Photography Tips & Tricks

[Guyzerr]

I was sneaking around your place last night and did this for you. Maybe it will hold you over until you get the shot you want. :24:



Zirc here's what I would try.

Make sure your camera is mounted on a tripod.
Set your ISO to 100 because you don't want a lot of grain in the picture.
Put your dial on " S " for shutter priority because this is the setting you'll need to experiment with. Your " f " stop should be handled automatically while in that mode.

Do not use the flash.

Take your first shot at 1/30 sec. It will be too fast but you have to start somewhere. Take a look at the shot and slow your shutter down to the next step. Keep doing that until the effect you want is achieved which I might add could be hard because of all the lighting. You have the glow of the city lights, the reflection off the house and other buildings and probably a yard light or two to contend with. If possible change your actual position to avoid as much light as possible with the exception of background light directly behind the horse statute. If you could get a spotlight to shine on the back of it that would help a lot.

Lemme know how it goes. Good luck.

 

[freakofnature]

So lower ISO is better? :unsure: I've been shooting with as high an ISO as I can. Well then...

LOL, that photo edit is really cool.

 

[Siphorous]

So lower ISO is better? :unsure: I've been shooting with as high an ISO as I can. Well then...

LOL, that photo edit is really cool.

It depends. A lower ISO will mean lower noise - ever camera will start to have noise creep in at higher ISOs. Of course, this varies per camera as to the extent of the noise and at what ISO it becomes unacceptable.

Noise reducing software exists in case you really need to take a shot at a higher ISO.

Higher ISO means less time needed for the shot, the picture will be more exposed, more noise.
Lower ISO means more time needed for the shot, the picture will be less exposed, less noise.

As for 'time needed for the shot' - this is dependent on how much light you have in the scene - e.g. lots of natural (or artificial) light = less time, less light = more time. All this has to be taken into account when deciding to use a higher ISO or not (or let the camera decide).

For you with night shots, higher ISO is good in that it requires the shot to be exposed less but will get more noise. A lower ISO is better if using a tripod as you don't have to worry about speed (ISO) but can try leaving the ISO lower for less noise but expose it for different times, experimenting as Guy has suggested to obtain the desired result.

Clear as mud? If so, perhaps Guy can carry on where he left off - my night brain may not be functioning so well as to provide a clearer explanation right now

 

[freakofnature]

It depends. A lower ISO will mean lower noise - ever camera will start to have noise creep in at higher ISOs. Of course, this varies per camera as to the extent of the noise and at what ISO it becomes unacceptable.

Noise reducing software exists in case you really need to take a shot at a higher ISO.

Higher ISO means less time needed for the shot, the picture will be more exposed, more noise.
Lower ISO means more time needed for the shot, the picture will be less exposed, less noise.

As for 'time needed for the shot' - this is dependent on how much light you have in the scene - e.g. lots of natural (or artificial) light = less time, less light = more time. All this has to be taken into account when deciding to use a higher ISO or not (or let the camera decide).

For you with night shots, higher ISO is good in that it requires the shot to be exposed less but will get more noise. A lower ISO is better if using a tripod as you don't have to worry about speed (ISO) but can try leaving the ISO lower for less noise but expose it for different times, experimenting as Guy has suggested to obtain the desired result.

Clear as mud? If so, perhaps Guy can carry on where he left off - my night brain may not be functioning so well as to provide a clearer explanation right now

No, that makes sense. I tried a few moon pics with a lower ISO and thought they looked like crap but perhaps I didn't give it a fair chance.

 

[Guyzerr]

Clear as mud? If so, perhaps Guy can carry on where he left off - my night brain may not be functioning so well as to provide a clearer explanation right now

I usually try and shoot at the lowest ISO setting that I can get away with because I don't like noise in my shots. That said, a lot depends what a person is using for a lens as far as " f " is considered. Most of mine are f2.8 so it isn't quite the average light hog that's demanding say something in the f 4.5 - 5.6 range which most of the kit lens are.

 

[Siphorous]

I usually try and shoot at the lowest ISO setting that I can get away with because I don't like noise in my shots. That said, a lot depends what a person is using for a lens as far as " f " is considered. Most of mine are f2.8 so it isn't quite the average light hog that's demanding say something in the f 4.5 - 5.6 range which most of the kit lens are.

See, I should have waited for you to reply. My night brain failed to take account of the lens itself Very good point. My only 2.8 is the 50mm macro/portrait lens. This displeases me and I must rectify at some point.

 

[Guyzerr]

No, that makes sense. I tried a few moon pics with a lower ISO and thought they looked like crap but perhaps I didn't give it a fair chance.

Once again you can do it with a tripod and an average lens but you need length. I'm thinking a minimum of 200mm. The one large shot I posted in your astronomy thread was taken with a 100 - 400 @ 400mm. Moon shots should be done under the manual settings imo and that's including the shutter speed. A remote cable helps.

The main issue with your horse statute shot is the light you're dealing with. It looks like it's coming from all angles. If you could shut everything off and place a spotlight behind the horse I'm sure that would simplify things. Or a small spotlight from a distance pointed toward the horse with all other lights off. I'm thinking you have a challenge on your hands. The nice thing about digital photography is you already have the camera and don't have to pay or wait for your results. You can see them right away and if garbage just change settings and do it again.

