Team-BHP - The DSLR Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by sachinj12 (Post 2919429)

Unless you are planning to put the images on billboards, the D3100 will more than do. What sort of product photography are you doing? For product photography, the 18-55 and a macro lens will suffice. I dont see a need for the 55-200. And oh, yes, you do need good lighting. Consider investing in CLS (Nikon jagron for the flash systems) and a good tripod.

Hello Sachin, thanks for the advice. We are into promotional products and have a necessity to publish photographs of products like T-Shirts, Caps and almost anything and everything that can be promoted under one's brand name. We require clarity in the pictures, since the ones we used to publish earlier in our brochures were mostly blurry. Doesn't speak well that way of our brand. The 55-200 lens were free with the package and I thought the more the merrierstupid:. But I don't see the use of these lenses for our application too. As for lighting, will invest in flashes (CLS) as soon as I get a grip on the camera soon. Any suggestions are welcome as to any particular models applicable. One doubt, should I buy a Lens Filter for the DSLR? And are there any other precautions that I would have to take? I got a carry case with it, but its just about ok. Should I buy something better? I know I am being inquisitive, but please bear with me. Thanks a ton.

Cheers
Champ

Quote:

Originally Posted by Champion (Post 2919622)

Any suggestions are welcome as to any particular models applicable. One doubt, should I buy a Lens Filter for the DSLR? And are there any other precautions that I would have to take? I got a carry case with it, but its just about ok. Should I buy something better? I know I am being inquisitive, but please bear with me. Thanks a ton.

Cheers
Champ

If budget permits, buy the Nikon flashes. ELse look at the 3rd party flashes. Honestly, I dont own a flash yet,so cant say much about the 3rd party flashes. I assume your shoots will mostly be indoor? Filters are of various types and used for various purpose. I dont see a need for filters for your usage. Though a cheap UV filter will protect your front element from scratches ( you can remove them while you shoot). A good carry case is an essential one time investment. Do get a new one if the one you have is inadequate. BHPain shajufx will be able to guide you more on flashes/umbrella/diffuser and other items required for commercial stuff. Do ping him.

Cheers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nilanjanray (Post 2918825)

How many here use back button focus - dedicated AF-ON or configuring the AE-L/AF-L button?

I have been experimenting, not fully convinced that it makes sense for shooting wildlife/movement/taking shots when you only have 1 sec to get that shot. Maybe it is a matter of practice. Does it make sense when one has to react quickly or track a moving creature? Using a camera like D90 that doesn't have the most sophisticated auto-focus?

Would it be worth it spending many hours making back button focus instinctive? Currently half-shutter focus has become instinctive - will have to unlearn that.

I've been using the back button focus for about a month now, and I've come to love the separation between focus and metering. Besides saving battery power by not having to wake up the metering system and the VR motor by way of using the shutter button when all I want to do is focus, I think the biggest advantage would be getting to stay in AF-C at all times and still be able to lock focus as if I were in AF-S without needing to dive into the menus. As for the effectiveness in actual focus, I don't think there's any difference (not that I expected it) between the shutter focus and back button focus while in AF-C mode, and perhaps this is merely a matter of greater handling control leading to improved chances of capturing the critical moment without having the focusing system let you down.

Also, before I adopted this approach, I remember an occasion when I had to repeatedly go through the cumbersome 'autofocus at a single point-switch to manual focus-recompose-shoot' regimen with the camera set on a tripod (the AF-L button in my camera doesn't offer an AF-hold option, so I couldn't have used that) which would have been far simpler if I had used the AF-On approach instead. Just quoting an example where this feature really comes in handy in my experience. Finally, I don't think you really would take that long to get used to this. I guess it depends!

Quote:

Originally Posted by nilanjanray (Post 2918825)

P.S. another learning lately - avoid spot metering in Nikon unless the contrast and/or intervening objects really call for it (I have been experimenting with Spot for a while now when shooting wildlife). Matrix does a decent job most of the time. And the newer cameras have far more sophisticated metering and DR. Any thoughts on this?

I personally found it too volatile and inconsistent (with my expectations, that is) where I found multiple exposures to be significantly varying even under the same lighting conditions because of the nature of this kind of metering. Again, just my opinion that matrix metering has been adequately versatile in dealing with most situations, and I find myself changing that only under particularly specific conditions. In short, I agree with you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vibbs (Post 2919747)

Friends need a small help here. I have a canon 1100D . Today while trying to take a moon shot with my tamron 70-300 mm lens, I found a marked fall in the image sharpness. A shot with the same lens and camera had given a much better shot a couple of months back. What,can be the reason for such a decline ?Can it be due to a dirty lens or camera sensor? what else can be the issue?

