Team-BHP - The DSLR Thread

Superb pictures there, Nilay! In order to get at an under exposed picture, one can first understand the correct exposure for that lighting / scene and then dial down aperture or shutter speed or ISO to make the picture darker. These might be different techniques to have the same end result. I perfer to get my required exposure without using exposure compensation and use the exposure compensation to make only slight adjustments like a 1/3 or a 1/2 stop. Anything more than 1 stop exposure compensation can be dialed into the camera using Av/Tv and ISO. Maybe the school of thought is different.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeroen (Post 3292811)

Not necessarily. On most cameras you can still keep it on auto and use the various settings to adjust, i.e. EV compensation, flash intensity. It really depends on how you want to light a topic, depth of view etc. Just experiment a bit.

For most of my photograhy I use aperture control and auto focus.
I would use full manual control on aperture, shutter and ISO perhaps under certain conditions where I would use flash or for instance when taking multiple photographs for a panorama and or collage type of photograph.

That's the only way to ensure consistent lighting conditions across multiple frames.

I've been experimenting quite a bit with HDR and I typically shoot 5 frames, autobracketing in aperture mode, fixed ISO and 0.5 steps. On my camera I can program various set modes so I can change from my regular aperture mode to HDR mode at the push of a button, very convenient.

I rarely use manual focus, unless for whatever the reason, auto focus won't work. I do use the various auto focus modes a lot though. Spot, average metering etc. etc.

Even in Aperture mode I typically always dial in -0.5EV compensation. Reason being I shoot everything in RAW to start with and I find this tends to give me a bit more room to play with once I load it into Photoshop and start editing. Easier to adjust the ever so slightly dark bits, then to adjust the ones that are to bright.

Jeroen

Joren, even in manual mode, you do can do auto focus. Most of the folks dial in a +1EV to get the maximum information from the light and this technique is known as - 'expose to the right' or ETTR. Read more here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposing_to_the_right

Regarding flash usage, when you are going off camera with a manual flash, you have to be within sync speed. so you have to remain with 1/200th or else you will begin to see banding in your photos. With aperture priority, you loose the contol over the shutter speed. (You don't want too long a shutter to create motion blur). Flash intensity or flash power can be manually dialed into the flash as required. The key is to get a completely dark/black photo and then light the area that you want with a flash. It is easier to get a completely dark photo in the manual mode, rather than with exposure compensation rather than with aperture priority. May be one can use the Shutter priority and dial in a 1/200 and then play with ISO and aperture.

Quote:

Originally Posted by govigov (Post 3293160)

I'm not sure what triggered your first remark, but I agree that manual mode (aperture/shutter mode etc) is completely independent of auto and or manual focus. At least on all the cameras I'm familiar with.

On the expose to the right; this is probably one of the most controversial topics in photography that I know. Even your Wikipedia mentions this and provides various links to other approaches. Whole forums have been filled with the pro/cons and different approaches, so I don't think we're going to solve it in this one thread here.

So let's just say I'm of a different school of thought. I expose, a little bit, to the left.

In essence you can recover only some from highlight areas, so better be safe than sorry and expose to the left as it becomes easier to recover.

See for instance: http://prolost.com/blog/2008/3/2/exp...the-right.html

I'm not going to say one is better than the other. It's probably to a large extend a personnel preference and or believe. I was taught "expose to the left" by a professional photographer in my home country. But then even the professionals don't agree on what's best.

it works very well for me, fit for purpose as I'd like to think:

http://www.india.jeroendorrestein.co...a/Welcome.html

Just enjoy and experiment to your hearts content!

Jeroen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeroen (Post 3293482)

When you expose to the right (ETR) you are trying to use the full dynamic range of the sensor. The only problem is that the histogram for RBG may not show the whole picture and you have to check each colour R,B,G individually if you do not want to avoid the blown highlights, which cannot be recovered.

The Nikon D600 and D800 have one of the wides DR and colour depths available in commercial cameras, a bit to the left (say 1 bit) will still leave enough DR to recover the shadow details while not blowing the high lights. One method suggested for these two cameras is to meter the brightest area and then do shadow recovery in post processing. You have to shoot RAW for this.

