The Learning Curve

[Pea-n-Me]

Oops, I added to the confusion. I meant to say f1.4, not f1.8.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

A few articles:

Lens Focal Length http://www.paragon-press.com/lens/lenchart.htm

Focal Length http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_length

F number http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number

Depth of Field http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field

Dis Thread:

Talk to me about FOCAL LENGTH like I'm a two year old

 

[Groucho]

I haven't checked this thread in a couple weeks but I saw in an email that my EE shot was mentioned so I'll poke my head back in.

RAW can mean very good things for overexposed photos, but there are limitations to how far it can be stretched (depending on what camera you are using). The thing you will notice on Groucho's EE shot is that the area around the sun is completely desaturated. This has to do with the level at which each color channel clips on the sensor. But then again, I'd definitely rather have an awesome photo with a small problem that only a fraction of people are going to notice rather than a photo for the trash Just pointing this out to demonstrate a point, I guess... no bash on your photo Groucho

No problem. I actually was able to adjust the size of the corona around the sun fairly freely in Lightroom, and decided to go with the look that you see in the "processed" photo.

To give an idea of what I did, here's the before (default settings, as imported into LR) and the after.

The WB was adjusted slightly, the exposure was bumped +0.95, recovery is set to 87 (this is mainly what adjusts the glow around the sun), fill light is 76, and highlights are -26. Blue was tweaked (saturation +43, luminance -17) to give the sky a deeper blue. I also added just a touch of noise reduction (in LR) just to clean up the areas that were dark in the original photo.

Basically, the bumped exposure and fill light brighten up the dark areas, and recovery and the highlights adjustment to bring back the areas that were now too bright. All told, it was maybe 3 minutes of work - certainly no more than 5. (I have too many photos to process at the moment to spend too long on any one! )

So...I never even considered the different manufacturer's lenses and f-numbers.

So (again)....are you saying that Nikon's 30 & 50mms are f1.8 and Pentax and Sigma's are f/1.4?

Does that mean that the Pentax and Sigma lenses let in more light and might be slightly more advantageous for low-light situations?

Don't know...just asking to see I'm getting this right...

Nikon and Canon have inexpensive ($100 or under) 50mm F1.8 lenses, that let in less light (and are lower build quality due to the low price, and somewhat lower optical quality, fewer aperture blades, etc.) Both also have more expensive ($300+) 50mm F1.4 lenses with higher build and optical quality. Pentax sells only an F1.4 lens but with top-notch quality and for about $200.

Sigma makes the 30mm F1.4, which is available for all the usual DSLR systems. The only lens with similar focal length and speed is the Pentax 31mm F1.8, which is way more expensive so it's kind of in a different league.

 

[Dcanoli]

Nikon and Canon have inexpensive ($100 or under) 50mm F1.8 lenses, that let in less light (and are lower build quality due to the low price, and somewhat lower optical quality, fewer aperture blades, etc.) Both also have more expensive ($300+) 50mm F1.4 lenses with higher build and optical quality. Pentax sells only an F1.4 lens but with top-notch quality and for about $200.

Sigma makes the 30mm F1.4, which is available for all the usual DSLR systems. The only lens with similar focal length and speed is the Pentax 31mm F1.8, which is way more expensive so it's kind of in a different league.

So-to get this straight--the $300 Canon/Nikon 50mm 1.4 lenses are comparable to the Pentax F1.4 ($200)? What mm is the F1.4?

(I guess I can go look that up myself...)

What about the Sigma 30mm 1.4? How is the quality on that if it is comparable to the expensive Pentax 31mm?

(I know, I know--too many questions...I can always go and do the leg work/research myself....)

 

[mikamah]

I haven't checked this thread in a couple weeks but I saw in an email that my EE shot was mentioned so I'll poke my head back in.


No problem. I actually was able to adjust the size of the corona around the sun fairly freely in Lightroom, and decided to go with the look that you see in the "processed" photo.

To give an idea of what I did, here's the before (default settings, as imported into LR) and the after.

The WB was adjusted slightly, the exposure was bumped +0.95, recovery is set to 87 (this is mainly what adjusts the glow around the sun), fill light is 76, and highlights are -26. Blue was tweaked (saturation +43, luminance -17) to give the sky a deeper blue. I also added just a touch of noise reduction (in LR) just to clean up the areas that were dark in the original photo.

Basically, the bumped exposure and fill light brighten up the dark areas, and recovery and the highlights adjustment to bring back the areas that were now too bright. All told, it was maybe 3 minutes of work - certainly no more than 5.

Just a newbie question, but if you had shot in jpg, would you have been able to do anything to brighten that picture and make it look like the second one? I think they both are pretty cool.

 

[boBQuincy]

JPG is 8 bits, RAW is 12 bits. That is 16X more information! Adjusting a JPG leaves "holes" in the brightness values and these can be visible, especially in smooth gradations like sky where they look like banding or posterization.

