- 4,477
- 480
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2005
I wouldn't use ISO 800 for that shot. It would ruin it. I like the silhouette of the foreground.
Official Photography Thread: Vol. ICan'tFindTheLastOne
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by ebayologist,
- Start date
elboricua 6
Banned
- 1,978
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2006
I really do think he was talking about night shoots with lots of light because if not - then im
When I shoot into the sun I usually have to move to the lowest ISO (100) and go down about 4-5 stops so I can get into 1/2000 range - like that I haveflexibility to underexpose or over expose if i feel like it. If I have ISO 800 forget about it .. all the pictures would be trashed!
- 173
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2003
for night time... i dont like going above iso 400 unless i completely have to. noise sucks and i dont know how to get rid of it.Originally Posted by elboricua 6
I really do think he was talking about night shoots with lots of light because if not - then im....
When I shoot into the sun I usually have to move to the lowest ISO (100) and go down about 4-5 stops so I can get into 1/2000 range - like that I have flexibility to underexpose or over expose if i feel like it. If I have ISO 800 forget about it .. all the pictures would be trashed!
good call on the 1/2000. i didnt think about that when i was out there. i am still in my first month of doing this.
- 3,628
- 1,789
- Joined
- May 10, 2002
Just got back from circuit city and all slr's are 30% off. Hopefully the accessories get discounted alot too.
elboricua 6
Banned
- 1,978
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2006
- 2,710
- 30
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2007
elboricua...
- are you (were) in the Marine Corps?
rizobs...
- when it comes to noise I've always used the photoshop plug-in Neat Image, you can find a "free" copy online.
Probably thebest plugin to use when potato-shopping your pics.
- are you (were) in the Marine Corps?
rizobs...
- when it comes to noise I've always used the photoshop plug-in Neat Image, you can find a "free" copy online.
elboricua 6
Banned
- 1,978
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2006
You know it .. LoL .. I hope you didn't take offense my dude - you know how we do!
Anyways, I took a moon shot a while back and I was very unhappy with it, so I went ahead and did it again.
This was about 4:50PM today ...
ISO 100
F11
1//100
55-250 @ 250
- 504
- 10
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2005
more 120 film images, shot with a holga
- 2,710
- 30
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2007
elboricua...
^ Nah its cool man, no worries.
Was that your barracks? The Navy always get shafted and we got the crappiest stuff.
*I cant quote for some reason* my computer at work is super lagging.
Potato-shoppers...I got another great plug in for those who are interested. Check out Focal Point, great plug in for creating a realistic DoF. Enjoy.
^ Nah its cool man, no worries.
Was that your barracks? The Navy always get shafted and we got the crappiest stuff.
*I cant quote for some reason* my computer at work is super lagging.
Potato-shoppers...I got another great plug in for those who are interested. Check out Focal Point, great plug in for creating a realistic DoF. Enjoy.
- 910
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2004
quick question. i just got my 50mm f/1.8 lens in for my d60 and i read that the aperture ring has to be locked on 22, is there a reason why?
and on a sidenote i need to get used to taking a step or two back when taking pictures with this lens.
and on a sidenote i need to get used to taking a step or two back when taking pictures with this lens.
elboricua 6
Banned
- 1,978
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2006
Nope I was on my way to blockbuster and decided to take a picture for you ..
It's actually Marine Corps barracks 8th and I and National Landmark .....
It's actually Marine Corps barracks 8th and I and National Landmark .....
- 4,477
- 480
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2005
Otherwise you wont be ale to shoot/meter with it.
- 3,788
- 63
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2007
my fav pic of the ones you posted, i like the subject and the perspective and the lighting. good +!@$
elboricua 6 wrote:
as always great shot but i have a question not just to you but to all my fellow photo people..
i had my camera set up on the tripod, 200mm, played with the exposure and everything, even had the remote for the shutter as to avoid vibration, and my moonpics still come out as just a blurry ball of light? what am i doing wrong? when i look through the viewfinder it looks good but after i take it, not so good..advice please? thank you in advance
- 910
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2004
dunno what that means. is it only on select cameras that the aperture ring has to be locked on 22?
- 4,477
- 480
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2005
Nope, at least on DSLRs, you always have to do it.
- 910
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2004
cool thanks for the help santi. im diggin this lens though, i wish i had money for a wide angle
- 504
- 10
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2005
- 4,024
- 876
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
as always great shot but i have a question not just to you but to all my fellow photo people..
i had my camera set up on the tripod, 200mm, played with the exposure and everything, even had the remote for the shutter as to avoid vibration, and my moon pics still come out as just a blurry ball of light? what am i doing wrong? when i look through the viewfinder it looks good but after i take it, not so good.. advice please? thank you in advance
you gotta change your aperture to a higher f stop.
- 173
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2003
my fav pic of the ones you posted, i like the subject and the perspective and the lighting. good +!@
thanks man, i was surprised to see that my flash was able to go that far. it probably bounced off the water.
elboricua 6, thats a great moon shot. thats crazy how you get it that crisp. i cant even come close tothat
- 504
- 10
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2005
yarrh
Banned
- 344
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2005
BayEST you take some dope pics. You're proof that high end equipment don't mean *++#.
- 1,796
- 19
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2007
^ Who said you can't take good photos with an entry-level DSLR and kit lens? It's fairly easier to photograph a controlled environment where strobesand a tripod can be setup. However there are limitations of such equipment where shots must be captured spontaneously such as social events and weddings, whichrequire faster lenses and bodies capable of excellent high-ISO performance. If you really believe that the higher end equipment don't mean anything, thendamn, there must be thousands of idiots out there spending their money on useless equipment.
- 1,086
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2003
elboricua 6
Banned
- 1,978
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2006
Once again, you are making your own assumptions. I don't think no one here ever said that you can't take good/great pictures with entrylevel DSLR.
BTW, when are you going to post some pictures?? All I seen was a Audi from a P&S camera and that's it. Just interested in seen some of your work dude.. thanks!
elboricua 6
Banned
- 1,978
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2006
You're probably just overexposing the image - the moon is brighter than you'd think and if you have your metering set so it averages the whole scene (the rest of it being the night sky) then it will let too much light in.
So, either reduce the aperture or decrease the exposure time - and maybe try changing your metering to spot and meter straight off the moon.
LOL - I remember my 1st time shooting the moon and I had the same problem and someone here told about about the settings being:
f/11
iso 100
1/100
and that help tremendously.
Like Kdwallace said, you are probably over exposing the pictures. Try using the settings I mentioned above and automatically you should see a big improvement.When it come to the moon you have to under expose it to get the results you want.
But you can also try to do stuff like f/9 iso 200 or alternate for best result but start where I told you and you should be straight!
