A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old April 14th 14, 02:40 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 213
Default Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users

Le 14/04/14 15:31, nospam a écrit :

Nospam mentions shallow depth of field but he misses the point that
sometimes shallow depth of field is exactly what one wants.


which you can easily get if that's what you want, and is in fact much
easier on a full frame camera than on 4/3rds.

With the same lens ? Hahahaha. Great joke.
Take a shot at FF , crop it. Now you have APS-C or 3/4, whatever.
Does it change the DOF ?

But it is easier to get on the FF camera because you get more choice of
lenses made for FF, with a wide aperture hence a shallower DOF. Nothing
prevent you from using them with a smaller sensor if you feel so inclined.


Noëlle Adam
  #42  
Old April 14th 14, 03:05 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users

In article ,
YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle wrote:

Superwide apertures help to compose and focus when it's really dark.


i've never had a problem, even with f/4 lenses.


Try in the dark, then, you will see the difference between 1,4 and 4.


i have. the trick is use both eyes.

maybe if you pixel peep, but normally, it's not noticeable.


http://cdn-4.nikon-cdn.com/en_INC/o/.../Photography/D
4S_iso_02.jpg

Sure, I have only real life experience.
Where buying a D4s and having plenty light and unfiltered faith on nikon
ads is not an option.


it's just one of many examples.

nikon d7000 @ iso 3200
http://www.yophotographer.com/page.php?t=12055
pentax k5 @ iso 3200
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/93...3/pentax-k5--3
200-ultegra
fuji x100 @ iso 6400
http://coffeegeek.tumblr.com/post/61...rain-why-the-f
uji-x100-is-a-landmark
canon 5d @ iso 3200 (and given the exposure, was very dim)
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/25602011

all very impressive, given the isos involved. mix in a little noise
reduction in lightroom (or photoshop), and you can go a bit faster too.

Real life situation are such that most of the time, the need for high
iso occurs within darkness, when the light is both scarce and uneven.

Shooting high speed with high iso and plenty even light is a laboraty
situation.


try theatre photography, where high iso is *really* useful.

It is what I do. In a rather small, intimate theater where the lights
are usually played low. Sometimes very low.


then you know how useful high iso can be.
  #43  
Old April 14th 14, 03:05 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users

In article ,
YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle wrote:

Nospam mentions shallow depth of field but he misses the point that
sometimes shallow depth of field is exactly what one wants.


which you can easily get if that's what you want, and is in fact much
easier on a full frame camera than on 4/3rds.

With the same lens ? Hahahaha. Great joke.
Take a shot at FF , crop it. Now you have APS-C or 3/4, whatever.
Does it change the DOF ?


actually it does, because you have to enlarge the result more.

however, that's an invalid comparison. the comparison to make is
between a crop and full frame sensor with the same number of pixels and
using the same equivalent focal length, which will produce the same
composition in the image.

the smaller the sensor, the wider the aperture has to be to match a
given image quality and depth of field, but the problem you run into is
that the faster lenses don't exist for the smaller sensors.

for example, you can get an f/1.4 lens on full frame, but to duplicate
that on crop, you would need an f/1.0 (not available, other than
obscure lenses that are impossible to actually find) and an f/0.7 on
4/3rds (definitely not available).

that is why it's easier on full frame.

But it is easier to get on the FF camera because you get more choice of
lenses made for FF, with a wide aperture hence a shallower DOF. Nothing
prevent you from using them with a smaller sensor if you feel so inclined.


nope. you have a much wider choice of lenses for crop sensor cameras
because both full frame and crop lenses will work on a crop sensor
camera, whereas on a full frame camera, you are limited to full frame
lenses.

you could set the camera to crop mode for crop lenses but then you're
losing the advantages of having a full frame sensor. at that point, you
have a crop sensor camera, with its wider selection of lenses.

there are a few crop sensor lenses that might cover a full frame at
certain focal lengths, but those are an exception and the quality at
the edges isn't all that wonderful when doing so.
  #44  
Old April 14th 14, 05:07 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 213
Default Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users

Le 14/04/14 16:05, nospam a écrit :

which you can easily get if that's what you want, and is in fact much
easier on a full frame camera than on 4/3rds.

With the same lens ? Hahahaha. Great joke.
Take a shot at FF , crop it. Now you have APS-C or 3/4, whatever.
Does it change the DOF ?


actually it does, because you have to enlarge the result more.


No, it doesnt change the DOF. It may change the definition, but not the DOF.
Sorry, I still beleive in physics.

Noëlle Adam
  #45  
Old April 14th 14, 05:15 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 213
Default Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users

Le 14/04/14 16:05, nospam a écrit :

then you know how useful high iso can be.

Together with fast lenses, yes.
Not instead.
Just like stabilisation is NOT a substitute for fast lenses, if your
subject is moving.
Not saying that stabilisation is not a nice thing to have.


