Official Photography Thread: Vol. ICan'tFindTheLastOne

Bump -- looking to buy a good digital SLR in the near future and I don't want this thread to disappear. Speaking of which, any advice to a complete photo noob on what to buy? I've been thinking of a Nikon D40 or D50 because I see a lot of pics that I like on Flickr taken with those...but what do I know?

My boy's a photog as well -- does a lot of wedding stuff.

Photos By Jameel Morrison
 
Question to anyone that can answer...

I do most of my photography outside in sunlight. Is there a way I can set my monochrome setting (I use a 400D) so it can capture darker blacks and lighter lights? Because I always seem to get more of just grayness. I basically want the picture to look more extreme, but don't want the obvious look of the contrast being adjusted too much.

My bad if that was confusing. Thanks, yall.
Vallejo, CA
 
Quote:
I do most of my photography outside in sunlight. Is there a way I can set my monochrome setting (I use a 400D) so it can capture darker blacks and lighter lights? Because I always seem to get more of just grayness. I basically want the picture to look more extreme, but don't want the obvious look of the contrast being adjusted too much.
ers digital has fewer shades of gray people I talk to says like 5-7 distinct shades more with film so, its in uphill battle for digital that really comes out in B/W. I'm sure if you read this post you've heard me comment on digital B/W being middle tone heavy and I take it this your problem...

The real solution is shoot film, but really what I've heard is to first properly expose the shot, that means "shoot for the shadows, develop for the highlights" i.e. use the reflected light meter within the camera and meter in the darkest part of the image and then shoot. Then in ps burn in the light parts. Also I've heard shooting in color and then switching it to B/W in photoshop is better because your camera the sensor reads things in color and then processes it to B/W with its internal computer and simply put the photoshop and your computer are more powerful than the computer in the camera. So shoot raw and then convert in ps to B/W.

The other thing that just dawned on me reading your post is that you shoot in sunlight... Clearly if you shoot outside sunlight is probably going to be there, but most photographers especially b/w photographers love cloudy days. you don't need total overcast but the noon day sun is too harsh so either shoot on overcast/cloudy days or later in the afternoon...

Clouds act as diffusers or light boxes of the sun... Give you far more even and well distributed light. And the later afternoon is good because the sun isnt high the sky so you get less harsh shadows and smoother light.
Click to expand...
 
Hmmmmmmm........so what's the verdict between the two: Canon XTI or Nikon D40?

AirJordans4Life....thought you got a new cam. Dope stuff!
- Fong$tarr



E-mail: Fongstarr@hotmail.com
Member since: January 26, 2003
TEAM WARRIORS WE BELIEVE
 
good stuff ebay....

I'll start experimenting with all that asap. and post some photos as well.

Thanks again!
Vallejo, CA
 
Fongstarr
Everything I've read seems to side with Canon but really strikes me more a bang for your buck rather than one is better than the other. A more fair comparison is the Nikon D40x and Canon XTI 400D which are actually quite similar. While alot of the reviews seems to side with Canon, alot of the sites I've seen reviews on have camera advertisements of them so I don't know how much you can trust some of the reviews ala $ole Collector... But honestly I don't think you can go wrong with either. Its like picking between a toyota corrola and honda accord, I don't know a ton about cars, but correct me if i'm wrong they're both pretty solid vehicles..
 
^^^Thanks Fong.

All the reviews and comparisons I've read led me to the D40. This takes into account picture quality, cost, user friendliness and functionality. the cost of the D40 is about $300 less than the XTi and the picture quality and user friendliness is at least equal, with the XTi having more functions and MP. If you're looking for something in the $500 range, the D40 is the better choice.

And just like ebay said, all you're really doing is paying for more functions and the consumer perception that more MP equals better camera with the XTi or D40x. but from a picture quality standpoint, the D40 or Canon XT is the same and you can't go wrong with either.
by the way, make sure to read my sig...

ebay Auctions:​
 
Oh yeah

I remember someone was discussing about the short lens 50mm F/1.8 II for canon.

HELLLLLA WORTH IT, especially for it's price.

Great pics, guys.
Vallejo, CA
 
^^^^True...true. Although the Corrola would probably outlast the Accord and save on gas and money....but I get what your saying.
- Fong$tarr



E-mail: Fongstarr@hotmail.com
Member since: January 26, 2003
TEAM WARRIORS WE BELIEVE
 
437384.jpg
:smh:
smh.gif
:lol:
laugh.gif
:lol:
laugh.gif

goldHasselblad.jpg
 
Doesn't Booduh use a Nikon? Does he have the D40 or the higher model?

Oh also....is it true (to a certain degree) that higher megapixals doesn't necessarily mean a better picture quality? I remember I was talking to this one guy at Circuit City and he said the 6 mp Canon were better then Sony 10 mp ones. Any truth to that statement?
- Fong$tarr



E-mail: Fongstarr@hotmail.com
Member since: January 26, 2003
TEAM WARRIORS WE BELIEVE
 
i have a nikon D100 and a nikon D50.

how do i use those to the fullest potential? lol
teamdecepticon​
T R A N S F O R M E R S​
2 people using this screen name.sole lovely/mjbetch/a filipino​
TEAM MAC​
 
Quote:
Oh also....is it true (to a certain degree) that higher megapixals doesn't necessarily mean a better picture quality?
Thinking about this for a min: For pixels to really actually significantly matter you need a: to want reasonably large image like few thousand pixels and want to print resonably large or have on a computer (i.e. not on the web) reasonably large and b: shoot raw, if you're not shooting raw the advantages of super huge pixels is still an advantage but its significantly less of an advantage without shooting raw... Because if you're shooint jpg's your shooting a degrading file. its @#%$ dumb to shoot something that breaks down reasonably fast thats a huge amount of pixels, because part of the reason to have that many pixels is to edit the file, but editing it degrades it. it's like taking 1 step forward and 1 step back...
Having a 10MP P&S is like having a turbo on a geo metro...

Quote:
I remember I was talking to this one guy at Circuit City and he said the 6 mp Canon were better then Sony 10 mp ones. Any truth to that statement?


The guy I'm willing to bet probably doesnt know his @#%$ from a hole in the wall, but by the same token I would take the canon over the sony in that situation, even if the mp difference was even greater... There was some Sony vs Canon post this weekend and basically the footnotes are yeah, sony's have Carl Zeiss lenses and thus makes optics their only claim to fame but it's really like having a 20k benz and then bragging to your friends you drive a benz forgeting the part about its a 20k benz. Carl Zeiss are the benz of lenses because Victor Hasselblad put them the "team" on with exclusivity to Hasselblad cameras about 50+ years ago...

The moral of the story is this. P&S are all garbage camera's they're faking the funk persay... if I had to have one I'd take a Leica D Lux 3 but 2nd choice would be a Canon or a Nikon...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
feel like posting something
TEAM DC​
"And as the sun, that had been too afraid to show its face in this city, started to turn the black into grey, I smiled. Not out of happiness. But because I knew... that one day, I wouldn't have to do this anymore. One day, I could stop fighting. Because one day... I would win. One day, there will be no pain, no loss, no crime. Because of me, because I fight. For you. One day, I will win."​
 
Booduh has a nikon d80
teamdecepticon​
T R A N S F O R M E R S​


Team SK3 we dont miss posts... we got auto updates.​
 
I have a Nikon D40 and it's great - you can't go wrong with the Canon equivalent though.
TEAM SINISTER

Shopping at The Leftorium since 1977.
​
 
^ Your pics aren't working big cat...

But I figured out what they are... Medium format cameras for the most part use waist level viewfinders it has the same slr construction with a mirror it just reflects on ground glass that the image appears on. You basically hold it at your waist flip up the top part where the view finder is and bring it closer to focus but most have a folding magnification glass. It's 120 or 220 film so 12 or 24 exposures if you shoot 6x6 and less if you shoot 6x7 or 6x9 or more if you shoot 6x4.5. So you're looking at the size of the negative thru the view finder so you can compose quite well so its less just blazing thru film and more composing shots, also because film isnt cheap. it's like $3 or $4 a roll of 120 and then another $3 or $4 to get color film processed (b/w i just do right in my apt).

But they also make viewfinders for alot of medium format cameras that are basically the same as a 35mm slr view finder...

It's alittle different but you get used to it. Also because the backs where the film is at detach they make digital backs that have the same sensor as a dslr just significantly larger. So technically if I had like 9k i could make my film hassy digital...

I also have this Yashica TLR. It's medium format too...
photo5it2.jpg
 
^^^ I just tried to post the pictures you had posted...
and thanks for the information, even though I lost you there for a bit.
AY BAY BAY​
 
yo ebay...

When you were talking about shooting in color then putting it to b/w in photoshop. How much of a difference would it make from shooting in jpeg vs raw?
Vallejo, CA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

aNYone
OFFICIAL NFL OFFSZN THREAD 2023-24: Vol: Draft Night!!!
1562 1563 1564
Replies
39K
Views
2M
finessence
finessence

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom