyone down in any way, sometimes the intermernet thing can be misleading like this.

LaughingBeagles

17th May 2015, 09:11 PM

Thanks 04OFF, appreciate your post very much. I absolutely have no issue with people disagreeing with what I post, I guess it's just how it is said that makes a difference - especially in a forum, where the non-verbals are missing.

The reason I shoot RAW is because as I get more experienced, I can revisit some of my early compositions with a fresh set of eyes. There have been plenty of shots I thought were great at the time only to look at them a few years later and think "if only".

I have to stress that there were two main reasons we shot RAW in my course - 1. So the lecture can check to see what you have done post production (you could not tweak them to begin with so had to learn to take not only a good shot but one that told a story) and 2. So you learnt more about the metadata that composed a shot. As the course progressed, you were able to do minor tweaks but again, you had to submit the RAW data so you could be assessed on your original composition (hard to do with JPG).

As it was photojournalism, we had to be able to learn things like - without a tripod; take panoramic shots and stitch together manually, shoot in low light, and so on. Our lecture Julie Millowick (worth a google - a well regarded photographer) was great. I did not finish the course as we moved back to WA so had to defer. It did provide me with enough to realise that I had much to learn, that my camera was ok but not great in low light (very noisy) and so on.

Anyway, onwards and upwards.

04OFF

17th May 2015, 10:04 PM

Yes look, we all have different styles, and all shoot different, I really look forward to learning some stuff from your input, so I hope you continue to post here, I am sure Fracster will be along soon to clear the air, but as I said, I very much doubt there was anything sinister meant buy his post, he is a talented Photographer who knows his stuff, but ive never read "anything" where he has deliberately degraded anyone, but as us poms can be , we certainly know how to voice a opinion (lol) unfortunately, sometimes the internet can make people appear to come across in a bad way.

I have a good friend who also shoots 100% raw , he is a computer geek , so im not surprised he likes to play with pics in the PC, he is not a bad Photographer, but still learning (I thing we all never really stop learning anyway) but some of the crap pics he "revives" with the computer are simply amazing, but he still has heaps to learn about basic composition, especially with regard to cropping, although I can say, if I ever did do a wedding, I want to share a shoot with him, because he has the PC skills to make every shot better, and our styles and skills being different, I think would make for some interesting stuff.

Either that or we would drastically fail, and never work again (lol)

So I guess what I am attempting to say is, that a persons choice to shoot raw, may also be influenced by the skills and willingness to modify images in the PC, personally I don't like to use much PC, but to be honest, that's more likely because I don't have any PC skills, and are too stubborn (lazy) to learn, I enjoy creating real time effects in the camera, and I guess I feel once you start explaining to people you used a PC, people start to think maybe you just created the whole thing in photoshop, not that that's wrong, but at some point you must cross a line between what is classed as Photography, and Computer Generated Images ?

Anyway, hope you can stick around in here :smiley_thumbs_up:

LaughingBeagles

17th May 2015, 10:38 PM

My background is digital forensics (Uber Geek) so I can relate. Funny how there is a strong sense that RAW = lots of fiddling, which is not the case for me. I was taught composition, the right f stop, apeture, ISO, the rule of thirds, post ion the "story" of the shot and so on. I also strongly believe there is an art to it as well, the gut feel in seeing through the lens.

All these things I do as a beginner but it's fun.

fracster

17th May 2015, 11:56 PM

Sorry bud, I did not intend to come across as robust. Just stating what my thoughts were,I certainly did not intend to offend or pee you off in anyway.
Thanks for your "robust" response. Makes me just want to get involved all the more.... (not). Anyway, I think I'll leave this thread alone - you've got it all covered. ;)

fracster

17th May 2015, 11:59 PM

LaughingBeagles, please do NOT leave this thread alone, yours and everyone else's opinion is greatly appreciated here, it great you take/took the time to reply, and I thank you for that, people will all always have a difference in opinion, and other people can learn much from "different" views, please do not take Fractsers passionate response (or anyone elses, including mine) as anyway aggressive, im sure Fractser would be dis-heartened to find you may feel that way about his post, I can assure you (without conversing with Fracster) it would not be his intention to put anyone down in any way, sometimes the intermernet thing can be misleading like this.Absolutely spot on mate. Sometimes words typed on a forum can come across in a different way than intended. My post was trying to help, though I do admit that some of my posts may come across as blunt and robust, that is not my intent at all guys.

4bye4

18th May 2015, 12:21 AM

I have been following this thread for while now, and also some of the individuals posting on it. Let me start by saying I find both fracster's and 04off's photography extremity interesting and exciting. I have also recently met Pete and I like what I have seen of his work. The interesting thing is that each person has there own technique and some differences in their approach to photography and whether to use RAW or JPG format.
My own experience started way back in the 70's, when I bought a Pentax, a lot of photography books and undertook a few courses at TAFE. This made me a reasonable photographer and at the time I knew all the rules like the rule of thirds, f stops and all the others that Pete mentioned in his post. Unfortunately, although I was a reasonable photographer it bored me to death in the end and that coupled with a growing family and limited budget had me sell all my equipment and not become interested in photography again until 2011. I am now learning all over again, but with a much more mature attitude. I now find myself composing much better photographs mainly because I am putting my own "feel" in to the subject matter and knowing when to ignore the "rules" of photography. So as not to take over the thread and bore everyone to death, I'll leave this post now on this note. I agree with just about everything that has been posted but I do find that shooting in RAW uses a lot of memory and is not warranted unless you are going to manipulate the photograph afterwards. Because the modern camera is capable in auto mode, and almost any photograph can be enhanced on a computer, we as photographers, need to show our individuality by creating our own individual style and composition techniques.
Lastly, when 4x4ing, I have a second camera with a 300mm telephoto set to auto and multiple shots just sitting withing reach. This has often enabled me to get photographs of those situations that "come out of nowhere."

