Which one would b a better choice ?

[ijnek]

ya...
ur teacher will tell u to get a d3x cos the iso performance is very veri good...

d60 is a decent body, u jus need practise.

even outdoor photography u can use flash sometimes, so it's very useful...

 

[lsisaxon]

David , daredevil - a quick question, slightly OT but still related to SIN

when i was shooting the models on stage, quite a few pics were very bright and overexposed because so many of us were using flash. Luckily i was shooting in RAW+JPEG so post processed RAW for the images that were interesting.


However, if there was no RAW, i would have had lots of spoiled pics how do you suggest we handle such a scenario?

Understand the lighting condition, understand how the metering works. These are fundamentals. Meter the highlight area, meter the shadow area, make an assessment how many stop the latitude of the entire scene is. If it doesn't fit the latitude of the sensor, then see which part of the image you want as a midtone and work within that. Otherwise, you'll have to modify the lighting situation instead.

 

[daredevil123]

David , daredevil - a quick question, slightly OT but still related to SIN

when i was shooting the models on stage, quite a few pics were very bright and overexposed because so many of us were using flash. Luckily i was shooting in RAW+JPEG so post processed RAW for the images that were interesting.


However, if there was no RAW, i would have had lots of spoiled pics how do you suggest we handle such a scenario?

Shoot everything in RAW. That is the best solution.

 

[daredevil123]

Unless you're using D3..... ;p Then it's a different story. BTW, I shoot a lot of indoor without flash using D90 as well.. So I guess it's not exactly a necessity. Depends on what you're shooting and what kind of effect you intend to get.

I was just trying to exaggerate a bit. ;p But still, a flash gun should be in every photographer's collection of equipment. So it should be there when the need arises.

 

[lsisaxon]

I was just trying to exaggerate a bit. ;p But still, a flash gun should be in every photographer's collection of equipment. So it should be there when the need arises.

Yup. No doubts about that. :thumbsup:

 

[Nicona]

Thx alot for explaining and even provide a link really appreciate it ^^

 

[Nicona]

Ok, so we were saying that the pic was shot at 200mm focal length. D60 has crop factor of 1.5x, so now min shutter speed = 1/(200x1.5) = 1/300s. So far so good.

VR will let you gain 2 more stops. This means that you can shoot with a shutter speed that is 2 stops slower, as the VR mechanism will compensate for any slight movement or camera shake. So let's count stops: from 1/300s to 1/150s (multiply by 2) is gaining one stop. From 1/150s to 1/75s is another stop. That is how we get 1/75s.

For better understanding of relation between ISO, aperture and shutter speed, please take a look at this article from me (wrote long long time ago :bsmilie. Try to understand at least from 1-9.

Cheers.

Thx alot for explaining and even provide a link really appreciate it ^^

 

[DrSpock]

Now let's see. You were shooting your 2nd pic at 200mm. After the crop factor, your effective focal length is 300mm. Using the rule of thumb of 1/focal length, you need a shutter speed of 1/300s. With the 70-200/2.8 VR, the VR gives you more 2 stops. So you'll need a min shutter speed of 1/75s.

The exposure value of your 2nd pic is ISO1600 f/5.6 1/8s. So with the 70-200/2.8 VR, from f/5.6 to f/2.8 you gain 2 stops. Let's say you shoot at ISO1600 f/2.8. Since you gain 2 stops, the shutter speed is now 1/32s, which is still 1 stop away from the needed min shutter speed.

The above assume that the original lens you used to shoot the pic has no VR. If it has VR, then you do not gain the 2 extra stops from VR, and you're now 3 stops away from needed min shutter speed.

So as you can see, buying the 70-200/2.8 VR is not really a good solution to this problem. What is a good solution? Learn how to use flash properly. I have a friend who insist on not using flash even in poorly lit condition, "to capture the atmosphere". And so what happened? He got all blur pics while I got good ones, simply because I used flash. :bsmilie:

(Hijacking this thread):lovegrin:

Hi Mod, the VR allows you 2 stop, Qn 1. is this an assumption or again it depends on lighting conditions, like day time or night time?

Here the deciding factor is exposure Qn 2. so if you use f2.8 lens technically you can discount the VR effect and go to as low as 1/32 min SS? Qn 3.Or is there a combination of VR & f stops?

Qn 4. What would happen i you boost the ISO up to 3200 from 1600? Will that get you a stop up? Qn 5.Will using a tripod help somehow in this case?

Sori for posting so may Qns:devil:

 

[lsisaxon]

(Hijacking this thread):lovegrin:

Hi Mod, the VR allows you 2 stop, Qn 1. is this an assumption or again it depends on lighting conditions, like day time or night time?

It's actually based on the min shutter speed of 1/focal length. So VR would be able to give you up to a 3 stop advantage, VRII would give up to 4 stops.

So for example, most people could handhold a 200mm at a shutter speed of 1/200s. With VRII (many VR lenses released after 2005 are using VRII technology), you could theoretically handhold the lens at a shutter speed of 1/13s. (1-stop, 1/100, 2-stops 1/50, 3-stops 1/25, 4 stops 1/13s). But the key word is 'up to' it really depends on situation as well. If your subject is not static, it will cause motion blur at that kind of shutter speed also.

The other questions are related more to exposure. Think of VR as a tripod replacement, nothing more than that. ;p

 

[ziploc]

(Hijacking this thread):lovegrin:

Hi Mod, the VR allows you 2 stop, Qn 1. is this an assumption or again it depends on lighting conditions, like day time or night time?

As lsisaxon had explained, the number of stops VR gives is independent of lighting conditions. Manufacturers usually publish a higher number, e.g. 18-200VR gives 3 stops, but in practice you'll probably get about 2 stops most of the time. So if we assume we can gain 2 stops from VR, then for a given exposure (regardless of day or night, bright or dim) you'll gain 2 stops from that exposure.

Qn 2. so if you use f2.8 lens technically you can discount the VR effect and go to as low as 1/32 min SS?

If you discount VR, it will just be the same as a lens without VR. Meaning that if you shoot at 200mm then the min shutter speed you need would be 1/(200x1.5) = 1/300s. The difference between an f/2.8 lens and, say an f/5.6 lens is that you have more light entering the camera (in this case 2 stops) with the faster lens, so you can "spend" the extra 2 stops to get faster shutter speed or lower ISO. So to answer your question, if discounting VR, whether you can shoot at 1/32s will depend NOT on how wide your aperture can go, but on the focal length that you're shooting at (e.g. if your effective focal length is 30mm then of course you can shoot at 1/32s). Note also that the 1/focal length is just a rule of thumb. People with super steady hand can probably go 1~2 stops lower (we have seen CS members done that before).

Qn 3.Or is there a combination of VR & f stops?

As already explained, wrt the rule of thumb, min shutter speed depends just on the focal length and not f-stop. With VR, you can use the number of stops gained to either: lower the shutter speed, stop down the aperture, or lower your ISO.

Qn 4. What would happen i you boost the ISO up to 3200 from 1600? Will that get you a stop up?

Yup that will gain you 1 stop. But of course with higher ISO comes higher noise and lower details.

Qn 5.Will using a tripod help somehow in this case?

Sori for posting so may Qns:devil:

Depends on what you meant by help in this case. If you're referring to shooting SIN, then no, as you'll get motion blur under slow shutter speed when the models move (or simply shifting their bodies slightly).

Hope that helps.

 

[synfan]

Ok, so we were saying that the pic was shot at 200mm focal length. D60 has crop factor of 1.5x, so now min shutter speed = 1/(200x1.5) = 1/300s. So far so good.

VR will let you gain 2 more stops. This means that you can shoot with a shutter speed that is 2 stops slower, as the VR mechanism will compensate for any slight movement or camera shake. So let's count stops: from 1/300s to 1/150s (multiply by 2) is gaining one stop. From 1/150s to 1/75s is another stop. That is how we get 1/75s.

For better understanding of relation between ISO, aperture and shutter speed, please take a look at this article from me (wrote long long time ago :bsmilie. Try to understand at least from 1-9.

Cheers.

wow..
thanks for ur guide..

 

[DrSpock]

Thanks to Mod ziploc & lsisaxon for the in-depth explanation. Need to go out to play more and after 5 yrs of practice with 1 million actuations I should reach this level of understanding at my fingertips:bsmilie:

Cheers:thumbsup:

 

[Nicona]

you dont like flash because when you say flash i mean you refer to the in-built flash

I guess time for you to read Scott Kelby digital Photography VOL-II.

A flash with bounce or diffuser can work wonders for a picture like you have posted.

Looking at the exif, you are shooting at 200mm with 1/8 !!
:nono: not gonna work

Hmm , wht is this 'exif' thingy ? Is it a programme to view photos 's aperture shutter etc ?
Anyone mind tellin me how this works n where can I get it ? Thx in advance

 

[DrSpock]

Hmm , wht is this 'exif' thingy ? Is it a programme to view photos 's aperture shutter etc ?
Anyone mind tellin me how this works n where can I get it ? Thx in advance

U can download it for free by googling for 'Opanda Exif' and run the program.

 

[ijnek]

right click on ur pic, and view the properties.
go to the Summary and click on Advanced if u hv not done so...

basically information like the iso,aperature,shutter speed etc when u took tat pic

 

[Ninestar]

As lsisaxon had explained, the number of stops VR gives is independent of lighting conditions. Manufacturers usually publish a higher number, e.g. 18-200VR gives 3 stops, but in practice you'll probably get about 2 stops most of the time. So if we assume we can gain 2 stops from VR, then for a given exposure (regardless of day or night, bright or dim) you'll gain 2 stops from that exposure.



If you discount VR, it will just be the same as a lens without VR. Meaning that if you shoot at 200mm then the min shutter speed you need would be 1/(200x1.5) = 1/300s. The difference between an f/2.8 lens and, say an f/5.6 lens is that you have more light entering the camera (in this case 2 stops) with the faster lens, so you can "spend" the extra 2 stops to get faster shutter speed or lower ISO. So to answer your question, if discounting VR, whether you can shoot at 1/32s will depend NOT on how wide your aperture can go, but on the focal length that you're shooting at (e.g. if your effective focal length is 30mm then of course you can shoot at 1/32s). Note also that the 1/focal length is just a rule of thumb. People with super steady hand can probably go 1~2 stops lower (we have seen CS members done that before).



As already explained, wrt the rule of thumb, min shutter speed depends just on the focal length and not f-stop. With VR, you can use the number of stops gained to either: lower the shutter speed, stop down the aperture, or lower your ISO.



Yup that will gain you 1 stop. But of course with higher ISO comes higher noise and lower details.



Depends on what you meant by help in this case. If you're referring to shooting SIN, then no, as you'll get motion blur under slow shutter speed when the models move (or simply shifting their bodies slightly).

Hope that helps.

Thank You Ziploc. Had some similar questions on these also. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Nicona]

U can download it for free by googling for 'Opanda Exif' and run the program.

Thx , but i can't view those information it's written no EXIF information found .. hmm ...:think:

 

[xieshen]

ask ur teacher to pay for it...
wat a joke.

an external flash work well too in low light situation.
jus bounce the flash

I happen to be the teacher that stated my preference for the lens over flash.
While I see your point in flash bouncing, i do not see the basis of the joke that u mentioned.

While the 70-200 f:2.8 lens is costly, it is a good investment. All people need is to spend some time saving for it. It's just a matter of dedication and patience. Of course, learning to use the flash requires that too.

 

[aspenx]

I happen to be the teacher that stated my preference for the lens over flash.
While I see your point in flash bouncing, i do not see the basis of the joke that u mentioned.

While the 70-200 f:2.8 lens is costly, it is a good investment. All people need is to spend some time saving for it. It's just a matter of dedication and patience. Of course, learning to use the flash requires that too.

Ziploc went through the trouble of doing the maths for the TS. As far as I know, there was nothing wrong with his calculations, which proves that TS will not be able to get the kind of pics she wants with her D60 at ISO 1600 with the 70-200 wide open at 200mm without a flash.

Besides, the lens is TOO HEAVY for the tiny camera for any proper handling.

So, will it be really worth it to get the lens NOW for the TS's case? I still think not. In the meantime, everyone wants to get nice pictures and it doesn't mean I can't get nice pics just because I don't have any trinity lens. ijnek was not very nice with the words he chose, but the "joke" is that many people are getting good shots at the same show even without that lens.

 

[ijnek]

hi teacher,
no offence to u.

but a flash would hv more or less solve her problem than getting a 70-200 f/2.8 for a faction of the cost.

sorry if i offended u with my choice of words...i was weighin the cost factor in my mind.

but consider cost/weight and other factors, i still think she should hv gotten a decent flash to work with rather than spendin a bomb on a 70-200 f/2.8.
no doubt it's a good len, but not every1 would need 1.

here's an example...
here we c some1 sellin the 70-200 f/2.8 for sgd2K
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=579653

a new sb600 would cost less than 400 and a new sb900 less than s700.
and that's not even half the price for this 2nd hand 70-200 f/2.8.

once again, i apologise to u for my choice of words.
but as a teacher, i think u hv a responsibility to ur student/s as well.
instead of advising them to get the best out there, there r other options to weigh as well which can get the job done