Jump to content

Learning photography


Droozy
 Share

Recommended Posts

depends on case by case la... large aperture can reduce noise might appear in high iso...
[dizzy][dizzy]

Large aperture is useful for taking candid or street photography. For still life like night city photography, any camera with long exposure also can take good quality with lowest ISO.

 

To me, camera is just a tool. Expensive camera may not produce good photos.

Edited by Megaweb
↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimately it's the (high) ISO that contributes to noise in the pictures. Not the large/small aperture. The advantage of large aperture is the luxury of using a faster shutter speed, to avoid handshake or subject blur.

 

But having said that, let's not forget that DOF control is also very important!

 

High ISO ? you sure ?

 

TS is refering to still life night photography and not human photography in low lighting. Why need to use large aperture ? dizzy.gif

 

depends on case by case la... large aperture can reduce noise might appear in high iso...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can share which country did you get the 17-55 from? The 24-85 F/3.5-4.5 is a underrated lens, pretty sharp!

 

The 18-200VR so far is the most versatile lens, only shortcoming is the sharpness and smaller aperture.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neutral Newbie
Photography is an expensive hobby [:/]

 

the cost really depends on your point of view.

 

if you ask me to spend a few $ks on a bicycle, I would really really think about it. But if you ask a bike enthusiast (sp?) the same question, he probably wouldn't hesitate to say 'why not?'

 

but of course, I've thought about getting the 17-55 for a long long while before deciding to go for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neutral Newbie

ah yes, DOF. forgot abt that.

 

especially important if you're talking about taking portraits. you'd want your background to be as out of focus as possible. some pple call it bokeh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neutral Newbie

depends on case by case la... large aperture can reduce noise might appear in high iso...

[dizzy][dizzy]

Large aperture is useful for taking candid or street photography. For still life like night city photography, any camera with long exposure also can take good quality with lowest ISO.

 

To me, camera is just a tool. Expensive camera may not produce good photos.

 

it really depends on what you want out of your camera. if you require your camera to give you both jpeg and raw, then you'd probably need a more expensive camera. also, if you require GPS input, no. of frames per second, etc.

 

have you seen the photos taken by the D3 or D300 ? the photos taken at hi ISO (1600 and above) settings are simply unbelievable. Almost like taken at ISO 400.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neutral Newbie

i got mine from the US. waited for a long time before successfully bidding for it.

 

the 24-85 is truly under-rated, but no point for me to keep it. but focusing, not as fast as my 17-55 [sly] of course, the 17-55 has got silent wave motor.

 

the 18-200 wins hats down on convenience. good for travelling. with VR2, the small aperture is not really a problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it really depends on what you want out of your camera. if you require your camera to give you both jpeg and raw, then you'd probably need a more expensive camera. also, if you require GPS input, no. of frames per second, etc.

 

have you seen the photos taken by the D3 or D300 ? the photos taken at hi ISO (1600 and above) settings are simply unbelievable. Almost like taken at ISO 400.

 

I only believe pro cam good for sport photography. Whether shots are nice or not is still depend on photographer.

 

I am not interested in D3 or D300. Are you the user of the nikon group? Why not show us you nice photos instead of the expensive tool [laugh]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neutral Newbie

for me, what is important is the composition. what do you want your photos to show/tell. my dream was to become a photojournalist. like those taking war photos in WWII. hahah. dream only lah. really respect those photogs that risk there lives to bring us the real picture.

 

nowadays, technology is impt, if you want to bring your news fast

(using wireless) to the millions of pple who are hungry for news (internet or print). so those pros may have to invest in expensive cameras. of course, not me lah.

 

I mentioned D3 / D300 is to show that technology has really advanced to such an extend that noise is now irrelavant (comparatively).

 

user of nikon group? i frequently browse CS's forums but don't usually contribute in terms of postings. I look at how those good photogs compose their photos and learn from them.

 

nice photos? [laugh] no lah. me still learning. share share comments can lah.

 

photo-genius.blogspot.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

depends on case by case la... large aperture can reduce noise might appear in high iso...

[dizzy][dizzy]

Large aperture is useful for taking candid or street photography. For still life like night city photography, any camera with long exposure also can take good quality with lowest ISO.

 

To me, camera is just a tool. Expensive camera may not produce good photos.

 

seriously what's a still life night city photography?? still life or just night landscape?

 

could u define for me?

Link to post
Share on other sites

still life is something that dun move like buildings and landscape. Why use high ISO to take building shots ?

 

Proper technique used should be using a tripod and shutter release cable or timer mode to prevent any movement while taking still life shots. Of course use small aperture for wider DOF.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want a PnS camera with the best low-light performance, then you shld look at this offering from FujiFilm. It's arguably the best PnS camera for low-light photography currently. [:)]

 

 

can take porn shots for me?

Link to post
Share on other sites

fully agree mega!!!

it's about how the photographer uses whatever tools he had at the time to capture the way he wanted the photo to be. so what an ISO1600 shot looks like taken with ISO400??

instead of talking about what the camera can do, why not talk about how to take photos?

 

it really depends on what you want out of your camera. if you require your camera to give you both jpeg and raw, then you'd probably need a more expensive camera. also, if you require GPS input, no. of frames per second, etc.

 

have you seen the photos taken by the D3 or D300 ? the photos taken at hi ISO (1600 and above) settings are simply unbelievable. Almost like taken at ISO 400.

 

I only believe pro cam good for sport photography. Whether shots are nice or not is still depend on photographer.

 

I am not interested in D3 or D300. Are you the user of the nikon group? Why not show us you nice photos instead of the expensive tool [laugh]

Link to post
Share on other sites

It can take night photography. Any cameras can.

Only the final results.

 

For pana, its known to have high noise level for night shots at higher ISO.

I've seen some previews. quite bad actually. Even though photoshop can help correct this. But still, I think a lot of work needs to be done.

 

Rgds

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...