Photography - Technique and Equipment considerations

[FBM]

Got it. I've got macro on my mind and I'm going to start scouting about for a new lens.

Your camera has a Nikon mount?

I wouldn't think so, since it's a Fuji, but I'm still pretty clueless. I'll flip through the Owner's Manual...

EDIT: Yep.

[CJ]

Got it. I've got macro on my mind and I'm going to start scouting about for a new lens.

Your camera has a Nikon mount?

I wouldn't think so, since it's a Fuji, but I'm still pretty clueless. I'll flip through the Owner's Manual...

EDIT: Yep.

There you go, you'll need a Nikon mount lens, your Fuji has the latest Nikon mount so any lens made in the last 5 years will not only fit but work as well.

[FBM]

Got it. I've got macro on my mind and I'm going to start scouting about for a new lens.

Your camera has a Nikon mount?

I wouldn't think so, since it's a Fuji, but I'm still pretty clueless. I'll flip through the Owner's Manual...

EDIT: Yep.

There you go, you'll need a Nikon mount lens, your Fuji has the latest Nikon mount so any lens made in the last 5 years will not only fit but work as well.

Excellent. Any recommendations for a 1:1? Any brand I should avoid?

[CJ]

Got it. I've got macro on my mind and I'm going to start scouting about for a new lens.

Your camera has a Nikon mount?

I wouldn't think so, since it's a Fuji, but I'm still pretty clueless. I'll flip through the Owner's Manual...

EDIT: Yep.

There you go, you'll need a Nikon mount lens, your Fuji has the latest Nikon mount so any lens made in the last 5 years will not only fit but work as well.

Excellent. Any recommendations for a 1:1? Any brand I should avoid?

Pick from Nikon, Sigma or Tamron and you will have kit that will outperform your capability to use it. Go for internal focusing so the front of the lens stays put while focusing as the movement scares bugs away, rather spoiling the point of the lens. Obviously I would recommend a Sigma 180mm or 150mm if you can afford it.

However if you are looking for a second lens I'd forgo the macro and invest in the Sigma zoom as it will allow you to explore macro photography adequately and will vastly broaden the range of photographs you can take.

Beware there are two 70-300mm Sigma zooms an APO and a cheaper non-APO, don't go for the cheaper version! The APO tag means Apochromatic, this means it contains additional lens elements that control the 'prism' effect inherent in all lenses and improves the colour rendition at the 300mm end of the lens's extension.

[FBM]

Pick from Nikon, Sigma or Tamron and you will have kit that will outperform your capability to use it. Go for internal focusing so the front of the lens stays put while focusing as the movement scares bugs away, rather spoiling the point of the lens. Obviously I would recommend a Sigma 180mm or 150mm if you can afford it.

However if you are looking for a second lens I'd forgo the macro and invest in the Sigma zoom as it will allow you to explore macro photography adequately and will vastly broaden the range of photographs you can take.

Beware there are two 70-300mm Sigma zooms an APO and a cheaper non-APO, don't go for the cheaper version! The APO tag means Apochromatic, this means it contains additional lens elements that control the 'prism' effect inherent in all lenses and improves the colour rendition at the 300mm end of the lens's extension.

Sweet. Money isn't really an object but I don't want to have to sell the farm to support my hobby, if you know what I mean. I'll start at the top and work my way down. I'll let you know what I decide on before I buy, just in case. Dude...

[Vikki]

I have a Pentax K-200D and I want to get more proficient with manually setting the shutter speed, exposure, aperture, sensitivity, etc. I want to be able to play with darker images and shadows, light, focus etc, that sort of thing with the camera itself, rather than photoshopping/lightening/darkening with the computer. Been feeling ridiculously inspired by Sally Mann lately. She uses a large format oldie camera, but there's no reason I can't have fun with my pentax.

Does anyone know of any good tutorials online? I can't really find any.

Also, does anyone think that investing in a holga is worthwhile? I love the colours that they tend to produce.

[Vikki]

Also, is anyone a fan of iPhone photos? People do some amazing shit with them.

