Photography and video recording

A place where you can chat about anything that isn't to do with games!
neorichieb1971
Posts: 7679
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:28 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Photography and video recording

Post by neorichieb1971 »

Does anyone on this forum have a little time to explain ISO speeds in photography?


If you have low light conditions (twilight) would you use higher or lower ISO speed?
If you are moving the camera by free-hand does the ISO speed affect anything?


Wiki is quite good at explaining but I am not sure what half of it means. I need laymans terms of how/why/when you change the settings.


Also this camera i'm thinking of buying (Sony NEX-7) does 1080p/60 AVCHD 2.0. Is this the same as AVCHD (.m2ts / .mts) ? (Want PS3 playback without conversion).

I don't think youtube allows 60fps, does it downgrade the image to 30fps?


Thanks for any help on this subject... :)

Richie.
This industry has become 2 dimensional as it transcended into a 3D world.
User avatar
GaijinPunch
Posts: 15661
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:22 pm
Location: San Fransicso

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by GaijinPunch »

neorichieb1971 wrote:Does anyone on this forum have a little time to explain ISO speeds in photography?


If you have low light conditions (twilight) would you use higher or lower ISO speed?
HIGHER.
Here's what you need to know about light and photography.

Aperture (this is the width that the "blades" leave when the shutter opens. I think that's what the equivalent number is in mm but don't hold me to that. But any rate lower number = "wider" aperture = more light is let in = "faster" image. You will notice lenses with "wide aperture" with a much larger price tags. Primes that boast 1.4, etc. can easily be $1000. Zooms with 2.8... same story.

ISO: This is the tricky one b/c the higher you jack this, the shittier your picture will look. It uses electricity AFAIK, which causes noise. Cameras that can handle > 800 ISO without shit-fucking your picture are expensive.

Shutter Speed: This one should be obvious. The faster this goes, the less light is let in. If your shutter isn't fast enough, youll get motion blur and other shitty stuff.
If you are moving the camera by free-hand does the ISO speed affect anything?
Video question... not really for me. However, all the stuff above can be changed if the light composition changes (which happens when you move the camera). I assume video-ing is just a whole new nightmare.

EDIT: Note that aperture directly affects the depth of field. THose wide apertures of 1.4 are razor thin. In laymans terms, at 1.4 you could shoot a portrait of a person at a 45 degree angle w/ the eye closest to you as the focal point. The other eye would most likely not be in focus. Raise this up to 5.6 and the depth of focus is about half a mile, so not a problem. However, the shutter speed will have to be decreased substantially... but several fold, actually, to compose the same image.
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
neorichieb1971
Posts: 7679
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:28 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by neorichieb1971 »

GaijinPunch wrote:
neorichieb1971 wrote:Does anyone on this forum have a little time to explain ISO speeds in photography?


If you have low light conditions (twilight) would you use higher or lower ISO speed?
HIGHER.
Here's what you need to know about light and photography.

Aperture (this is the width that the "blades" leave when the shutter opens. I think that's what the equivalent number is in mm but don't hold me to that. But any rate lower number = "wider" aperture = more light is let in = "faster" image. You will notice lenses with "wide aperture" with a much larger price tags. Primes that boast 1.4, etc. can easily be $1000. Zooms with 2.8... same story.

ISO: This is the tricky one b/c the higher you jack this, the shittier your picture will look. It uses electricity AFAIK, which causes noise. Cameras that can handle > 800 ISO without shit-fucking your picture are expensive.

Shutter Speed: This one should be obvious. The faster this goes, the less light is let in. If your shutter isn't fast enough, youll get motion blur and other shitty stuff.
If you are moving the camera by free-hand does the ISO speed affect anything?
Video question... not really for me. However, all the stuff above can be changed if the light composition changes (which happens when you move the camera). I assume video-ing is just a whole new nightmare.

