Author Topic: What new simple DSLR?  (Read 14559 times)

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: What new simple DSLR?
« Reply #75 on: 22 August, 2016, 11:06:51 am »
Hope you have fun.
Getting there...

Ben T

Re: What new simple DSLR?
« Reply #76 on: 23 August, 2016, 04:13:46 pm »
Thanks for all the advice, on this thread, especially that to ditch preconceived ideas. Lots of learning also over and above the original question.
I quite like the G7, it seems a really clever camera. I seem to be able to access the advanced features that adjust exposure whilst still benefitting from the automaticness. For instance, it seems pretty easy to choose which item in a scene to focus on without even needing to use the MF dial.

That Pana 10:1 zoom does have an excellent reputation, more than decent image quality and remarkably compact.  It's one of the best of its type in any interchangable lens system.

And you can use it to find where your personal 'sweet spot' is in terms of focal length.  After you've taken a hundred shots or so, analyse the focal lengths you're using the most.  Then you might consider getting a 'better' lens that majors on that length (though it would probably be expensive).  For example I've always known my own 'sweet spot' is around the 40-45mm mark (on a Panasonic, so that's 85mm in old money - the classic 'portrait' focal length though I never ever shoot portraits).  That might lead me to lust after the 42.5mm prime, but actually (a) I'm too mean and (b) I value the convenience of zooms very highly, so the little 35-100 zoom suits me very well.

Yes that's a good idea, 'cos you can see what focal length was used in the details. Cheers.

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: What new simple DSLR?
« Reply #77 on: 23 August, 2016, 04:40:20 pm »
Wildlife photography (including Ducks) is just about the most challenging form of photography (and one I don't really enjoy.  Too much reliance on gear and patience).

I know this about it though. There are only 2 rules of basic Wildlife photography:

Rule 1 - If it's not 100% tack sharp it's crap.
Rule 2 - You must always remember rule 1

In that respect you almost always need a high shutter speed so 1/1300 is fine.  Sharp with image-noise beats blurred without image-noise so set camera to >1/1000 and let the camera sort the rest out.

The Duck looks sharp to me (Feathers are a nightmare for revealing when you didn't get it spot on) and the water droplets look frozen.
Birds are bastards for not keeping still.  A Camera's LCD is rarely good enough to reveal the tiny amounts of motion-blur that render a wildlife photo useless.
Image-stabilisation helps to some extent but not if the bird is moving quickly/jerkily, that always needs high shutter speeds.

If you can't get all of a subject sharp (let's say you use a big bright telephoto lens, then you MUST get the eyes sharp, at the expense of everything else).
You can always get creative I suppose but get the eyes tack sharp and you'll be forgiven most everything else. Get that focus point over the eye.

Congrats on your new toy.

100% tack sharp. (I was helped by the fact that the Eagle was secured to a post with a tether at a Hampshire Hawk Conservancy.. but let's pretend it's looking for prey in Northern Minnesota and I had waited for 3 months in a hide).



If you check the EXIF data you'll see I broke most of my own rules for this photo.. but it wasn't moving very much at all.
Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

Ben T

Re: What new simple DSLR?
« Reply #78 on: 23 August, 2016, 05:32:26 pm »
Yeah, I see the value of sharpness - (I'm presuming that just means "in focus" right? i.e. the opposite of blurred)

Strangely I don't get any EXIF data in the downloaded file, maybe google strips it out? there isn't in mine either but there is in the original files, and if you go to the album (linked on previous page) it's there.
The eagle photo's great.
(Helps that you're either close / zoomed in enough to chop out the 'visitor centre this way' sign ;) ;) )
What approx. distance were you from it / focal length?

What (even with EXIF data  :) ) you can't tell about that duck photo* is that it was the best of about 20 shot in quick succession over a period of about 3 seconds using burst mode. Lots of almost-identical-but-not-quite-as-good ones either side just got deleted.

* that you could call "cheating" but I call it using the technology that's available...


Woofage

  • Tofu-eating Wokerati
  • Ain't no hooves on my bike.
Re: What new simple DSLR?
« Reply #79 on: 23 August, 2016, 06:06:09 pm »
Yeah, I see the value of sharpness - (I'm presuming that just means "in focus" right? i.e. the opposite of blurred)

Not just perfectly in focus but free of any motion blur as a result of either subject movement or camera shake - hence the need for a fast shutter.
Pen Pusher

rogerzilla

  • When n+1 gets out of hand
Re: What new simple DSLR?
« Reply #80 on: 23 August, 2016, 06:06:56 pm »
That eagle gets molested by the local buzzards.  It's quite funny.  Crows molest buzzards, buzzards molest bald eagles, bald eagles molest Nazgûl.
Hard work sometimes pays off in the end, but laziness ALWAYS pays off NOW.

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: What new simple DSLR?
« Reply #81 on: 23 August, 2016, 06:32:17 pm »
That eagle gets molested by the local buzzards.  It's quite funny.  Crows molest buzzards, buzzards molest bald eagles, bald eagles molest Nazgûl.

Some years back, when they flew a couple of Condors in from a few miles away, you could see local Blackbirds harassing them. Quite a mismatch.

Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: What new simple DSLR?
« Reply #82 on: 23 August, 2016, 06:33:33 pm »
Yeah, I see the value of sharpness - (I'm presuming that just means "in focus" right? i.e. the opposite of blurred)

Not just perfectly in focus but free of any motion blur as a result of either subject movement or camera shake - hence the need for a fast shutter.

Exactly that.

Hence rigs like this..



Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.