[CJ]

I have a Pentax K-200D and I want to get more proficient with manually setting the shutter speed, exposure, aperture, sensitivity, etc. I want to be able to play with darker images and shadows, light, focus etc, that sort of thing with the camera itself, rather than photoshopping/lightening/darkening with the computer. Been feeling ridiculously inspired by Sally Mann lately. She uses a large format oldie camera, but there's no reason I can't have fun with my pentax.

Does anyone know of any good tutorials online? I can't really find any.

Also, does anyone think that investing in a holga is worthwhile? I love the colours that they tend to produce.

I'll have a think about that and get back to you.

[CJ]

The frame was taken hand held with the A100 anti-shake operational and was the best of a sequence of 20 'ish frames. The focal length was 300mm and the f-stop f5.6 i.e. the lens was wide open so the image is at it's poorest. It was quite bright so the shutter was 1/500th of a second (almost good enough not to need the anti-shake working) and the sensitivity was ISO-400 (not too good, not too bad). The original file is 3,872x2592 pixels and 2.77MB saved as a fine quality Jpeg.

This frame was resized to 800 pixels wide and saved at jpeg level 7 (upper medium quality) with no other processing, all images were saved at this Jpeg level.


This frame was sharpened with Unsharp Mask (A=75%, R=1.1, T=2) then reduced and then sharpened again (A=75%, R=1.1, T=2).


This is the head area at 1:1 camera:screen-pixels i.e no resizing at all and also no processing


This is the image above tweaked with an Unsharp Mask of (A=100%, R=1.1, T=2)


This is the presentation shot UM (A=75%, R=1.1, T=2) > crop image > resize > UM (A=75%, R=1.1, T=2)


The shot would have been sharper with the Sigma or Minolta Macro's but for a multi-purpose lens costing £175 vs specialist lenses costing £450 and £599 respectively I think the Sigma zoom represents very good value for money.

[CJ]

Another example from the Sigma 70-300mm APO zoom.

[CJ]

I have a Pentax K-200D and I want to get more proficient with manually setting the shutter speed, exposure, aperture, sensitivity, etc.

There is a direct relation between aperture and shutter speed, it is inescapable. If you make the aperture half the size (f8 > f16) you must open the shutter for twice as long (1/125th sec > 1/60th sec) there is no way to escape this relationship.

Shutter speed really only has one thing to do, be quick enough to make camera shake unnoticeable. The classic rule of thumb is that the shutter speed needs to be quicker than the focal length of the lens ( ).

If the lens has a focal length of 50mm you can safely use a shutter speed down to 1/60th sec, with care 1/30th sec and at 1/15th you'll need to support the camera with a tripod or stand it on a wall. So if your 50mm lens is at f16 and shutter speed is at 1/30th sec you need to open up your lens to f8 so the shutter will have to go quicker 1/60th sec.

In practice modern cameras do this for you. With the camera in Programme mode (or automatic) it will use a set of rules that stop camera shake blurring the photo (the biggest cause of spoilt photos). So why take control yourself?

Of the two primary controls at the photographers disposal (aperture and shutter) aperture is creatively generally more important as it controls the amount of the photo that is in focus, the Bluebell photos above illustrate the effect of aperture. As long as shutter speed is 'quick enough' aperture has more effect on the finished photo.

I want to be able to play with darker images and shadows, light, focus etc, that sort of thing with the camera itself, rather than photoshopping/lightening/darkening with the computer. Been feeling ridiculously inspired by Sally Mann lately. She uses a large format oldie camera, but there's no reason I can't have fun with my pentax.

You have a massive advantage over Sally Mann as your camera let's you experiment, so make use of that facility. Take hundreds of shots using different aperture/shutter combinations and see which you like best.

Does anyone know of any good tutorials online? I can't really find any.

No, but I'll see what I can find.

Also, does anyone think that investing in a holga is worthwhile? I love the colours that they tend to produce.

If you like it, buy it. Photography is about the image not the equipment, but if a particular piece of equipment simply allows you to create an image you like it is just a tool that you need.

[Taryn]

I haven't used unsharp mask before but I have just been trying it on a few of my practice shots today.
What I don't understand is the three options, Radius, Strength and Clipping. I have been using it on default so far, Radius 2, Strength 100 and Clipping 5.