RAW has so much more information available that there is little reason not to use it. Some newer cameras have 14 bits, another 4X as much information! It's there, it's free, take advantage of it!

 

[MontanaZoo]

Help me out. I took this weekend. Well, actually a series of them of one of our tigers at the zoo stalking and then trying to pounce on a big guy wearing a yellow shirt walking by her exhibit. Are there settings that I could have used to improve this picture? I have a canon digital rebel xti and I was shooting in Av portraits of the tiger sitting in her pond before she jumped up and started running.

I would have loved to have everything including the droplets of water spraying of her in perfect focus and have the background have more dof especially to get rid of the chainlink. I was also taking this through a window. F5.6, ISO 200 which is what I usually have the camera set to. I used the Canon Zoom Lens EF IS 70-300.

By the way, do I have to say she was moving incredibly fast?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/juliez_pics/2482453094/

 

[DisneyFreak06]

Hi wonderful photographers!

I've been lurking on here for a little bit, reading things here and there, but I have a question, so I thought I'd ask the pros! (By the way, I'm semi new to the SLR world, I had an SLR for about 8 years, but used it only on automatic for the first 7 or so and then took a little course where I learned a little more. Then the focus on it broke and I bought a DSLR. I still don't know much, but I understand somewhat, just don't practice enough I guess.)

My niece is in a ballet recital this Saturday. I know I won't be perfect, but I thought I'd ask which lens to use and what settings are recommended.

I have a Canon XT and 3 lenses: the kit lens 18-55 f3.5-56; the 50mm f1.8 and the 70-200 f4L. I'm assuming the kit lens is out. I would like to use the L lens for the reach, but I'm not sure if it is fast enough. It's in a very large theater that is used for our major concerts and such. Thanks for you help!

 

[handicap18]

Hi wonderful photographers!

I've been lurking on here for a little bit, reading things here and there, but I have a question, so I thought I'd ask the pros! (By the way, I'm semi new to the SLR world, I had an SLR for about 8 years, but used it only on automatic for the first 7 or so and then took a little course where I learned a little more. Then the focus on it broke and I bought a DSLR. I still don't know much, but I understand somewhat, just don't practice enough I guess.)

My niece is in a ballet recital this Saturday. I know I won't be perfect, but I thought I'd ask which lens to use and what settings are recommended.

I have a Canon XT and 3 lenses: the kit lens 18-55 f3.5-56; the 50mm f1.8 and the 70-200 f4L. I'm assuming the kit lens is out. I would like to use the L lens for the reach, but I'm not sure if it is fast enough. It's in a very large theater that is used for our major concerts and such. Thanks for you help!

This is a question that really can only be answered once you get to the venue. Light is the key. You might be able to get away with the f/4 at ISO1600. I certainly would bring it and also bring the 50 f/1.8. With the 70-200 f/4, I would shoot in Av mode. Set your ISO to 1600 and your f/stop to f/4. If the shutter speeds are fast enough (no less than 1/50th or so) then you should do well. Try to time things when there is a pause in the action. Try to get there early and get a seat close to the stage. If your close enough you can just use the 50mm. Again use Av and ISO1600. Check your shutter speeds. If they're fast you can also cut down to ISO800 or use a smaller aperture (f/2.8 or so). Again, the lighting is the biggest factor.

 

[DVC Eric]

Hi i've also been reading this board and love it. I have a canon rebel xti i was wondering if any of you have the image stabilization lenses and if they work.

Thank you for any help.

 

[Groucho]

So-to get this straight--the $300 Canon/Nikon 50mm 1.4 lenses are comparable to the Pentax F1.4 ($200)? What mm is the F1.4?

Well, I'm talking about the Pentax 50mm. The Canon, Nikon, and Pentax 50mm F1.4s are roughly comparable (though the Pentax usually is rated tops despite the lower price, but they're all pretty great - 50mms are, as I understand it, fairly easy to design well.)

What about the Sigma 30mm 1.4? How is the quality on that if it is comparable to the expensive Pentax 31mm?

(I know, I know--too many questions...I can always go and do the leg work/research myself....)

Well, the 31mm is, as I said, way more expensive (about 2.5x the price). Is it 2.5 times better? Certainly not. But it has been called one of the top three (if the the top) autofocus SLR lens ever. It's got wonderful all-metal construction, integrated lens hood, slip-on metal hood with flocked interior, etc... I haven't used the Sigma but I'm quite sure it's a more common-feeling plastic lens, nothing wrong with that but it won't have the luxury feel. Optically, some reviews have said that it's got some issues with softness in the corners, but I haven't seen much indication that owners of the lens notice such issues or if they do, that they're bothersome.

Certainly the Sigma is a much more sensible choice, I went with the Pentax because I knew that I'd always be yearning for it if I didn't get it, and would probably end up with it sooner or later! It also had a $100 rebate at the time, which I suspected would not be re-appearing (it hasn't.)

Just a newbie question, but if you had shot in jpg, would you have been able to do anything to brighten that picture and make it look like the second one? I think they both are pretty cool.

