Awesome shots guys. I went back to my older camera for the last trip- it is an Olympus e 410 with the kit lens and I was quite surprised to find out the quality of the image was actually pretty good I remember I hated that camera back at the time when I first started learning about photography and I was thinking that I should definitely invest more money in cameras and lens
Guys! While watching last 20 pages I got an idea: Could we write the name of the place where photo was taken? We live around the world and that will be even more engaging knowing where the pictures come from.
Photos from my bike trip I had last weekend. Made with htc one x; Zalesie, 30km from Warsaw, Poland
Guys! Could we write the name of the place where photo was taken?
No need to yell... geez. Good advice, though I'm not sure it's relevant for many photos :P I've included the location, if it's not obvious, and the image is actually a location.
Notman : it depends on what kind of low light shots if its people generally you'd use a lens with the widest possible aperature 2.8 or below are good low light and keep that wide open.
Generally ISO should be as low as possible, but it depends on the camera that youre using.
with shutter speed you have to balance depending on how much the subjects are moving.
so if its people and thy're moving like in your picture then in lowest f number on aperature and high enough shutter speed to ensure the focus point of the shot is sharp. leaving you to play around with the ISO.
That or get a flash that has a moveable head and bounce light off ceilings and walls.
Th EXIF data for my shot which is at night :-
focal length 14mm
aperature 2.8
ISo 3200
shutter speed 1/100
Notman : it depends on what kind of low light shots if its people generally you'd use a lens with the widest possible aperature 2.8 or below are good low light and keep that wide open.
Generally ISO should be as low as possible, but it depends on the camera that youre using.
with shutter speed you have to balance depending on how much the subjects are moving.
so if its people and thy're moving like in your picture then in lowest f number on aperature and high enough shutter speed to ensure the focus point of the shot is sharp. leaving you to play around with the ISO.
That or get a flash that has a moveable head and bounce light off ceilings and walls.
Thanks for the advice. The problem is finding the right settings, while I'm there. I was playing with various settings, and thought I had the right settings, based on what I see on the camera's LCD. Especially when things are happening fast (like this show). Obviously on a larger display, it becomes more obvious.
The biggest issue is, they changed the lighting, just before the show started. I wasn't aware that they were going to cut out all the lights, so my original configuration was wasted
I just use PS. I find importing things into LR to be quite annoying, and I usually send things off to PS anyway. Photoshop CC has everything I use in LR too. Adobe Camera RAW has most if not all the adjustment features that LR has.
I have not had a chance to try PS CC so far but I love how fast I can move across all of my images in LR and if I already made adjustments to one image it just takes a second do repeat this to other images. Also I can select what images I actually like and filter them very easy and intuitively. I was very skeptical about LR before I gave it a try but now I have all my images open in it and I can work on any one of them at any time, no need to open, load or even save images . At the end if I need to I send it to PS for final touches.
I find PS more intuitive when it comes to the sharpening process or, giving subtle effects. No High Pass filter in LR, no blurring, no Unsharp Mask, etc etc. You are right though, LR is great for its non-destructive editing capabilities.
Primes when I have time to shoot with a more considered approach, zooms when I need to be fast for the convenience factor or when I can't afford to miss a shot because I'm changing lenses (ie: wedding). Usually I prefer a bag full of primes over a zoom. Except for ultrawides or long teles, almost always use a zoom for ultrawides as ultrawide primes generally don't go as wide as zooms. Give me a 24, 35, 50 and 85 and I'm a happy guy.
Adapted manual focus lenses are just a waste of time IMO, fine if you have all day to set up your focus, but I use AF 99% of the time.
Adapted manual focus lenses are just a waste of time IMO, fine if you have all day to set up your focus, but I use AF 99% of the time.
M42 mounts seem to have a large following with DSLR photographers these days. Not only can you get them for pennies on the dollar but the glass quality is really outstanding ( helios 44-2, Zeiss-Jena etc.)
I have not tried it yet myself, but I was curious if anyone here had given it a go.
Replies
HP doing the finger guns
haha...
A Man and his Birds by vaccaro3d, on Flickr
Rooftop Watcher by vaccaro3d, on Flickr
Swarm by vaccaro3d, on Flickr
This junk is finally starting to melt by SauceyJack, on Flickr
Here's a few recent from me:
Nice one rens reminds me of the UK ..lol
DSC_9471 by Will_F, on Flickr
Oh well by SauceyJack, on Flickr
In her own world by SauceyJack, on Flickr
Here are some photos from today:
The sky looked cool the other day.
Have some flower power from this afternoon:
Leo by SauceyJack, on Flickr
Hmmm by SauceyJack, on Flickr
Black rhino by SauceyJack, on Flickr
While watching last 20 pages I got an idea: Could we write the name of the place where photo was taken? We live around the world and that will be even more engaging knowing where the pictures come from.
Photos from my bike trip I had last weekend. Made with htc one x;
Zalesie, 30km from Warsaw, Poland
Hong Kong ^_^
No need to yell... geez. Good advice, though I'm not sure it's relevant for many photos :P I've included the location, if it's not obvious, and the image is actually a location.
Here are some more birdie pics from me:
I never quite got my camera settings correct, for the low lighting... all part of learning I guess.
Notman : it depends on what kind of low light shots if its people generally you'd use a lens with the widest possible aperature 2.8 or below are good low light and keep that wide open.
Generally ISO should be as low as possible, but it depends on the camera that youre using.
with shutter speed you have to balance depending on how much the subjects are moving.
so if its people and thy're moving like in your picture then in lowest f number on aperature and high enough shutter speed to ensure the focus point of the shot is sharp. leaving you to play around with the ISO.
That or get a flash that has a moveable head and bounce light off ceilings and walls.
Th EXIF data for my shot which is at night :-
focal length 14mm
aperature 2.8
ISo 3200
shutter speed 1/100
Some more bird pictures taken today:
The biggest issue is, they changed the lighting, just before the show started. I wasn't aware that they were going to cut out all the lights, so my original configuration was wasted
Prophecies, one of these days I want to try getting some shots like that. Awesome shots.
Thanks
Ditto, these days i do almost everything in LR, though for real advanced stuff I send it off to PS.
Adapted manual focus lenses are just a waste of time IMO, fine if you have all day to set up your focus, but I use AF 99% of the time.
M42 mounts seem to have a large following with DSLR photographers these days. Not only can you get them for pennies on the dollar but the glass quality is really outstanding ( helios 44-2, Zeiss-Jena etc.)
I have not tried it yet myself, but I was curious if anyone here had given it a go.