 

[freakofnature]

Once again you can do it with a tripod and an average lens but you need length. I'm thinking a minimum of 200mm. The one large shot I posted in your astronomy thread was taken with a 100 - 400 @ 400mm. Moon shots should be done under the manual settings imo and that's including the shutter speed. A remote cable helps.

The main issue with your horse statute shot is the light you're dealing with. It looks like it's coming from all angles. If you could shut everything off and place a spotlight behind the horse I'm sure that would simplify things. Or a small spotlight from a distance pointed toward the horse with all other lights off. I'm thinking you have a challenge on your hands. The nice thing about digital photography is you already have the camera and don't have to pay or wait for your results. You can see them right away and if garbage just change settings and do it again.

Yeah, there are yard lights everywhere here on the farm. I suspected that my lens might be my downfall with taking moon shots. I have the kit lens that came with my camera and after a year I saved my pennies and got a 55-200mm lens. I think the lowest f-stop on it is 4. But I have the tripod and a remote shutter release and plenty of ime on night shift. I shall continue to fiddle, get angry and throw things and then fiddle some more.

 

[Tuffdisc]

The best tip I can give at the moment, is to get to know your camera well. It is no point just taking photos, when you can get so much more out of your camera if you know the ins and outs of the equipment you use

 

[Tuffdisc]

What would you say would be the best lens for portraiture that would fit nicely with my Canon 50D?

 

[Guyzerr]

What would you say would be the best lens for portraiture that would fit nicely with my Canon 50D?

You could ask 100 people and you'll get 100 different answers.

If you want to try something very inexpensive try the " Nifty Fifty ". It's Canon's best value lense. For about $120.00 Cdn you're on your way to converting to " prime " lens. I've owned 'em and was amazed at it's sharpness.

Link: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-50mm-f-1.8-II-Lens-Review.aspx


Read this............... http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/portrait_lenses.html

Notice the example of the 50mm?



If you want to throw caution to the wind as far as money is concerned give the 70 - 200mm f2.8 IS a shot. I love mine. It's actually my walk around lens.

I found this site. It might help you.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Portrait-Lens.aspx

 

[skyblue]

i agree with guy on that 50mm,big time.....being a macro it'll pick up every detail

 

[Guyzerr]

What would you say would be the best lens for portraiture that would fit nicely with my Canon 50D?

pinkporridge might have something to say about this considering portraiture seems to be right up her alley. Hopefully she'll come along and add something.

 

[Tuffdisc]

i agree with guy on that 50mm,big time.....being a macro it'll pick up every detail

Thought you had a 60mm macro lens?

You could ask 100 people and you'll get 100 different answers.

If you want to try something very inexpensive try the " Nifty Fifty ". It's Canon's best value lense. For about $120.00 Cdn you're on your way to converting to " prime " lens. I've owned 'em and was amazed at it's sharpness.

Link: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-50mm-f-1.8-II-Lens-Review.aspx


Read this............... http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/portrait_lenses.html

Notice the example of the 50mm?



If you want to throw caution to the wind as far as money is concerned give the 70 - 200mm f2.8 IS a shot. I love mine. It's actually my walk around lens.

I found this site. It might help you.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Portrait-Lens.aspx

Ah, but you can see I already have that attached to my camera, the nifty fifty

 

[Guyzerr]

Ah, but you can see I already have that attached to my camera, the nifty fifty

These eyes are much too old to see that in your avatar.

 

[skyblue]

Thought you had a 60mm macro lens?

canon macro.....always quality:nod:

 

[Tuffdisc]

These eyes are much too old to see that in your avatar.

So I see

canon macro.....always quality:nod:

Yeah, but too expensive, wondering if the sigma version, or near enough, was the same quality, I feel it is time to break the mould of getting Canon lenses

 

[Guyzerr]

So I see
Yeah, but too expensive, wondering if the sigma version, or near enough, was the same quality, I feel it is time to break the mould of getting Canon lenses

My new lens is a Sigma and I'm quite impressed with what I see as far as color duplication and sharpness is concerned. The build quality isn't quite the same but when a lens is 1/2 the price of others I can overlook that. It's also quite a bit lighter because of it. Something else I noticed is the stabilization motor isn't as quiet but that's no big deal to me. I'm not using it to spy on anybody so absolute silence isn't a factor. It auto-focuses as fast as my Canon 70 - 200 so that's a plus. Warranty for a Canon is 1 year and for the Sigma it's 10 I think. That's a big plus.

If you do a Google search on " Sigma macro lens review " there's a ton of stuff that comes up.

 

[Tuffdisc]

Is manual focusing better than AF?

 

[Guyzerr]

Is manual focusing better than AF?

The experts say it is and who am I to argue with them?

Personally I have a hard time with the focus screen on the 50D and have been thinking of getting a different one. I liked the screen I used to have on my old 35mm SLR Pentax K1000. It was a split screen and it made for very easy focusing.

I think a lot of it has to do with what a person shoots as well wouldn't you think? Try focusing on a speck of fly shit doing 50 mph. That's what it's like for me to shoot hummers or other BIF's. I also have to leave my glasses on when I shot so that doesn't help either.