EDIT: Note that aperture directly affects the depth of field. THose wide apertures of 1.4 are razor thin. In laymans terms, at 1.4 you could shoot a portrait of a person at a 45 degree angle w/ the eye closest to you as the focal point. The other eye would most likely not be in focus. Raise this up to 5.6 and the depth of focus is about half a mile, so not a problem. However, the shutter speed will have to be decreased substantially... but several fold, actually, to compose the same image.

Thanks GP, trying to get my head around this stuff. I see what your saying about ISO speed and aperture but it sounds awfully experimental. In low light conditions my camera is awful. But I have no clue what i'm doing lol. At least I know I need to set the apeture and ISO speed now.

When I said Quote:
If you are moving the camera by free-hand does the ISO speed affect anything?
I meant in photography terms not video. If the object your capturing is a race horse panning from left to right you would have to pan with it or alternatively capture it in the frame by luck. I meant the former.

Ironically the video on my camera gives better results in dark than it does with pictures. Something I don't quite understand but I'm sure a logical explanation exists for it.

This is the camera I want (its small/compact and has just about everything on it http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/stores ... 1666375235). I want 1080p/60 playback mainly but looking to take some serious pictures.
This industry has become 2 dimensional as it transcended into a 3D world.
User avatar
GaijinPunch
Posts: 15661
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:22 pm
Location: San Fransicso

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by GaijinPunch »

To get good pictures (low noise) hand held in low light, you're going to have to get entry-level pro stuff. Even mid-range DSLRs get noisy early on... 800 being somewhat tolerable. Examples below.

As for your question: the biggest thing to fear when shooting handheld is the shutter speed. However, the shutter speed relies on aperture and ISO. For a horse race, you're going to need a fast shutter speed (1/several hundred). For a walking person at a moderate distance, 1/80 or so *might* work. Depends on speed.

The Tachikoma below was taken with an Canon 5D Mark II at about ISO 5000 (maybe 4000) which is known for excellent ISO performance, but is not a good sports camera. Only 3.9 FPS and the auto focus leaves a lot to be desired.

The girl walking unfortunately wasn't uploaded at higher res so it's hard to see the noise, but was shot at ISO 800, and at about F1.8... maybe 1.4 The guys behind her are way out of focus. I believe it was 1/80s but even so, I got motion-blur on her hand.

Image
Tachikoma DJing on the A&H Xone 4D by gaijin_punch, on Flickr

Image
In a Hurry (2) by gaijin_punch, on Flickr
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
neorichieb1971
Posts: 7679
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:28 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by neorichieb1971 »

I know this is an old thread but still not bought a dedicated photo camera.

I want to get a Sony A6000 sometime soon. But was wondering if I should get the camera with the kit or without the kit.

I plan to buy a premium lense out of these 2 -

Sony FE 55mm f/1.8 ZA lens $1000 (or cheaper Sony SEL50F18 E 50mm f/1.8 OSS E Mount Lens $300)

The $300 model is stated as a portrait lense. But not sure if this type of lense works for everything or just cat pictures. Not sure why the lenses have such differing price points either.

The 18-55 kit that comes with the camera as a bundle (with extra cost) states that I can be nearer the target than with the 2 pre mentioned lenses. I don't see this as a problem as my targets will hardly ever be close up.

I plan to take pictures of cars, trains, the sky, holiday snaps. So the most demanding of my interests would be moving cars and trains.

I've not owned a pro camera before. So could anyone enlighten me on if you have to take the lense off after each usage? Does the camera and lense usually fit in the carry case still intact?

I noticed with quite a few photographers that shoot video at the same time (with a camcorder) that most DSLR's have very annoying clicking sounds. Is this an option you can turn off?

I will be shooting exclusively in 16:9.

Sorry for lots of questions. But most of my questions are not covered in reviews. I don't even know how long the battery life is on these things. I chose the A6000 because its relatively compact and I need to fit a tripod and camcorder in my ruck sack at the same time.

Thanks for any tips.
This industry has become 2 dimensional as it transcended into a 3D world.
User avatar
jandrogo
Posts: 255
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 11:51 pm
Location: Spain

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by jandrogo »

neorichieb1971, why have you chosen the a6000 against other compact mirrorless compact cameras?