Could it be the air quality (temperature, humidity, dust & particulate matter, haze) that was the difference? Rather more likely, could it be a minute difference in focus? Focus tends to be a tricky customer indeed! Otherwise, could it be a difference in camera settings from the last time you tried, in terms of handling internal vibrations (tried with the mirror locked up/remote/cable release)? Another equally likely culprit is an excessively long exposure during which the moon actually moves ever so slightly. Are you sure you're exposing for the same time as you did the last time?

Quote:

Originally Posted by sachinj12 (Post 2919663)

Quote:

Originally Posted by joslicx (Post 2919691)

Champion

If you are gonna shoot indoors and also if you are buying Nikon DSLR then buy the DSLR body and for lens buy the 35mm f1.8G lens instead of the kit lens/zoon lens. this lens is supposedly very very good for indoor/low light shooting. And you wont need any zoom indoors (as you can move near/far from your subject as you might wanna shoot).

Dear Sachin, thanks for the input. Will invest in a good carry case. I saw a couple of National Geographic bags around here. Looked lovely. Shall buy one soon. I shall get in touch with BHPian shajufx for other accessories that I would require as time passes.

Dear joslicx, unfortunately I already bought the camera with the 18-55 and 55-200 lens. I shall certainly note the lens you have written about and perhaps if I do find the present ones inadequate (low possibilty considering I am a learner), I would get them. Thanks all the same.

Cheers
Champ

Quote:

Originally Posted by vibbs (Post 2919865)

Thankyou Skandyhere. I first assumed it could be the exposure but then I tried with a faster speed too. Yesterday was pretty clear and the moon too was huge so technically it should have come out well. The only difference I can think of is that I yesterday used a tripod whereas the other day I had just set it on th balcony railing with support. Now maybe since the floor is slippery there is a small chance that under the weight of the cam the tripod legs are probably flexing just a little bit and hense the issue. But when even with a very high speed I couldn't get the results is when I started looking for reasons like dirty lens or camera sensor. Just wanted to rule those out.

A dirty lens (read some really visible fungus growth) or dust in the sensor won't be affecting your image sharpness at all.

You are getting less sharp images probably because the focus is not right - try with manual focus as well. Otherwise it could be a structural damage happened to the lens by which it lost its axial symmetry slightly?

It could even be that you are using a wider aperture now, than the earlier trial. Moreover, if you use fast shutter speeds like 1/800s, you won't needing a tripod to get the moon right. (In case of a bright moon)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Champion (Post 2919926)

Dear joslicx, unfortunately I already bought the camera with the 18-55 and 55-200 lens. I shall certainly note the lens you have written about and perhaps if I do find the present ones inadequate (low possibilty considering I am a learner), I would get them. Thanks all the same.

Cheers
Champ

Hi Champ. The 18-55 is quite good and it is all you'd need indoors. 55-200 is more of a travel lens. You should still invest in a prime lens as primes are much sharper than any zoom lens and 35mm is the best one for crop sensor cameras for general photography. This lens is rated at f/1.8 so its much faster than the 18-55 which will make lot of difference if there is not enough light. It only costs about 12k so quite affordable. I am also getting the D7000 and the 35mm only (will add either 18-200 or a 16-85 lens later)

If you are gonna use a tripod then do not forget to switch off VR when using your 18-55 or 55-200. VR is to be used only when shooting handheld.

Quote:

Originally Posted by joslicx (Post 2920121)

Thank you joslicx, I was just about to enquire about the VR switch when you clarified. I'll keep that in mind. Looks like I will have to go through the booklet to find out more about what this DSLR could do. One learning curve, and I hope I enjoy it.

Cheers
Champ

Quote:

Originally Posted by vibbs (Post 2919865)

Like clevermax mentions, I think it could be either a wide open aperture at the lens' limits where the image is generally soft, or at a very small aperture (though unlikely going by what you've said about shutter speed) which causes softness due to diffraction. Are you sure the exposure was spot-on? It's easy to overexpose the moon in which case too, image sharpness could 'appear' less than ideal.