2TROLLFAM

25th October 2015, 09:41 AM

Here's a challenge for you - ME !! [emoji13]
I bought a Nikon D7100 about 2 months ago and last weekend thought I'd be clever and take it to the Supercross so that I could get some good pictures .... Hmmmm that backfired !!

Until the sun went down all was good with the silly thing set on AUTO however once that sin went down, and the spot lights came on the track I think I managed to take 1, maybe 2 semi ok pictures

The rest were crappy and blurred - was sitting there googling what settings I should be using and even ended up with a groovy pic that looked like my camera was on LSD [emoji849]

HELP !!! No nothing about photography but want to be able to take pics of Motorsports during the day and night .....

http://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2015/10/393.jpghttp://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2015/10/394.jpghttp://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2015/10/395.jpg

ETA : when I bought it came with 2 Nikon lenses

18-140mm which is on the camera and a 50mm

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FNQGU

25th October 2015, 10:01 AM

A general tip would be to throw it into Shutter Priority and up the speed to at least 1/500th of a second, (maybe even 1/800th or faster) to capture fast moving objects.

You should have a focus lock option on that D7100 too. Work out how that works and it will follow your subjects keeping them in focus.

Also, I'd suggest you put it into burst mode to take multiple frames each time. You'll end up with a stack of images you don't want/need, but in amongst them there will hopefully be one or two that are exactly what you wanted.

With the light dropping right off at night, you might find a need to up your ISO to 800 or 1600 too. Your camera is probably doing it already automatically, but if your shots are still too dark, you might need to take control of it.

2TROLLFAM

25th October 2015, 01:52 PM

One of the searches (plus reading the manual) suggested these settings which was how I got the slightly OK pics - methinks I'll have to look into doing a basic photography course just to learn the basics of how to use the darn thing LOLhttp://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2015/10/397.jpg

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FNQGU

25th October 2015, 02:11 PM

If you use the Aperture Priority then you are leaving it to the camera to select the shutter speed, and it will base that on the amount of light it is getting from whatever Aperture setting you use. You won't get a crisp 'frozen' image from moving objects as often. Most times it will come out blurred. The H subsetting there is likely for High Speed (ie. burst mode) I think. Someone who uses Nikon can tell you better than I could.

Another option for you would be to select Scene, and choose 'Sports' or something similar.

Jump on YouTube and watch a couple of tutorials if you don't have time for a course.

2TROLLFAM

25th October 2015, 02:26 PM

4bye4

25th October 2015, 03:38 PM

One of the searches (plus reading the manual) suggested these settings which was how I got the slightly OK pics - methinks I'll have to look into doing a basic photography course just to learn the basics of how to use the darn thing LOL

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Be careful - I bought a camera, did a course and outgrew the camera so bought a better one, another course etc. A bit like doing mods on a Patrol.

2TROLLFAM

25th October 2015, 04:19 PM

Be careful - I bought a camera, did a course and outgrew the camera so bought a better one, another course etc. A bit like doing mods on a Patrol.

Naaaaaa had a good camera years ago when my ex husband and I showed dogs - set it completely in auto and push button ... That's the extent of my excitement for photography LOL

Just with work get free tickets for the bikes races, motor cross etx and thought would be nice to be able to take decent photos for FB etc

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

04OFF

26th October 2015, 10:34 PM

Hi Sharen, i think the suggestions from the others are a great place to start, basically you need think along the lines of that your camera is attempting to capture enough light to generate a clear and well lit image.

At night time, just as humans don't see as well as in the daytime, so does the camera suffer from lack of light, the pupils in our eyes widen to allow more light to enter, and our brain also fills in a lot of gaps to allow us to see at night, the camera also needs adjustments to help see in the dark.

As mentioned before by a previous poster, In basic terms you can make your camera more sensitive to light (increasing the ISO) the downside can be degrading of picture quality (noise or grain in the image) at high ISO, new cameras these days are very good at avoiding such noise so don't be afraid to try, anyway, the way i look at it is, a slightly noisy pic, is better than NO pic at all.

The other thing (also as mentioned) is to allow time for the camera sensor to absorb more light with a slower shutter speed, if you keep the shutter open for long enough you can make night look like day, this method however, is not practical for fast moving objects as it will introduce blur (as you have already seen)

Using a zoom lens on full zoom will often reduce the cameras ability to absorb any available light, try to use use a low f-stop or fast lens (need less light) that operates down to a small "f" number (normally the f-stop is written in the outside of the lens), use it on minimal zoom, sure your image may be further away, but you will have the best shot at getting something you can use, even if it means cropping the image in the PC later to make the subject appear closer.

You can also help your camera by positioning yourself so you are shooting with any available light (such as a track light) behind you, the light behind you will help light the subject, but if you shoot toward a light, the camera may see this light as the overall light available for the image, and if the light is quite bright, the camera will do what our eyes do when we look into a bright light (like when we squint), and so the camera will try and darken the whole image down, this will result in everything you wish to capture looking dull and dark.

The other way to get more light at night is of course by using a flash, unfortunately most standard camera flashes do not work over a very long distance, nor give very much control, a extra external flash is the best way, but will cost more money, and add bulk to your camera/bag, plus external flashes require extra batteries to operate, flash can also be a art in itself to master, and can also annoy the hell out of people having them "pop" off in their face all the time. :tongue:

2TROLLFAM

26th October 2015, 11:05 PM

Thanks Heaps !! greatly appreciate the laymen terms [emoji2]

So my guess would be definitely lighting was my major problem the other night as we were in the stands at the end of the back straight with at least 4 sets of spotties facing us and had the lens zoomed right in ... Yeah my ex husband had a seperate flash for his camera and used to annoy the crap out of me, let alone the people beside us at dog shows.

I don't want to be an expert, just to manage a decent pic would be great [emoji108]🏼

Speaking of pics - I need to go check out your threads and see how your rebuild finished up ......

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

fracster

1st November 2015, 09:21 PM

Thanks Heaps !! greatly appreciate the laymen terms [emoji2]

I don't want to be an expert, just to manage a decent pic would be great [emoji108]🏼

When shooting that sort of thing at night, I would follow Kevs advice above. The Nikon system has an "auto ISO" function, I use it for 90% of my shots. I have a D7200 so assume the 7100 is similar.:

Turn the camera on and press the menu button,go to the photo shooting menu by using the scroll button (the small camera icon on the left hand side) and press the right hand side of the scroll wheel, move down the displayed options until you highlight "ISO sensitivity settings and click the right hand side of the scroll wheel again,a further range of options will now show. the third one down is Auto iso,press the right hand side of the scroll wheel again and select on. Go back one step and then you can select a max iso from the fourth option down and a minimum shutter speed from the fifth.

For night shooting I would max out at 6400 ISO and the subjects you want to shoot need maybe 1/500th, try these settings. and see how you go on, you may need more or less shutter speed. Only you know how dark it actually is out there.

The good side to this is that you don`t have to worry about iso settings, the camera does that for you, so stick it in "S" mode then follow the other guys advice. Personally, I would shoot this in manual mode, some people seem fazed by manual mode, but it is quite easy if auto iso is enabled. I will happily run it through with you if you like. The down side is that high iso does produce a grainy image, as Kev says above, a grainy image is better than a blurred one.

Best of luck and keep at it, help is always at hand.

fracster

1st November 2015, 10:07 PM

The H subsetting there is likely for High Speed (ie. burst mode) I think. Someone who uses Nikon can tell you better than I could.

You are correct mate.CH is indeed continuous high shutter burst, CL is a slower option. Both are adjustable via the menu option.

2TROLLFAM

3rd November 2015, 02:51 AM

[emoji108]🏼 Okie Dokie .... Might have to go looking for night races .. LOL .. Or just go hang out at the drag races in the name of education of course!!

Thanks so much everyone ...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

mudnut

4th February 2020, 11:33 PM

A bit of a thread excavation. Well, I'm out of action for another three weeks, so I am trying to learn my new camera. I have a Canon 1500D with a standard 18-55mm and scored a 75-300mm zoom lens on special.

I am trying to catologue as many bird species that live on my property as I can. I will need to get a better zoom lens for the more shy species, so any advice on what to go for would be appreciated.

These pictures were taken in auto mode and sports mode with the 75-300 lens.

Any feedback is appreciated.

jack

4th February 2020, 11:39 PM

Thanks Mudnut, I'd forgotten about this thread. Very timely as I need to learn as well.

mudnut

4th February 2020, 11:42 PM

I have never had a half decent camera before, so I am a complete novice, Jack.

mudnut

5th February 2020, 03:37 PM

I also want to know if the Sigma brand lenses are worth getting?

Rossco

5th February 2020, 05:05 PM

Hey mudy, yes Sigma lenses are definatly good quality. Didn't know this thread was here will have to sit down and have a good read [emoji106]

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Cuppa

5th February 2020, 08:10 PM

Hi Mudnut. I reckon your photos are not bad , but could definitely be improved with practice. It might help if when asking you posted the camera settings associated with each shot. The focus seems just a bit off as in not crisp, which is a shame as they are nice shots composition wise, particularly the honey eaters.

As far as Sigma goes, I only have one Sigma Lens. It's a bit of a monster, weighing in at close to 2kg, a 150mm to 600mm zoom, but when I manage to have it on the right settings at the right time it gives what I think are some pretty good results. The following pic for example, of a Spotted Whistling Duck, which I'd guess was about 40 metres away from me was taken at the full 600mm on 1/500th sec, F8 & ISO 1600. I think I cropped it a bit too. I'm in no way suggesting the pic is anything special, I'm certain more experienced photographers could find many things to improve it, Certainly better light would have improved it, but I reckon it must take years of practice & dedication to achieve what professional bird photographers do. However in regard to Sigma quality I have no complaints. I'm pretty sure I would have been resting the lens on something as it's weight & length are too unwieldy for me to have captured that clarity handheld at 1/500th sec at that distance.

80085

Cremulator

5th February 2020, 09:44 PM

I also want to know if the Sigma brand lenses are worth getting?Buy the best glass (lenses) you can afford. The lenses are what you hang on to, it's the camera body that is what you will upgrade from time to time.
The mounts for SLR lenses haven't changed since the early 60's so you can still use those lenses from the same manufacturer on today's cameras.

mudnut

5th February 2020, 10:30 PM

Cuppa

6th February 2020, 10:57 AM

Thanks for your all of your replies. That is a very impressive picture, Cuppa. The problem with focus is due to my very poor eyesight. I took a heap of pics with just auto focus and factory settings and edited the best ones. I think it will take a very long time to learn the jargon of this hobby.

Is it commonplace to buy refurbished lenses or is that a not a good option?

mudnut My eyesight is pretty crap too, although since having cataracts done on both eyes I only wear glasses for reading/computer etc. In case you haven't found it on your camera, many cameras have an adjustment for the viewfinder to make it suit your eye. I always use the viewfinder. If I had to rely on the screen I'd need to put glasses on every time which would be a real pain.
If you are already using an adjusted viewfinder it may be worth looking at what auto focussing option you are using. Play around with the different options, taking the same photo with each to see if the results improve.
If your camera just has a screen & no viewfinder, or has a viewfinder which cannot be adjusted you might need to consider either glasses specifically for looking at the screen, or a different camera which has viewfinder adjustment.
In my experience a good viewfinder beats a screen any day. I'm not sure if it is only digital viewfinders which have adjustment. Mine is digital & whilst the level of detail is less than what the camera itself captures it is easy enough to see when it is in focus.

Cuppa

6th February 2020, 11:41 AM

Hi again mudnut. just had a quick look at the manual for your camera.

It does have viewfinder adjustment although the comment in blue at the bottom is suggests it may not be that great.

80086

Another thing to try is getting a greater depth of field, that way if the focus on the subject is a bit off, there is a better chance of still getting the pic you want as the greater depth of field means more distance both in front of & behind the the subject will be in focus.

To get greater depth of field you need to use a higher F setting (ie a smaller Aperture).

Always a balancing act though as using a higher F setting means less light gets in, so the camera will automatically change to a slower shutter speed and a higher ISO setting to compensate. Slower shutter speed may make camera shake an issue, & the higher the ISO setting the increased possibility of a grainy looking photo.

All this means is basically it is more difficult to achieve a higher depth of field in low light conditions. It can be done using a tripod & fully manual settings, but that is more 'advanced'. Best to first master the basics & in so doing learn the limits of your particular camera, before trying to find ways around the 'auto' limitations.

Enjoy playing!

ps. I didn't look to see if your camera has the following, it probably does but may call it something different. Mine has a focus setting called DMF. This enables auto focus, but also allows manual focus of the image once it has auto focussed. if yours has similar it might be a good way of learning to judge whether your auto focus has indeed focussed upon the subject or a nearby blade of grass or similar. Just a thought.

mudnut

6th February 2020, 11:56 AM

jack

6th February 2020, 07:01 PM

80086

.

Well I’ll be, I’ve got this on both of my cameras. Thanks Cuppa, learnt something new again today.
Now I wonder what I’ve forgotten ........

Cuppa

6th February 2020, 07:16 PM

Thanks, Cuppa. I mucked around with the fiddly little dioptric dial for ages, before taking those pics. I think my eyes were tired, so gave up.

I plan to obtain a tripod and hide, so I get closer to the subjects. This should allow me to play with the settings without scaring off the prey.

The only focus switch I have found is the AF/MF switch on the Lens.

I would imagine there will be more focus settings in the menu. Onve you find the settings you like & use most you will most probably be able to assign them to different buttons to make them quicker to access.

Cuppa

6th February 2020, 07:31 PM

Whilst I'm here I wonder if anyone is using Back Button Focussing (BBF). I only recently discovered it & whilst I am still getting used to it, it seems to have the potential to revolutionise the way I can take pics of birds.

https://www.naturettl.com/back-button-focus/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PN9R0D3pF0

Bovril

6th February 2020, 10:06 PM

I have always used back button focussing on my DSLR. Far better control over af.
In reply to an earlier question, the Sigma lenses span the quality range. Some aren't very good, some are exceptionally good.
Until recently I had a Sigma 150-600 Sport which was used primarily for aviation photography. It was a heavy beast but I was happy with the results.
All the attached were taken with that lens.http://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2020/02/24.jpghttp://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2020/02/25.jpghttp://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2020/02/26.jpghttp://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2020/02/27.jpghttp://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2020/02/28.jpghttp://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2020/02/29.jpghttp://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/images/imported/2020/02/30.jpg

mudnut

7th February 2020, 08:18 PM

Cuppa

7th February 2020, 08:58 PM

This is with the 75/300mm lense at 300mm, on AV mode 1/500th shutter speed with an f value of 6.3. To me it looks washed out with the goats coat dominating the pic.

I also went to manual AF mode and selected the central focus point. I am unable to reset the focus to the default which highlights the complete picture.

I don't think it looks washed out, but I can see what you mean about the goat's coat dominating the pic. I believe that this would be less so if you had used a higher f stop to obtain a greater depth of field, getting the wagtail & some of the grass behind in greater focus. The Goat wasn't moving so you could afford to drop the shutter speed quite a bit, especially if the bird wasn't moving much either. Dropping the shutter speed & increasing the F stop should allow for greater depth of field whilst maintaining much the same ISO.

mudnut

7th February 2020, 10:44 PM

I'll try that, Cuppa. It was a bit tricky, as the wagtail would suddenly pounce on an insect then flit back up, so getting it in a still shot was pure luck. I'll have a go at playing with filters to add a bit of colour or reduce the glare.

This was shot taken on full auto and the wren's beak was was a bit blurred so I have had a bit of fun with touch up, filters and such.

mudnut

8th March 2020, 09:25 PM

Red Wattlebird. A common honeyeater found right across southern Australia. It is nomadic, following the cyclic and seasonal bloom of flowers. A fairly aggressive and nomadic tree and shrub dweller, its main sustenance is nectar and pollen, but it will also eat fruit and hunt insects.

I used a Sigma 150-600mm lens, shutter speed 1/200 f6.3. Having to run it through Paint detracts from it though. Is there another way to resize pics so they are sized appropriately?

Cuppa

9th March 2020, 01:33 AM

Resizing for forums is problematic because most have a relatively small file size limit. If you reduce the file size you lose clarity. One way around this is to use an online photo host - upload to it & then use a link to it on the forum.

There are heaps of free photo re-sizing programmes for Windows, Others here may be able to advise which they like, otherwise it's just a matter of trying some to find one to suit. On my Mac I just export the photo from my photos app & choose the size as I do it.

Provided the size is acceptable to a forum, saving as a .png file retains more of the photo's information. Often it's a balance between physical size of the image & it's file size.

Is that a Wattle Bird or a spiny cheeked honeyeater?

How do you like the lens. I bought the same lens last year, but struggle with it's weight. Ok on a tripod, but hard work hand held. Wish I'd bought a 400mm zoom for birds, but the one available for my camera was over $4k!

mudnut

9th March 2020, 11:41 AM

I have edited the post with the species name.

To be honest, I have had very mixed results with the lens, Cuppa.

I am getting maybe one good pic in 20. The 600 I have is the contemporary style which is supposed to be far lighter than the more rugged sports lens.
And yes, I struggle with the weight. Mrs mudsane has been carrying the equipment in a rucksack for me on field trips.

I bought a cheap Inca tripod to use until I can find a good half ball type with a better camera mount.

I am thinking about building a hard shell case with a collapsing handle, pneumatic wheels and a seat cushion on top, so I can get to good sites alone.

I tried numerous different settings and modes for this shot of a Great Egret at around 70-80 metres away. The pic was the best of a bad bunch and is same settings as above.

And yet the Chest Teal is almost perfect. Same settings, but only 40 metres away.

Cuppa

10th March 2020, 11:17 AM

I'm still experimenting with the Sigma lens. A few things have made it focus quicker , but stuffed if I can remember precisely what. I have used the Sigma software to change how some of the functions & switches of the lens work. I also use reasonably fast shutter speed (& consequently larger aperture and/or higher ISO) when hand held. Constant focus helps a lot but drains the battery more quickly. And Back Button Focussing helps a lot too. But yes I get pretty mixed results & know the frustration when the only shots you have turn out to be crap. Particularly frustrating is being unable to focus a clearly as I need to,mbecause in the rush to get the shot have forgotten to change the 3 position switch for the lens' focal range. I also suspect that becoming fluent with such a large lens requires an awful lot of practice/experience. The lens itself is certainly capable of high quality, it's the user input which needs to improve. Shots need to be planned which involves observation & learning about the bird's behaviour & habits - it's favourite perches for example (something I quite enjoy). Spontaneous shots with the big lens can 'get lucky' , but is definitely hit & miss. When going out to try to get shots of a bird which I may never see again, especially in heavy cover like the rainforest I've rather disappointingly learned that it is better to trade the closer close-up shot, for a clearer more distant shot with my 55mm-210mm Sony zoom, with a 1.7x Olympus teleconvertor fitted. Just *much* easier & faster to handle.

mudnut

10th March 2020, 12:26 PM

I have tried on numerous occasions to capture a good image of a Tree Creeper. No matter what focus level is chosen, the tree trunk comes out clearer than the bird.

I have used the 18-55, the 75-300 and the 150-600 lens with the same results. Apart from the fact that the it never sits still, I have come to the conclusion the White Throated Tree Creeper emits a camouflage aura.

Cuppa

10th March 2020, 12:52 PM

To my eyes both tree trunk & bird are very 'soft'.

Do you have a setting which enables auto focus AND manual focus? It may help to get 'in the ballpark' with auto focus & then try to tweak it manually to improve it. I use this quite a lot when in heavy undergrowth as I found the camera would often focus on a nearby leaf or twig when I thought it was on the bird. Result was 'snaps' which my wife found acceptable but all I could see was a bird which should have been 'pin sharp' but wasn't.

mudnut

10th March 2020, 04:19 PM

I had a go at getting some insects, 18-55mm lens, but lost the settings info. Took over a hundred snaps to get these two. The first fly ate a smaller insect after I took the pic.

The lenses all have manual focus. I have tried looking for back button focus, but my model camera doesn't have that extra AF button.

Cuppa

10th March 2020, 05:27 PM

The auto/manual focus on mine is called DMF (Digital Manual Focus I think)

mudnut

10th March 2020, 08:51 PM

https://www.google.com/search?q=digital+manual+focus+Canon+eos+1500d&rlz=1C1EJFC_enAU827AU836&oq=digital+manual+focus+Canon+eos+1500d&aqs=chrome..69i57.23393j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#kpvalbx=_sVpnXrDiE7bez7sPxbuBkA039

Some easy tips.

FNQGU

11th March 2020, 08:54 AM

Mudnut, coming in late here, so you guys might have already covered this, but have you tried opening your aperture right up to as large as it will go for those sorts of subjects? Or is 6.3 as large as it gets on that Sigma? I routinely shoot on Aperture mode using autofocus but manually place my focus point. With things like birds (and even goats), you don't necessarily need more depth of field than what you would get at your largest aperture and the blurred background keeps your bird as the main subject without any distractions.

Also there is a general rule to always focus on the eye if you can. The human eye is always drawn to the eye of any subject, so images with the eye in crisp focus tend to be viewed as better images. I don't know how your model Cannon works but are you able to select a single focus point and then move that focus point around within your composition to where you need it to be?

Another feature that might be worth considering is to set your exposure to a pinpoint setting, or the smallest circle/area that the camera has. I'm guessing that the goanna shot would have looked quite a lot different if you were able to do this.

Some good advice from Cuppa there on refining your focus manually as well. Your instruction book should tell you if you can do this when your lens is on AF or not. My lenses do and I love the feature, particularly if shooting through a fence or some foliage or some distraction in between you and your subject as well.

Hope this helps a little. Best thing is to get your camera off the Auto setting and into the zones where the creativity starts...and you can get what you are looking for. :-)

Cuppa

11th March 2020, 12:33 PM

Or is 6.3 as large as it gets on that Sigma?