I own a Nikon d3100 dslr, it takes amazing pics but last year I bought a 18-200 lens and camera is now really heavy and uncomfortable to carry in holydays... so I want a camera with all the dslr advantages (manual adjustments, interchangeable lens, viewfinder, etc..) but in a smaller body...

The a6000 seems a really good option, but I don't rely much on Sony

Positive/negative opinions about the a6000... and any good alternatives with viewfinder?
Working in the japanese language achievement
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by Ed Oscuro »

A note about setting ISO in dark conditions: You can't just say "increase ISO when it's dark." It depends on what you're taking a photo of. As a rule of thumb, I only change ISO last - after I can't change aperture or exposure time, but ISO also needs to be high enough that you get enough data to keep the image looking clean (the histogram view should show a large amount of data on the right; if this looks a bit too bright, darken it later). A camera which shows the built-in exposure meter's reading (measuring how bright the scene is, and then displays this as a little icon on a scale) can help you decide how to change your exposure. Example: If you're trying to take a photo of backlit clouds at sunset, some cameras using certain metering settings will decide to try and make the leaves of surrounding trees look as green as in daytime, which will completely ruin the picture. On the other hand, if you are in a dark restaurant, you won't likely mind if a few small lightbulbs in the picture go totally white (even if they just look orange in person) when it's necessary to brighten the rest of the image to bring out details. Most likely, 90%+ of your time taking photos of things in darkness will mean that you'll be trying to brighten the scene in general, but be wary of brightly lit things, especially if they are the focus of your image.

The reason this is such a problem for cameras is that the push to more sensors with better ISO sensitivity has not been accompanied by similar improvement in the range from the darkest to lightest things that the sensor can pick up. Cameras can only pick up a relatively narrow range, and while it's at least as good as our eyes, our brains compensate for this and we remember dark and bright parts of scenes at the same time, experiencing it as a single view, and we expect cameras to do this as well. To try, some cameras have bracketing (multiple shots) or in-camera HDR modes, and they might be worth a shot.

More general thoughts about choosing a camera:

I think that most people can get by fine these days with compact cameras or even phone cameras. There are a few phone cameras that have sensors bigger than some compact or even mirrorless cameras - rare, but the size of the sensor is the main thing that determines image quality, including how well you can take images of darker scenes. If you want to take photos of dark things, generally you should get the biggest camera you can! (i.e., the biggest sensor and the lenses with the widest aperture.)

About the Sony a6000 - I don't have any comments on this camera in particular other than the price tag - compare it carefully to other brands, especially Nikon (cheap V1 and expensive J1 offerings) and Canon offerings (EOS M3). A lot of people swear by Olympus and Panasonic (Lumix) cameras in the mirrorless segment, too.

When in doubt, go to http://www.dpreview.com and look at some camera reviews, paying attention to the final scores sheet and closing comments.

The tricky thing about mirrorless cameras is that they're basically just a smaller DSLR without a viewfinder prism and hump (unless it's an electric viewfinder, lol). They work best if you want to change lenses (and there are good lenses on offer), or you want the camera to be as large as possible without adding a viewfinder, mirror, or the DSLR level of bulk and weight. If you buy a mirrorless camera just to use one lens, that can be fine too, but a bridge or compact camera's lens will likely give a wider range without being much less quality.

Generally speaking: More camera = more image quality, but more bulk and expense. Note that a camera with a permanently bolted-on lens can be really convenient, and in many scenes it won't appreciably lose image quality over bigger cameras. At the same time, there are some phones and phone-sized devices coming out with physically large sensors that should rival the quality of mirrorless cameras. (Note that size = something like 3/8 inch, not 21 megapixels, which isn't a measure of the physical size.) The EOS M3 has an APS-C size sensor - which is the same size as most DSLRs use.

In short, a lot depends on what you think you want to actually do with a camera. There is no one-size-fits-all camera.
User avatar
Stompp
Posts: 384
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:51 am
Location: Sweden

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by Stompp »

neorichieb1971 wrote:I noticed with quite a few photographers that shoot video at the same time (with a camcorder) that most DSLR's have very annoying clicking sounds. Is this an option you can turn off?
You already got some great info from Ed :) About the clicking sound when taking pictures with a DSLR (or any SLR), no you can't get rid of it since that's the sound from the mirror getting flipped up so that the sensor (or film) can be exposed to the light.
neorichieb1971
Posts: 7679
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:28 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by neorichieb1971 »

I chose the a6000 because it sits as a mid range camera that has given impressive reviews. I don't circulate in the photography realms in any shape or form. I have depended on this forum and amazon reviews. I was gravitated towards the Sony offerings when they were called NEX because people stated the results were amazing for the size of the camera. To be honest I just want a click and shoot camera that will do the horse work for me. I trust Sony because their cameras do great video as well, I know their file structures and formats, I know that moviemaker has no trouble and no conversions are required. I won't be using the camera for video most of the time though as I have a Panasonic for that purpose. I believe if you want all the bells and whistles the A7000 is regarded very highly. The MP count is stupidly high but I don't think it counts for much these days if your screen is only 1080 or whatever.. Seems a bit overkill to me. I noticed most Canon and Nikon users stick to 4:3 ratio but I am not sure if this is a restriction or a choice.

Ed.. Whilst your knowledge is much better than mine I think when your shooting a moving target you need to prepare the shot before your target arrives. This may well prove difficult because sun conditions can change on you at the last second. I will not be doing many shots on stationary objects or landscape scenery unless the view takes my fancy. My primary focus is on trains and unless your at a station you cannot get a 2nd go or 3rd go. From what I've seen in my hobby most people get very reasonable shots by just clicking away. When I get the camera I will most likely experiment with different lighting and see what gives.

There is a great site called pbase.com and you can view pictures of any camera there. Unfortunately though you never ever see pictures of the same material to make side by side comparisons. Its really a tough call. But since cameras haven't really developed much in 15 years or so I am not so sure that any camera I get will be much better or worse than any other.

Thanks for the heads up Stompp. Didn't know the sound was mechanical. Thought it was an audio clip for retro type users.
This industry has become 2 dimensional as it transcended into a 3D world.
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by Ed Oscuro »

That reminds me: If I had to choose just one system - either a stills camera or a video camera - and had to shoot both pictures and video, I'd prefer a camcorder.

Why? A camcorder is better for video by far, and I think these days they can all take stills (or, failing that, you can try pulling stills out of your captured footage later).

That said, some of the compacts / Lumix style cameras have a good reputation for video and might do reasonably well. For video, I'd say that having direct control of zoom and focus are must-have features - at least a power zoom button is necessary. With stills cameras, the lenses aren't good for video (with only a few exceptions).

A nice camcorder is on my "if somebody wins the lottery for me, because I don't waste money on tickets" list :lol:
neorichieb1971
Posts: 7679
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:28 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by neorichieb1971 »

Ed, do you have to attach the lense before use and separate it after use to store it again?

I already have a Panasonic camcorder that does everything you said. The HC-X800.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Panasonic-X800- ... B006U98G42

The problem is when I roll video I don't want to touch it. I usually film from a tripod and I don't like touching the unit because I hate wobbles on the final output. I might upgrade by Velbon tripod to the DV-7000 at some point.

Therefore if I have a A6000 or similar I can take snaps from a completely independent camera whilst the video is rolling on the camcorder and I get the best of both worlds.
This industry has become 2 dimensional as it transcended into a 3D world.
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by Ed Oscuro »

It sounds like doing multiple things at once is absolutely essential here, so I guess you aren't looking to get too complicated with squeezing features of video cameras into your stills camera, and vice versa. Having video capability on your handheld camera for b-roll type footage or alternate angles could be good, though, but that's up to you!