This pic has had nothing else done to it except the default um, apart from reducing the size to 800 pixels. It wasn't a very sharp pic anyway so I thought it would be a good one to try it out on.

Original

[Vikki]

Thanks for the whole post CJ, I'll be back after dinner to sit & take notes!

In practice modern cameras do this for you. With the camera in Programme mode (or automatic) it will use a set of rules that stop camera shake blurring the photo (the biggest cause of spoilt photos). So why take control yourself?

Because I want to really get familiar with the camera and if I see an image in my head (eg a portrait with a particular darkness density or whatever), I want to be familair enough with the camera to know automatically the settings I need to adjust in order to make that happen. & also, I don't know. I feel lazy? I hate the autofocus with a passion.

And of course one has an advantage (in this case, over Sally Mann) with modern equipment, but I have an interest in the flawed. I like, sometimes, the unpolished feel, the smudges, the faulty cropping that comes out good, the unexpected movement in the background, whatever. Sometimes the things that you can't control end up giving the photograph that something extra. For example, this photograph of my mother from the late 60s is one of my favourite... that cropping would not have been intentional, but it's perfect the way it is:



I think this is also why I like using the iPhone... it's like a modern day version of using a Polaroid. It's a pretty primative camera by today's standards... only 2.0 megapixels, there's not much you can do but "Point & shoot!" And as a rule (for me) there is minimal interference with the finished product. I upload the image as-is, or run it through one of the filters in the Camera bag application from the iTunes store. Nothing gets done to them on the computer.

Some of mine:

Filter: 1973









Filter: Helga



lol I am sorry for ruining the lovely modern shots with my unpolished crap. But do you see where I'm getting at?

[CJ]

I haven't used unsharp mask before but I have just been trying it on a few of my practice shots today.
What I don't understand is the three options, Radius, Strength and Clipping. I have been using it on default so far, Radius 2, Strength 100 and Clipping 5.

This pic has had nothing else done to it except the default um, apart from reducing the size to 800 pixels. It wasn't a very sharp pic anyway so I thought it would be a good one to try it out on.

Original

Try the following. In the original frame Rad=2, S=75%, C=5. then reduce to 800 pixels then apply the same UM, see if you can notice any difference.

[CJ]

Thanks for the whole post CJ, I'll be back after dinner to sit & take notes!

In practice modern cameras do this for you. With the camera in Programme mode (or automatic) it will use a set of rules that stop camera shake blurring the photo (the biggest cause of spoilt photos). So why take control yourself?

Because I want to really get familiar with the camera and if I see an image in my head (eg a portrait with a particular darkness density or whatever), I want to be familair enough with the camera to know automatically the settings I need to adjust in order to make that happen. & also, I don't know. I feel lazy? I hate the autofocus with a passion.

And of course one has an advantage (in this case, over Sally Mann) with modern equipment, but I have an interest in the flawed. I like, sometimes, the unpolished feel, the smudges, the faulty cropping that comes out good, the unexpected movement in the background, whatever. Sometimes the things that you can't control end up giving the photograph that something extra. For example, this photograph of my mother from the late 60s is one of my favourite... that cropping would not have been intentional, but it's perfect the way it is:



I think this is also why I like using the iPhone... it's like a modern day version of using a Polaroid. It's a pretty primative camera by today's standards... only 2.0 megapixels, there's not much you can do but "Point & shoot!" And as a rule (for me) there is minimal interference with the finished product. I upload the image as-is, or run it through one of the filters in the Camera bag application from the iTunes store. Nothing gets done to them on the computer.

Some of mine:

Filter: 1973









Filter: Helga



lol I am sorry for ruining the lovely modern shots with my unpolished crap. But do you see where I'm getting at?

A bloody marvellous set of photos, please add them and many more to The Gallery! Your photos have a wonderful feel to them and convey the moment you 'clicked the shutter'. My photo's don't, I use my camera like a magnifying glass, to see that which one would not normally see, any artistic merit is purely coincidental. Your images though are highly artistic, capturing much more of the 'feel' of the moment, too much detail would almost overpower the message. There isn't one perfect type of photography style the camera is a tool with many uses, mostly used just to capture memories.