The lens is 150mm to 600, & f5-f6.3. I think f5 is only available at 150mm.

Cuppa

13th March 2020, 10:26 PM

mudnut

13th March 2020, 11:15 PM

What model and how heavy is the case when fully loaded, Cuppa. I suppose it would be useful as a 'base' storage unit for me to transfer the gear to a travel case on outings.

Cuppa

13th March 2020, 11:45 PM

It's a Pelican 1520, I think the case(with foam) weighs around 4.5kg.Not sure of fully loaded weight . I'd guess around 10 kg. They do a large range of sizes.
Since posting earlier, I decided to clean my lenses & to my horror discovered I already have a small amount of fungus inside my Sigma lens. At the moment it doesn't show up in photos, but it could get worse. Tomorrow I'm going to put it out in direct sunlight if I can in the hope that the sunlight will kill it. It's 12 months old. :(

mudnut

14th March 2020, 10:26 AM

I've watched a few videos on youtube about cleaning fungus off lenses, but a professional clean for your Sigma is on the cards.

Cuppa

14th March 2020, 03:08 PM

I've watched a few videos on youtube about cleaning fungus off lenses, but a professional clean for your Sigma is on the cards.

I think it would cost more than half the cost of the lens given that it's inside, & I'd question whether it was worth it to be honest. If it was an easier lens to use I might feel differently. It's out in the sunlight now, hoping it might kill off the fungus to stop it getting worse.

mudnut

21st July 2020, 02:17 PM

I didn't have time to get the Sigma lens or get the camera ready. 150mm lens, on sports setting.

A pair of humpbacks passing under a cliff at around 300m. I am really happy with the results.

You can see the white of the whale's fin and underbelly under the murky water, a lot clearer than my naked eyes could.

04OFF

21st July 2020, 09:50 PM

Was talking to a photographer when up at Portland Roads & he asked me how I was storing my camera & lenses. "In a soft carry bag" I said. This brought on a drawing of breath in through his teeth. Next time he visited he brought one of his camera cases, a Pelican case, airtight, waterproof with silica gel to keep things dry & a small battery powered hygrometer to keep a check on humidity levels in the case. He opened the case & the hygrometer said 20% , but reached 50% & still rising within within just a few minutes. Ambient humidity was over 90%. He then explained how one wet season was sufficient to get mould/fungus growing between the coatings of lenses, ruining them, & corrosion inside cameras. Well I don't mind admitting that it was an issue I had never considered, & that he put the wind up me. Seeings we are likely to see a lot more high humidity I thought it prudent to take some preventive action. The Pelican case & Silica gel arrived from ebay this morning. The mini Hygrometer (2 for $8!) should get her next week. Wife agreed to it being an early birthday pressie. :)

80656

Been using the same Pelican 1520 for my gear around 10 years now, 100% the best investment, it has saved my gear time and time again, on a very steep track ive had the whole thing fall out of the back of the car bouncing onto rocks, its had heaps of exposure to beach conditions (also falling out of the car onto sand).

Even just a week ago, a whole heap of beach sand somehow got dumped all over it in the back of the car, i just put the whole case on the ground, and hosed it off, no ingress of water or sand what so ever, my internal foam is looking a bit sad after all these years use, but still does the same job and nothing inside has ever got damaged.

81523

04OFF

21st July 2020, 10:02 PM

What model and how heavy is the case when fully loaded, Cuppa.

FYI, Just weighed mine, and its 10.1 Kg loaded as per pic ^

mudnut

7th November 2020, 11:53 AM

I am so mad at myself. The camera case snagged on a cupboard as I was bringing it inside and it hit the ground with a mighty bang. Since then the focus is soft at best using any lens.

This is the best I can get, with manual focus, with my poor eyesight. I will have to send the camera away for repair. I have even enhanced the pic.

Cuppa

7th November 2020, 01:07 PM

That's a bugger mudnut, hope it can be sorted without too much pain. I've come close to doing much the same a few times. I can't remember what camera you have, but I can recommend a camera repair place I used in Melbourne. I thought the sensor on my camera was wrecked after someone who should have known better (an ex professional photographer) managed to get a few drops of red wine on the sensor which had dried & gone hard. This happened in Tassie, & best I could find there were places who would send the camera away , taking several weeks. Turned our the place I used in Melbourne was where they would have sent it to.They quoted me a reasonable price, I took it in, swanned around the local shops & cafes for a couple of hours & then picked it up, They did a marvellous job, & charged me less than the quote!

http://camera-clinic.com.au/index.php/en/

mudnut

7th November 2020, 04:04 PM

Thanks, Cuppa. It will have to wait until we go to see the Outlaws. Did you make an appointment or just rock up?

Cuppa

7th November 2020, 10:09 PM

Thanks, Cuppa. It will have to wait until we go to see the Outlaws. Did you make an appointment or just rock up?

I phoned & made an appointment. You should phone them anyway to tell them what camera it is & what he issue is to ensure it's something they can do.

FNQGU

10th November 2020, 05:41 PM

mudnut - you can definitely look at repair. Take images, record the settings and include them when you make the appointments. eg. that image above looks super noisey. What are the other settings? Is anything registering as unusual?

mudnut

10th November 2020, 06:19 PM

Thanks for the advice. I have pics on a card to show the local repairer (who I just found out about). Hopefully I will see him this week.

mudnut

15th December 2020, 09:11 PM

Camera is back. It had a clean and adjustment. Took a quick snap through a trellis to get this little fella on the front lawn. It was just on the sports setting as I didn't have time to muck around before the bunny fled. The camera did quite a good job of focusing through all the other objects in its path.