Any of these interchangeable lens cameras can and should be stored with the lens on. If you buy a single zoom and nothing else, you'd never have to replace it again. That said, if this is what you'd buy, I'd recommend looking at cameras with fixed lenses for the cost and space savings potential I mentioned earlier.

I understand about the video - there's a lot of stabilizers, some funky mechanical rigs, but there's also in-camera stabilization using gyroscopes, similar to what stabilized lenses use. Luckily, I found that Amazon seems to have a category dedicated to this feature to browse. I can't guarantee how well it'll work though! I don't expect many stills cameras have it, except for probably a fair number of bridge / compact type cameras. Of course, despite the flexibility of optical stabilization, it's often worse than useless on a tripod, and the tripod has its place still.

Sounds like you're going through a heck of a tech overhaul, we'll all be interested to hear how it works out!
User avatar
GaijinPunch
Posts: 15661
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:22 pm
Location: San Fransicso

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by GaijinPunch »

Speaking from (limited) experience with Sony cameras:

Cons: They don't have the build quality of Canon or Nikon, but this should be expected.
Pros: They have Zeiss lenses that auto focus. This is a big pro... even though I don't use auto focus.

I'd be weary about buying a 50mm as my only lens. Primes are awesome and I recommend anyone get used to using them, but 50mm can be limiting in tight spaces. I'm a 35mm guy myself. But don't take my word for it -- dick around with some and make a decision.
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
neorichieb1971
Posts: 7679
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:28 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by neorichieb1971 »

The Zeiss lense is $1000 and the other 55 lense is $300. I would have to know there is an extra $700 worth of pixels in there to justify that kind of cost.

I don't mind getting a Nikon or Canon camera but your going to have to guide me a bit since there are 1000's to choose from and I haven't a clue about any of them.

What I can say is that I prefer to shoot in native 1080 or above and at 16:9 ratio.
I don't require a view finder, I'm happy with a screen.
I would pay more for a camera that has a brain and do most of the work for me. Due to my targets being fast moving objects would prefer something that has a great burst mode.
Battery life must be decent because I go places where I cannot charge the battery. I usually buy a spare battery anyway.
I prefer the camera to be stored as one unit. Don't mind changing lenses every now and again but not for every shot as all my shots will be outdoors (and quite often from at least 20 feet away from target).



As for my posts regarding upgrading my tech world.. well.

I got some cash coming via shares that done really well (so far). But thats not all, I bought a house last October and I suddenly have the ability to buy things where I can express myself a bit. When you have one room at moms place you get by, but you can't be expressive.

The computer is not an upgrade, I only have a laptop at the moment so its something completely new. Got a desk from work for £5 as they literally give things away. It will house my computer, 2 screens and a framemeister and I will get out a few consoles and games to play around with there.
Got a Wharfedale subwoofer recently.. to go with my Oppo 103 Blu ray player, Pioneer amp.

Next up is curtains. I still use the pre existing curtains in my house that the last owner left behind.


The camera.. I need a 2nd camera is all. Might as well get a still camera as I already have a camcorder.

I can do a little blog of my things in the future.. I like little projects like that. I have a ton of shit accumulated over the years, so much that my arcade cabs, PCB's and a whole bunch of movies are still at my moms place.
This industry has become 2 dimensional as it transcended into a 3D world.
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by Ed Oscuro »

Can you give more information about what these fast-moving objects? Insects and jet aircraft both move fast, but relative to different things.

Likewise a big lens is just a big lens - I don't see the point in buying a fits-all zoom lens if you're willing to use a smaller zoom, or even a prime. When I started learning my camera I only had one prime lens 'cuz it was all I could afford, and while it forced me to put the camera in funny places sometimes, it was workable enough.

Some comments about the automatic modes and money: Even a pretty bad camera can be used to make great photos. It's also quite possible to have a very expensive camera and not be able to do much with it - in fact, the more expensive a camera gets, the simpler its controls, but the more skill required for its use!

However, the automatic modes have their place. When I went to the zoo today (40th year open today! chipmunks everywhere again) I was able to do most everything just changing a couple settings - the autofocus mode, the autofocus points, and the aperture (and ISO, but only a little - to me, that's just "free brightness, but at the cost of a little noise possibly" so I shoot at ISO 100 as much as possible). I didn't mess with shutter speed (because that's automatically controlled), but I knew it was there and had to take that into account. But it becomes second nature. I had to change the autofocus points (from small to big) because it's very easy to make the camera fight - asking it to lock onto targets that it can't see, or expecting it to lock onto targets when it wants to go with others.

The good news is that even with a fully automatic camera setup, you can probably predict pretty well what it's going to do, given enough time with it - though we are talking about a bunch of variables it's considering in a fully automatic mode. But often it'll be doing things you don't want to, so give a thought towards learning the controls a little.

Manual controls basically allow me to either set something up fully in advance of shooting (rare), or they let me forget a few variables before the camera starts making its own choices.
neorichieb1971
Posts: 7679
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:28 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by neorichieb1971 »

A friend of mine made these with his camera -
https://www.flickr.com/photos/modernrai ... otostream/

Mostly would be shooting trains from stations, over head bridges and line side in fields. Trains go up to 186mph but most only go to 100mph. I do have the train schedules online so I know when they are coming round the bend.

Would certainly like to take pics of everything though.
This industry has become 2 dimensional as it transcended into a 3D world.
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by Ed Oscuro »

Relative to the camera, trains move quite slowly and very predictably. They have lots of features that should allow a camera's autofocus to lock on easily.

It's tiny things like tree branches in the foreground, or flying birds that move erratically, that can confuse autofocus.

So I wouldn't worry too much about a big investment in autofocus for trainspotting.

Also, since trains can vary from being quite distant to very close, I'd say that you might be able to do well with a wide zoom or even just a wider lens. I would actually try my 50mm lens, which has a kind of tight-in perspective on a APS-C camera (a smaller camera will need a shorter focal length lens, smaller than 50mm, to get the same perspective). I don't know how you'd like to frame the trains, but my thought is that a wider lens will let you capture more of the train than a long one can. Of course, this isn't a hard rule; there will be times when a very long lens would be the right choice to take a photo of a train, or some small detail on a train. But if you want to capture the entire train, usually that will require a somewhat wide lens, and if it's right next to you, the widest angle lens possible.

If you have a minute, do an online image search for 'focal length distortion comparison' to see what happens to things at different focal lengths. Of course, a train is different than a close human face seen in lots of these shots, but in my example above of photographing a train close to you with a wide lens, the straight lines of the train boxwork may appear to curve, getting "wider" near the center of the image, because those parts are physically closer to the lens. A longer focal length lens taking the same photo will preserve the classic rectangle shapes of the train better. But again, there's no right or wrong perspective to shoot at, though the longer focal length lens' view better fits our perception of a train as having straight lines.
neorichieb1971
Posts: 7679
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:28 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by neorichieb1971 »

The thing I notice with still shots is that if the location of the shot is local I visit that place to video and its hopeless. The amount of zoom and the composure of the still shot gives a very different perspective than the naked eye. So your right about about just about everything you stated.

50mm lens seems very reasonable. I always take shots that get the whole train in the shot. I would only go close if the train was a light engine or very short to get extra details in the closer image.

Its a comfort to hear that auto focus is clever enough for this subject matter. I suppose I just have to watch for trees and swarms of birds. Don't think that will cause much a problem.