Thanks! Like Bob said, you could certainly tweak the jpg but you'd have a much harder time recovering the overbright and overdark sections since there's less picture information saved.

 

[DizzyV6P]

Hi wonderful photographers!

I've been lurking on here for a little bit, reading things here and there, but I have a question, so I thought I'd ask the pros! (By the way, I'm semi new to the SLR world, I had an SLR for about 8 years, but used it only on automatic for the first 7 or so and then took a little course where I learned a little more. Then the focus on it broke and I bought a DSLR. I still don't know much, but I understand somewhat, just don't practice enough I guess.)

My niece is in a ballet recital this Saturday. I know I won't be perfect, but I thought I'd ask which lens to use and what settings are recommended.

I have a Canon XT and 3 lenses: the kit lens 18-55 f3.5-56; the 50mm f1.8 and the 70-200 f4L. I'm assuming the kit lens is out. I would like to use the L lens for the reach, but I'm not sure if it is fast enough. It's in a very large theater that is used for our major concerts and such. Thanks for you help!

In addition to Handicap's suggestion, If you have a monopod, that will help as well.

 

[MICKEY88]

This is a question that really can only be answered once you get to the venue. Light is the key. You might be able to get away with the f/4 at ISO1600. I certainly would bring it and also bring the 50 f/1.8. With the 70-200 f/4, I would shoot in Av mode. Set your ISO to 1600 and your f/stop to f/4. If the shutter speeds are fast enough (no less than 1/50th or so) then you should do well. Try to time things when there is a pause in the action. Try to get there early and get a seat close to the stage. If your close enough you can just use the 50mm. Again use Av and ISO1600. Check your shutter speeds. If they're fast you can also cut down to ISO800 or use a smaller aperture (f/2.8 or so). Again, the lighting is the biggest factor.

you might want to check in advance in 20+ years of attending dance recitals, I've never been to one that allowed cameras/picture taking

 

[Pea-n-Me]

FYI, I've begun to index the subjects in the OP.

I'll add pages if a subject repeats itself.

I've also asked if anyone minds if I link to important/good to know threads that might be of general interest so they can be easily referenced later.

Any other ideas, let me know.

Let's see some pictures!!

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Why did you buy the camera you did, and would you do anything differently if you were buying for the first time today?

 

[DisneySuiteFreak]

you might want to check in advance in 20+ years of attending dance recitals, I've never been to one that allowed cameras/picture taking

I've been to many that said no flash photography (can be distracting and dangerous for dancers supposedly), that's partly why I bought the 85/1.8 and 50/1.8 (along w/ my tripod). There have also been a couple that said no photography period, but it was because they were selling photos/video of the event. Like we don't pay them enough in our montly dues as it is...

 

[DisneySuiteFreak]

Why did you buy the camera you did, and would you do anything differently if you were buying for the first time today?

I bought my D80 because it was reasonably priced for what it could do, and I liked what I saw of the photos posted by other users. I knew I needed a camera that was capable of taking low light and action type shots. I liked the flexibility the DSLR offered and the ability to grow my photo taking skills. If I could do anything different, I would have waited for the D300 to come out as I bought mine a few months before. I don't regret the D80, as it suits my needs and I am not a pro by any means. I needed a DSLR so I could start getting decent shot of my DS in his last year in HS activities.
ETA: I also wanted to be able to use the the prime lenses in AF if needed. The D40 didn't have that ability.

 

[Tnkrbelle565]

subbing

 

[MICKEY88]

I've been to many that said no flash photography (can be distracting and dangerous for dancers supposedly), that's partly why I bought the 85/1.8 and 50/1.8 (along w/ my tripod). There have also been a couple that said no photography period, but it was because they were selling photos/video of the event. Like we don't pay them enough in our montly dues as it is...

the ones I've been to, didn't allow photography at all, because you will always have that one parent who will run down right in front of the stage for a closeup of their kid.., and they didn't want anyone distracting the dancers, or blocking the view of people that paid to see the show..

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Mark has taken the time to put together a bunch of learning tutorials which are great, but scattered around the Photography Board. I thought keeping them here in one place for easy reference might be helpful, and he's agreed that would be ok. Thanks, Mark!

(If anyone sees any that we don't have, can you PM the links to me and I'll post them here. Thanks.)

"How To Shoot" tutorials

Exposure

Fun With Math

Sensor Cleaning

A Few Thoughts (Long Exposure)

Mixing Flash and Ambient Light

Disney Photography Tips

What Makes A Photographer Great?

DSLR Startup Costs

Tripods

Rule of Thirds/Mixing Flash and Ambient Light

Metering

Is it OK? (Photo Law and Ethics)

Some Thoughts on Shutter Speed

How Blurry (Warning - Math)

When should I use my zoom vs my prime?

Exposure Settings Table/Second Curtain Synch see page 22

How to Shoot: SpectroMagic

How to Shoot Dark Rides