Cuppa

18th December 2020, 01:58 PM

Camera is back. It had a clean and adjustment. .

Just out of interest .... do you know what they had to adjust?

mudnut

18th December 2020, 02:30 PM

On the receipt: Dismantle faulty camera as required. Clean CCD Sensor, shutter and mirror box housing, mirror and sub mirror, view finder, fresnell and prism assembly.

Test image clarity and adjust back focus.

Cuppa

18th December 2020, 05:15 PM

Hmmm, right ..................guess the important thing is they were able to fix it. Expensive?

mudnut

18th December 2020, 05:35 PM

It was around $250.

Using the sports setting as with my previous pics, pre accidental shock, you can see, the pics are still noisy and soft. So I am up for another camera. Had to try though.

mudnut

29th January 2021, 01:06 PM

The Musk Lorikeet was 30 metres away. Shutter 1/2000 F6.3. Iso on auto. After a bit of cropping and adjustment to light, clarity and colour. It was windy and overcast. Still a soft focus, even with the focal point at the centre of the lens.

Cuppa

29th January 2021, 01:49 PM

Mudnut, I believe you are using the same lens as me aren't you? (Sigma150-600) Have you set it up with the Sigma software? Looks to me like the focus is a bit out, plus the lack of light has resulted in a higher ISO giving some grain?

This pic, was taken at a similar distance & quite heavily cropped. Nothing else done to it other than cropping. F6.3 1/640sec (leaning against a post to help steady myself) . ISO 100 (enough light at 1/640) Taken at full extension of the lens (600mm). Not suggesting it's anything but a pretty ordinary pic, but just to show that you should be able get things a bit less soft. Or do you think your camera focus is still a bit off since the repair?

Male Red Winged Parrot
82841

mudnut

29th January 2021, 02:21 PM

Where did you get the sigma software, Cuppa. Has it caused any problems with you computer, or lens. I also have to buy the usb dock. I am very wary of downloading off the the interwebs.

Looking back through my pics (post dropping the camera), I found this quick snap, Sports mode. That came out almost perfect. It seems I am at fault. Also as an update on the above pic. I found I had knocked the Focus range switch and the image stabilizer switch to the on position while the camera was on the tripod. Duh!

Cuppa

29th January 2021, 08:43 PM

Nice. Yes when you have setting on the lens as well as on the camera it can be hard to be fluent enough to get things right at the time of the shot. Regular practice is needed if like me you have periods when the camera only gets infrequent use, it's a whole learning curve again. The software downloads & are worthwhile. I'd love to be able to explain how, but I'm due for a re-learning curve after a relative camera hiatus of a number of months! Essentially though it does allow you to adjust settings to better suit your own style. Yep you'll need the USB dock, I don't think it's that expensive, but cant remember that for definite either.Bought it at the same time as the lens. Need to play around with the lens for a while & then make changes one at a time - trial & error style to see what you like.

https://www.sigma-global.com/en/download/lenses/sigma-optimization-pro/

mudnut

29th January 2021, 10:23 PM

Cheers, Cuppa. That's done. Now to get the dock and also find the lens user manual.

mudnut

4th February 2021, 04:41 PM

I took over 50 pics on all different settings, to get this one snap. Unstabilised 75-300mm lens on auto scene recognition.

I had a lot of trouble getting the camera to give a sharp focus on any setting. I even wiped all the settings I changed, back to factory default.

Musk Lorikeet on WA Flowering Gum.

Cuppa

4th February 2021, 07:45 PM

That must be so frustrating! I'd have liked to see a stabilised shot of that too. How much has been cropped? What does 'auto scene' do in terms of settings (should be on the photo info)

I don't know what the problem is but summat's not right. You know from that last bird pic you posted that the camera can do better than this. The focus is not that far off, but looking around the entire photo none of it is crisp.

How about taking a few shots from just a short distance, of anything with clean straight lines, furniture, windows or something, well lit. Straight lines but keep it simple with not a lot of detail . Not sure if it will help, but it should be easier to get a clean crisp image, just to prove that it can be done (hopefully). Trying it with each lens you have too wont do any harm. If you get some satisfactory results , maybe then go back to experimenting with settings.

Mind you if you think that's all crap, it quite possibly is as I feel like I'm clutching at straws.

Another thought. Can you borrow another similar camera off someone & go out for a shoot with both to compare results? Or go together & swap cameras.

mudnut

4th February 2021, 08:03 PM

All offerings of advice much appreciated, Cuppa. I have also booked into a lesson at the camera shop.

That has probably had over 50% cropped. Also used a small bit of editing, but much less than needed previously.

The camera set it at 1/750 and 7.1 fs. I will borrow my daughters gear and have a go at your suggestions when she visits.

mudnut

5th February 2021, 07:45 PM

After a 3/4 hour lesson I spent an hour or two testing out all the functions I was taught.

I got a few good snaps but this one was the best.

The sigma lens was set at 500mm. The Shutter at 1/640 and arperture was 7.1. Partly cloudy. mid-late afternoon.

All I did was crop and run it through paint to reduce size so it lost a tiny bit of clarity.

I think the shutter speed could have been at 1/1000.

Cuppa

6th February 2021, 10:22 PM

So spill the beans then - what did you take away from the lesson that helped. That’s a way better shot!

mudnut

6th February 2021, 11:03 PM

Rules of thumb, such as the shutter speed is approximately twice the value of the focal length.(there are many exceptions). Start in TV mode with the shutter speed set. Do the half press on the shutter button and see what the camera gives for Arperture. If the number is flashing, then it is not within an acceptable range. Use the AV button and the main rotor button near the shutter button to adjust light by up to three stops.

It is advisable to set the ISO on auto unless a particular setting is desired, for effects, etc.