I will google that stuff you mentioned later since its late here now and I got to get my clothes ready for tomorrow. But thanks Ed.. very informative.
This industry has become 2 dimensional as it transcended into a 3D world.
User avatar
GaijinPunch
Posts: 15661
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:22 pm
Location: San Fransicso

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by GaijinPunch »

neorichieb1971 wrote:The Zeiss lense is $1000 and the other 55 lense is $300. I would have to know there is an extra $700 worth of pixels in there to justify that kind of cost.
This is your first error. The benefit is definitely not pixels. But, if you don't shoot a lot you might not notice the difference. Nothing wrong w/ that... it just takes time. Zeiss lenses though... they are amazing.
I don't mind getting a Nikon or Canon camera but your going to have to guide me a bit since there are 1000's to choose from and I haven't a clue about any of them.
I'm way out of the loop on those. ;)
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
User avatar
ED-057
Posts: 1560
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 7:21 am
Location: USH

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by ED-057 »

I've had photography on my brain recently. I have an old Konica point&shoot. Two of them actually, which is handy for making 3D stereo pairs. I also have a Vivitar camcorder which is some weird model that nobody's ever heard of and writes malformed AVI files which I had to create my own program to repair.

I thought it would be cool to get a DSLR and learn how to do things properly. I talked to a guy who uses a Canon EOS 5D MkII which he was a fan of, but I figured I would do just fine with an APS-C sensor and save some $$$. So I got an EOS 30D, which I find to be rather sexy. Of course it's not as advanced as, say a 7D, and is also missing the superfluous stuff that the latest entry level cameras seem to have like GPS, wireless networking, touch screens (have I ever mentioned that I hate touch screens?), facebook integration, iphone apps, etc.

I RTFM (200 pages), which I'd bet was translated from Japanese. It makes everything sound more complicated than it really is. The camera came with another book that I also read, and an 18-55mm IS lens which is said to be relatively good for a kit lens.

I got the plugin for Irfanview to open RAW files. I was surprised by how much CPU time it takes to open these things (it's even multithreaded!). I don't know if Irfanview actually utilizes more than 8 bits per channel so I don't know if there is any point to shooting RAWs just to open them in Irfanview.

I've always thought that it was useful to have JPEGs that were larger than my monitor resolution, because of chroma subsampling and general lossiness. What I was not aware of, until I looked at a (reverse engineered) description of the CR2 file format, is that an 8 megapixel camera doesn't have 8 million RGB pixels. It has 8 million monochrome ones, of which 25% are red, 25% are blue, and the remaining 50% are green. One might say it is equivalent to a 2.6MP monitor. So an 8MP camera is not really overkill for photos to be viewed on a 1600x1200 monitor.

One thing I haven't seen any explanation of yet is what the image stabilization feature in the lens does exactly.
neorichieb1971
Posts: 7679
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:28 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by neorichieb1971 »

One thing I haven't seen any explanation of yet is what the image stabilization feature in the lens does exactly.
On video its simple. The lens moves on a X-Y axis which gives the impression its not been rocked about as much.

Look at this go pro video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf16mp6Nbh8 (7 mins in on the skateboard)


Not sure if something exists for photography. But would imagine vibrations would cause blur. So it could be an anti-blur application.
This industry has become 2 dimensional as it transcended into a 3D world.
Ixmucane2
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 3:26 pm
Location: stuck at the continue prompt

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by Ixmucane2 »

ED-057 wrote:I don't know if Irfanview actually utilizes more than 8 bits per channel so I don't know if there is any point to shooting RAWs just to open them in Irfanview.
Why IrfanView? Many specialized image editors are designed to process and convert raw files from cameras, not merely able to load them:
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by Ed Oscuro »

First thing you want to do for that 30D is go here and download Digital Photo Professional (or at least check it out) *and* the new firmware for the camera, if it's not already installed:
https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/port ... lr/eos-30d

The thing about RAW is that it allows you more headroom to make changes later, like brightening or darkening an image, or dealing with noise. The file size does add up pretty quickly but with the ol' 30D it should be pretty manageable...I learned on the T1i, which was roughly on par with the 50D.

I also use Irfanview, but I use it for viewing, i.e. to sort out lost cause images more quickly than I could do in Digital Photo Pro. It's definitely not a replacement for DPP though.