Noëlle Adam
  #46  
Old April 14th 14, 10:40 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users

On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 09:30:13 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Martin Brown
wrote:

The mindset some guys on Flickr seem to have is that bodies come and go,
it's your collection of lenses that continue to be useful.

that is a correct mindset, with the exception of major changes such as
manual focus lenses - autofocus lenses.

1) There is a certain amount of manual focus snobbery.

There is a distinct advantage to manual focus lenses in low light when
the autofocus is inclined to hunt and lose lock.

edge case, and only the low end cameras have problems in low light. the
mid and high end cameras can focus in rather dim lightning conditions.


Doesn't work at all for astrophotography.


astrophotography is definitely an edge case.

there are also focus assist systems, such as a grid of lines from a
flash.


Or in sports stadiums at night.


those are well lit if there's a game. if not, then what's there to
photograph?


http://easyrack.org/images/football_field_lighting.jpg

http://www.citruscollege.edu/Athleti...llstadium1.jpg

http://www.fillmoregazette.com/files...-panoramic.jpg

http://img.weiku.com/waterpicture/20...462098_1. jpg

I got more if you want them.

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #47  
Old April 15th 14, 03:10 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

there are also focus assist systems, such as a grid of lines from a
flash.

Or in sports stadiums at night.


those are well lit if there's a game. if not, then what's there to
photograph?


http://easyrack.org/images/football_field_lighting.jpg


http://www.citruscollege.edu/Athleti.../2009/football
stadium1.jpg


http://www.fillmoregazette.com/files...eld-lights-pan
oramic.jpg

http://img.weiku.com/waterpicture/20...462098_1. jpg

I got more if you want them.


like i said, what's there to photograph?

if an empty ball field is your thing, that's great but it isn't for me.
  #48  
Old April 15th 14, 03:10 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users

In article ,
YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle wrote:

then you know how useful high iso can be.

Together with fast lenses, yes.
Not instead.


yes instead. when i shot theatre with film, i *had* to have fast glass
because film didn't go much past 800 and it wasn't particularly good at
that speed.

with digital, things are just starting to get warmed up at iso 1600 or
3200, and 6400 is certainly usable in most cases, which means an f/4
lens is not a handicap at all. f/2.8 is nice to have but it's certainly
not critical.

Just like stabilisation is NOT a substitute for fast lenses, if your
subject is moving.


different issue. stabilization helps camera shake and opens up a world
of new opportunities in how slow you can hand hold a camera. however,
it won't help if the subject is moving, although it will if you pan to
follow the subject.

Not saying that stabilisation is not a nice thing to have.


it's great to have.
  #49  
Old April 15th 14, 03:10 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users

In article ,
YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle wrote:

which you can easily get if that's what you want, and is in fact much
easier on a full frame camera than on 4/3rds.

With the same lens ? Hahahaha. Great joke.
Take a shot at FF , crop it. Now you have APS-C or 3/4, whatever.
Does it change the DOF ?


actually it does, because you have to enlarge the result more.


No, it doesnt change the DOF. It may change the definition, but not the DOF.


it does, because depth of field is based on the circle of confusion,
which if you enlarge the photo, will be bigger.

Sorry, I still beleive in physics.


then you might want to revisit it.
  #50  
Old April 17th 14, 10:21 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,246
Default Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users

On 4/14/2014 5:40 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 09:30:13 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Martin Brown
wrote:

The mindset some guys on Flickr seem to have is that bodies come and go,
it's your collection of lenses that continue to be useful.

that is a correct mindset, with the exception of major changes such as
manual focus lenses - autofocus lenses.

1) There is a certain amount of manual focus snobbery.

There is a distinct advantage to manual focus lenses in low light when
the autofocus is inclined to hunt and lose lock.

edge case, and only the low end cameras have problems in low light. the
mid and high end cameras can focus in rather dim lightning conditions.

Doesn't work at all for astrophotography.


astrophotography is definitely an edge case.

there are also focus assist systems, such as a grid of lines from a
flash.

Or in sports stadiums at night.


those are well lit if there's a game. if not, then what's there to
photograph?


http://easyrack.org/images/football_field_lighting.jpg

http://www.citruscollege.edu/Athleti...llstadium1.jpg

http://www.fillmoregazette.com/files...-panoramic.jpg

http://img.weiku.com/waterpicture/20...462098_1. jpg

I got more if you want them.


I was going to post some of my high ISO images, but then I took this course.

http://myjetpack.tumblr.com/image/80457780970

--
PeterN
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
More speculative camera tech, pt. II Martin Brown Digital Photography 1 October 9th 13 02:55 PM
Linhof Tech. 70 and/or Tech. IV differences Alex Tutubalin Large Format Photography Equipment 5 January 16th 04 08:49 AM
FA: Omega Rapid M (medium format camera) Angelo P. General Equipment For Sale 0 December 31st 03 11:38 PM
FS: Omega Rapid M (medium format camera); us$ 280 Angelo P. Medium Format Equipment For Sale 0 December 16th 03 01:18 PM
FS: Omega Rapid M (medium format camera) Angelo P. Medium Format Equipment For Sale 0 December 8th 03 09:19 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.