If you want the best shot out of the camera and shoot only jpeg then the only recourse while shooting scenes with wide DR, is to decide what you want metered - the bright areas or the dark and expose accordingly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gd1418 (Post 3295711)

I recently acquired a new piece of hardware - The NIKON AF-I NIKKOR ED 300mm f/2.8 IF Lens.

Well it is used, but well-maintained and yes, I didn't have to sell my kidney for this. The new one "G" with VRII costs a bomb..! Boy, this weighs a ton....phew.

Have put my Nikkor 300mm/f4D for sale. It is listed in the classifieds section here.

Congrats GD Saab on your new piece of equipment. Hoping to see some cracking shots with this lens. Just one concern, hasn't nikon stopped supporting all AF-I lenses due to an exhausted stock of spare parts for AF-I lenses should you need support especially for the AF related support.

Folks,

Had to share a humorous post by someone in DPreview:). Link is here. posting in full.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3577808?page=2

"You on DX and a buddy on FX go shoot lions

The lion decides you both are meals and charges.You are 1.5 ahead and survives

Your wife using a suprerzoom point and shoot films everything in the comfort and safety of the landrover

Wife sells footage to cnn and buys a better superzoom for herself and a nice FX for you and takes you on another safari."

On a separate note, some Mansurov articles make me "!!!". Some illogical arguments when discussing DX vs. FX for wildlife shooting. Not that his wildlife photos are that good - when compared to expert wildlife shooters out there.

Being in Delhi/NCR, I cannot comment on the B'lore scenario. You can try FlipKart, JJMehta and even Ebay. With an used lens there is always a risk if bought online since one can't physically inspect till it arrives.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Me-hul (Post 3295792)

Which is a good and safe place to buy used lens'? I am on lookout for one but a little hesitant as I am no expert in lens', so chances of landing up with a defective piece is quite high.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPARKled (Post 3295798)

Here is the first shot from the new lens. A candid picture taken at 1/30 at f/2.8 at ISO 1250. The person in the picture doesn't know that he was being photographed. He was sitting in a park with friends basking in the Sun. The sunlight was illuminating one side of his face while the rest of the body was in shade. Hence I had to boost the ISO to get a decent shutter speed to take this picture in hand-held mode. I was amazed at the quality of the optics of this 'old' lens.

Comments & views about the picture.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gd1418 (Post 3297231)

Thank you SPARKled. I guess Nikon has stopped supporting AF-1 lenses but am not sure. This is a risk that one will have to live with. If such a situation arises then I'll have to reinvent the wheel and go back to manual focussing days that I used to do earlier when AF was not introduced..:)

Here is the first shot from the new lens. A candid picture taken at 1/30 at f/2.8 at ISO 1250. The person in the picture doesn't know that he was being photographed. He was sitting in a park with friends basking in the Sun. The sunlight was illuminating one side of his face while the rest of the body was in shade. Hence I had to boost the ISO to get a decent shutter speed to take this picture in hand-held mode. I was amazed at the quality of the optics of this 'old' lens.

Comments & views about the picture.

GD saab, To get a sharp photo at 1/30 with a 300 2.8 and that too handheld without vr is a feat for supermen. That's all I can say, and yes its sharp with a lovely oof area.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gd1418 (Post 3295711)

I recently acquired a new piece of hardware - The NIKON AF-I NIKKOR ED 300mm f/2.8 IF Lens..

Quote:

Originally Posted by gd1418 (Post 3297231)

Here is the first shot from the new lens. A candid picture taken at 1/30 at f/2.8 at ISO 1250.

GD, I don't know the first thing about photography but me thinks that you are cropping your photos much too tight. In the process you are snipping a little off along the edges (like the man's hair).

For us common joes to truly understand the size of the monster lens a more common object like a ball point pen and a little more wide angle perspective (in the photos of the lens) would have helped.

Navin, what makes you think that I cropped this picture? This all what I could fit in the frame at that time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by navin (Post 3299573)

GD, I don't know the first thing about photography but me thinks that you are cropping your photos much too tight. In the process you are snipping a little off along the edges (like the man's hair).

Hope this helps in visualising the "monster" and I don't use a ball point. :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by navin (Post 3299573)

For us common joes to truly understand the size of the monster lens a more common object like a ball point pen and a little more wide angle perspective (in the photos of the lens) would have helped.