Would be interested to see what the photos look like, I just hope the shutter hasn't been run into the ground - seems unlikely though, most people use these cameras sparingly. Someday I'd like to trade up from my 7D, and its shutter is still good...
User avatar
rapoon
Posts: 853
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 11:58 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by rapoon »

Ed, Gaijin, or anyone else:

Do you have experience w/ Tilt-Shift lens'? I'm looking for a <$1k alternative to Canons official offerings.
User avatar
GaijinPunch
Posts: 15661
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:22 pm
Location: San Fransicso

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by GaijinPunch »

rapoon wrote:Ed, Gaijin, or anyone else:

Do you have experience w/ Tilt-Shift lens'? I'm looking for a <$1k alternative to Canons official offerings.
Not actually touching or using, but there was a guy on one of the Canon forums that would shoot street shots with an 85mm (or so) tilt shift. Was pretty cool. Definitely not what it was made for.

You could always use the Instragram filter. :P
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
User avatar
ED-057
Posts: 1560
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 7:21 am
Location: USH

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by ED-057 »

Never used any photo editing software before, so Irfanview was the only thing I had on hand. I did just download Raw Therapee and Canon's stuff. Canon's download page only has "updaters" whereas I didn't get the original software CD, but after some searching I found out that adding a few registry keys is all it takes to get the installer to run (either that or downloading DPP 1.0 from the JP site and then updating that).

I had a raw shot of this PC AT motherboard which I pumped up the sharpness on. It's pretty clean for a handheld shot.

other photos:
some backlit fake birds
closeup of the fireplace
table with junk on it
old cat
street in the middle of the night

AFAICT there is no way to check the shutter count on a 30D. Working fine for now though.
User avatar
rapoon
Posts: 853
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 11:58 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by rapoon »

GaijinPunch wrote:
You could always use the Instragram filter. :P
this lens would be used exclusively for architectural photography. I've used software in the past to correct perspective distortions and results have varied. I'd rather just drop the $ on a lens. now it's just a matter of finding one that's affordable. =/
User avatar
ED-057
Posts: 1560
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 7:21 am
Location: USH

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by ED-057 »

I got a cheap 55-250 telephoto to play with. I wasn't sure if the AF would focus on the correct subject, so I focused manually for the first shot. Then I switched back to auto for a second shot (seen below), which ended up being remarkably sharp even at full res and easily better than the manual one. I probably don't have the diopter thingy set correctly though which may be a factor.
Image
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by Ed Oscuro »

rapoon wrote:Ed, Gaijin, or anyone else:

Do you have experience w/ Tilt-Shift lens'? I'm looking for a <$1k alternative to Canons official offerings.
I have a few of them, but they're all official Canon lens.

There are a few that are less than $1K. What focal length are you looking for?

I think Samyang or somebody made a few interesting lenses, but beyond that all I can remember is the lensbaby tilt...I wouldn't go with that.
User avatar
rapoon
Posts: 853
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 11:58 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Re: Photography and video recording

Post by rapoon »

Ed Oscuro wrote:
rapoon wrote:Ed, Gaijin, or anyone else:

Do you have experience w/ Tilt-Shift lens'? I'm looking for a <$1k alternative to Canons official offerings.
I have a few of them, but they're all official Canon lens.

There are a few that are less than $1K. What focal length are you looking for?

I think Samyang or somebody made a few interesting lenses, but beyond that all I can remember is the lensbaby tilt...I wouldn't go with that.


I'm glad you asked about the focal length because this is something I'm torn between. The lower focal lengths address the vertical distortion, but can create excessive depth distortion. I think the 45mm would be a nice middle ground, but a 24mm w/ an extension tube may work as well. I believe a 35mm was available at one time. I've no interest in "miniature effect", only architectural (primarily exterior) photography. I've read about the Samyang (and Rokinon). Reviews are poor and build quality is apparently shit (particularly in comparison to the Canon / Nikon). At the price of the off-brands, I'd simply opt for a used lens. What are the focal length of yours?

edit: I've been eyeballing the Zuiko 24mm f/3.5 SHIFT, several of which have been modified w/ a Nikon adapter, but I'm using a 6D. Could get a kindai adapter but results from other users vary.
Post Reply