I have the sensor sampling now tied with the focus point, and about 10-15% of the field. (Not ideal for all situations).

Learned how to use one shot focus mode, properly.

I will type up a small card with simple instructions, plasticate it and keep it with the camera.

The camera is set on multishot, so that after pressing the button it reduces camera shake.

Haven't found a user manual for the Sigma lens, but found a review video that discusses each function.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VykkH-OVdyg He takes a while to get into it, but has taught me a few functions.

Cuppa

19th April 2021, 12:16 PM

Three pics. First is the original 'as shot'. Second is cropped,lightened & detail increased. Third is with a different sky added in Luminar 4. I also had a shot taken in .jpg & by comparison it lacked detail. It was an unusually grey day & the morning (9am) sun was behind me. The bird was quite some distance away. Shot in Raw format on Sony A6500 with the Sigmar 150 to 600mm zoom lens on full extension. Handheld. ISO 125, F11, 1/500s 600mm This was the last of only 2 or 3 shots as I was keen to leave, due to there being a snake close by plus I was being attacked by green ants swarming up my legs! These factors could be described as disturbances to my concentration! Once I had the pic on my laptop I was pleasantly surprised at the relative lack of expected camera shake & the detail I was able to bring out with the post editing. Only thing I'm not 100% happy about is that the sky 'bled' into the top of the cyclone-busted tree the bird is perched on, but don't know how to rectify that. Reduction in file size to upload to forum has taken out a fair bit of detail as you might expect of a 25Mb photo reduced to just over 1Mb.

83379

83380

83381

mudnut

19th April 2021, 05:19 PM

Magnificent bird. Have you heard the male hammering on a tree trunk to alert his partner of his presence?

Cuppa

19th April 2021, 05:54 PM

Magnificent bird. Have you heard the male hammering on a tree trunk to alert his partner of his presence?

No but would love to. Since it was discovered they do that 30 or 40 years ago it has only been captured on camera about 60 times. At the end of this week we’ll be moving to a house sit on Cape Weymouth, at the northern end of Chilli Beach where we are expecting to have use of a quad bike to get down to the beach on, so expect to be in their territory a lot more often, so fingers crossed.

Cremulator

19th April 2021, 09:09 PM

Have a look at channel masking as a technique Cuppa. You can use the density of the image to create a complex selection in your photos.
Here are a couple of different skies. One more dramatic than the other. In each, I've tried to keep a lighter part of the image up near the crest to blend with the finer parts of the feathers, but both backgrounds are selected with consideration of the lighting in the original photo.
8338383384

Cuppa

19th April 2021, 09:22 PM

I'm impressed Cremulator, but have no idea about channels - unless that's another name for layers - in which case I'm still a total beginner. What software do you use? I suspect it is something which requires rather more practice & understanding than Luminar? In Luminar to put in a different sky involves no skill or need to use layers, at least not at my level. I will look up Channel masking to see if it is something I can try. Thanks.

Cremulator

19th April 2021, 11:17 PM

Channels are the red, green and blue information that make up the colour image.

I use Adobe Photoshop.

In looking at those examples again, I really should have cropped the sky to a smaller detail of clouds.
Those cloud images are photographed with a wide angle lens but you've captured that beautiful image of the bird with a 600mm lens. In reality, on a day that wasn't overcast, you still wouldn't see much of the sky due to the field of view with a 600mm lens.

Cremulator

19th April 2021, 11:51 PM

Maybe something more like this?
83385

04OFF

8th September 2021, 09:45 PM

.

84295

Have not posted here much, as you guys have really done a great job with the thread, exactly what it was for. :smiley_thumbs_up:

Hope everyone is keeping safe in these Covid times, at the moment we are lucky enough in QLD to be allowed out, so im trying to make the most of it, as who knows how long it will last.

Anyway,here's one i took this weekend, i thought may be relevant to this thread, as i did not have my DSLR with me, all i had was my crappy ph, its a el cheapo OPPO brand, and is really not good for taking any photos (nothing like a i phone etc), but it does show, while a good location obviously helps , the best camera you have, is the one you have "with you".

Also i think it shows just how you can use composition to your advantage (as i briefed on in the start of this thread) almost every time i shoot a car, i give the car "room" within the frame to move into, it looks more natural to the eyes, this often means NOT having the car in the center of the image, but giving the car space in front (the normal direction of travel) and for the exact reason just explained, is why i chose to cut half the camper trailer out of the picture.

If id had my DSLR (and had time to use it), i would have undoubtedly have captured much more enhanced and brilliant colour from the sky, as well as, i do set my Landscape mode (within the onboard camera settings) to add some subtle enrichment as well, i would have also used a Tripod so i could get a sharper image, extend the exposure time, and then have the option of illuminating the near side of the car with light painting effect (using a torch).

I say "option" of illuminating the car, as i would like to have seen the effect, but with the S5 alloys being quite shiny, im also aware that they may reflect torch light back at the camera, and really highlight themselves, this could well be very distracting, becoming the main focus of the pic, and could also have the effect of appearing to reduce the vividness of the sky.

Same goes for putting the interior light on in the car of the hazard lights on (as i have done in the past for effect) there is a real danger of drawing your eyes away from the sky, brake lights would be my pick in this situation, but you need a helper or long exposure (or a thong wedge) to make that work, anyway, some food for thought.

As with my other pics, i don't change or modify anything with the pics afterwards in the PC, with the only exception being, a small crop to cut the pic down into 16:9 (so it suits pretty much every screen the pic may be viewed on), yet ironically, the cheap OPPO phone lets me capture in 16:9 , so i didn't even have to do that (lol)

:biggrin: