The Photography Thread - Printable Version

The following warnings occurred:

Warning [2] Undefined property: MyLanguage::$archive_pages - Line: 2 - File: printthread.php(287) : eval()'d code PHP 8.2.28 (Linux)

File	Line	Function
/inc/class_error.php	153	errorHandler->error
/printthread.php(287) : eval()'d code	2	errorHandler->error_callback
/printthread.php	287	eval
/printthread.php	117	printthread_multipage

The Photography Thread - Printable Version

+- Madison Motorsports (https://forum.mmsports.org)
+-- Forum: Madison Motorsports (https://forum.mmsports.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Lounge (https://forum.mmsports.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: The Photography Thread (/showthread.php?tid=11458)

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Re: The Photography Thread - SlimKlim - 05-25-2017

I've been doing some research on the Nikkors, the 1.8G is the one to buy, the 1.8D will work with the D5500 but it won't auto-focus. I'll eventually pick up a 50mm 1.8G, will probably pair it with another cheap .43x wide-angle adapter, and a 10x macro adapter so I can get cool detail/macro shots (mostly of watches) without breaking the bank.

Re: The Photography Thread - RawrImAMonster - 05-25-2017

My current setup:

Nikon D7000
Nikkor 16-85mm F3.5-5.6G
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G

Here are some of the photos I've taken. You all have probably seen most of these posted already. I really need to take pictures more often.

[Image: 3.jpg]

Re: The Photography Thread - RawrImAMonster - 05-25-2017

Also I found that semi-legal copy of Photoshop CS2 that Adobe was giving out for free if anyone needs it. Technically you weren't supposed to download it unless you already had CS2 before they shut the activation servers down, but you know how that goes.

Re: The Photography Thread - Ken - 05-25-2017

ispoonwithmugen Wrote:
Ken Wrote:How does one go about getting that kind of picture? Quicker shutter speed and tracking the car?

I use a high aperture (usually because it's sunny out) maybe F20, Shutter speed of 1/2 of the car speed (If they're going 100mph 1/50 or so) and ISO usually at 100 or 200.

But yes slow shutter speed, track the car.

Oh, oops, had it backwards.

Speaking of aperture, getting confused with how it's used. When you say "high aperture" you mean high in reference to the value of the number right (in this case 20) - not the actual size of the aperture (since f/20 is actually a small physical size) right? So, high/low refers to value and large/small would refer to the physical size and is basically inverse of the value? Seems like people use each interchangeably.

Secondly - is it a good rule of thumb to try and guesstimate speed of the "target" in MPH and then halve that for shutter speed? So, say you're trying to get a bike assume it's going 16MPH and use shutter of 1/8?

Sorry, just trying to get a grasp on the basics.

Re: The Photography Thread - Apoc - 05-25-2017

He had it backwards. A large aperture is a small number... it's called large because the hole in the lens is bigger. The easiest way to remember it is small number have small number of things in focus.

Re: The Photography Thread - SlimKlim - 05-25-2017

Yes, "high" refers to the numerical value, which is actually a smaller physical opening. A good way to think about aperture is high = deep depth of field, low = shallow DoF.

A low aperture gives you a very shallow depth of field so only your subject is in focus, everything in the foreground and background will be blurry. The other main reason to use a low aperture is because you can take in more light in less time, so that's why pretty much everyone buys a lens with a sub<2.0 aperture.

Indoor lighting at night is only juuuuuust bright enough for my f3.5 to get a decent exposure. I have to crank ISO up to 2000 or 4000, and I can still only manage a 1/60th shutter speed. If I had an f1.8, I could increase my shutter speed so I don't have to worry about shakey hands, and reduce the ISO which will give a sharper image all the way around.

A high aperture does the opposite, it allows you to get more (or all) of the image in focus. It also requires a longer shutter speed to get the same exposure vs a lower aperture setting in the same conditions, so for those nice race car shots with a blurry background you'd want to increase the aperture setting and decrease the shutter speed.

Here's a good simple example:

[Image: deep%20vs%20shallow%20DOFchess%20pieces.JPG]

[Image: deep%20vs%20shallow%20DOFchess%20pieces.JPG]

I don't want to speak for Garrett but I don't think his shutter speed math is broadly applicable. The distance between you and the subject is a big factor, as well as whatever apeture settings you're using. A shutter of 1/8s to get a shot of the guy on the bicycle would be almost impossible to get it crisp, just of the top of my head I think a 1/40-1/60s in that situation would still allow you to get the cool blurry background, assuming the 16mph bike is much closer to you than the 100mph race cars.

Re: The Photography Thread - Apoc - 05-25-2017

Using the term "high aperture" to describe a high f-stop (number) is not accurate and is partly why the topic's confusing to people. Please stop.

Re: The Photography Thread - SlimKlim - 05-25-2017

How much of a chub do you get whenever you correct people?

I'm sorry, that's the way I was taught by my lazy & burnt out high school photography teacher and it stuck. My post still explains what aperture settings do. Wide vs narrow would probably be a better way to refer to it anyway. I've also heard people say fast & slow, since a lower f-value (or wider apeture) opening allows for a faster shutter speed.

Re: The Photography Thread - Apoc - 05-25-2017

<a class="postlink" href="https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem">https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem</a>

Attacking me doesn't make you any less wrong.

Re: The Photography Thread - SlimKlim - 05-25-2017

Apoc Wrote:https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque

Attacking me doesn't make you any less wrong.

Quote:Pedant (noun) - a person who is excessively concerned with minor details and rules or with displaying academic learning.

You're not right. Nor are you wrong. Different people refer to it differently. This article from Nikon describes it the way I do.

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-and-explore/a/tips-and-techniques/understanding-maximum-aperture.html

I see it referenced all kinds of ways, I think if you can grasp the concept that a high f-stop value = a large depth of field and less light entering the camera, you can refer to it however makes the most sense to you.

Re: The Photography Thread - Apoc - 05-25-2017

SlimKlim Wrote:This article from Nikon describes it the way I do.

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-and-explore/a/tips-and-techniques/understanding-maximum-aperture.html

Except they don't.

The lower f/stops give more exposure because they represent the larger apertures, while the higher f/stops give less exposure because they represent smaller apertures.

Note they say f/stop to represent the number and aperture to represent the opening. I wonder who else said that...

Apoc Wrote:Using the term "high aperture" to describe a high f-stop (number) is not accurate and is partly why the topic's confusing to people. Please stop.

It's akin to using hp and ft/lb interchangeably. They're not the same thing and you would clarify someone using them interchangeably.

Care to try again... or do you want to just keep throwing darts at me?

Re: The Photography Thread - Ken - 05-25-2017

This isn't the only place I've seen this, which is why i asked. Looks like they're both used interchangeably, for better or worse, but at the end of the day it boils down to - the Fstop value carries an inverse relationship to the physical size of the aperture.

Re: The Photography Thread - Apoc - 05-25-2017

Ken Wrote:Fstop value carries and inverse relationship to the physical size of the aperture.

This.

Re: The Photography Thread - Ken - 05-25-2017

Apoc Wrote:
Ken Wrote:Fstop value carries and inverse relationship to the physical size of the aperture.

This.

I'm sure there's a good physics related equation/reason why this is but still makes me want to punch someone since it'd just be easier for high fstop to equal large aperture. I still have to sit and think about it when reading some of these photography how-to's.

Re: The Photography Thread - Apoc - 05-25-2017

The f/stop is ratio to focal length. The bigger the opening/aperture, the closer it is to focal length, and therefore the smaller the number. That's why zoom lenses have higher minimum f/stops - the opening can only get so close to a 200mm focal length.

Oops... was that too pedantic?

Re: The Photography Thread - SlimKlim - 05-25-2017

I concede your victory but you're still a pedant.

Apoc Wrote:do you want to just keep throwing darts at me?

Yes

Re: The Photography Thread - Apoc - 05-25-2017

I've made peace with who I am. You should try working for me! :lol:

Re: The Photography Thread - SlimKlim - 05-25-2017

[Image: C8EB9VEW0AIZZTx.jpg]

Re: The Photography Thread - .RJ - 05-25-2017

lulz

Re: The Photography Thread - Senor_Taylor - 05-25-2017

Equipment:
Google Pixel
Cracked Screen

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk