Camera Discussion

[Jacca5660]

I honestly don't read the manuals. If I want to learn about something I'll read up on it or just play around and figure it out myself. I do think cy did an excellent job summing everything up. I currently have CS4 on my mac, which is older now but it is what I learned to use when in high school. I do plan on putting on CS5 as I got it for free when someone upgraded from CS5 to CS6. On my PC I actually do have an older copy of Photoshop elements and it does do a decent job. You can probably get it for less than $100, just look online at like amazon or something. When you are talking about blurry images are they very pixelated or is there visible motion blur. If it is the first then you could have your camera in a lower quality setting or just be shooting at too high an ISO.

MmeLeota, I've actually never been a fan of the super zoom point and shoot. I feel that the more optical zoom you use the softer the pictures will be. Viewfinders on point and shoots are becoming rarer and rarer. The idea now is to have the 3 inch display so you no longer have to hold the camera to your eye and can just reach out and get your picture. I personally still like viewfinders as well. Even a lot of the DSLRs have gone to the screen now. I just don't like that at all.

The blurry I am getting is from visible motion blur. Most of it is from shooting long shots with the lens in med to long telephoto settings. I now have a small tripod and am using the timer for the shots I can. This is of little use when we are up on the ridge shooting fireworks or such. That's why I started to record a lot of things. It's hard enough to get a shot with having to anticipate the time it takes the shutter and when a firework is going to erupt. Even with the tripod the camera still blurs when I depress the shutter button for a quick snot. Just the other day I found that there is a pre-shot function on the camera. If I half depress the shutter button the camera frames the picture and it only takes a small amount of pressure to get the shot.

I am old school also. I miss my view finder. I notice on our older cameras, you had to learn what was actually in the picture. The screen showed more of a field then was in the picture. Now on our newer cameras the screen is the shot. From what every body is saying about software ,THANK YOU, I think I'll just keep using what I have right now. I'm gonna learn how to shoot before I start manipulating the pictures.

[cy1229]

I completely love my viewfinder. I have become farsighted to the extent that I can't see a screen at less than arm's length without my glasses on, and I rarely have them with me when we're doing outdoorsy kinds of things. I adjusted the focus of the viewfinder inside my camera so that what is in focus for me is truly in focus. Funny story about that - my sister's point-and-shoot died and she didn't have $$ for a new one. I had an old Minolta Dimage sitting around that had a button that wouldn't work right. I managed to get the body apart enough to get the button back in line with the opening for it in the body, and SHAZAM! It worked! I was all because I fixed it ALL BY MYSELF and gave the camera to my sister. The first thing she did was try it out, and she flipped out because everything inside the viewfinder was blurry. I very embarrassingly told her it's because I'm half-blind, and all she had to do was turn the little diopter adjustment. I think we laughed for a good 5 minutes over that. And she called me old... I'm only 5 years older than her but you know, it can make a huge difference sometimes.

The other thing about viewfinder vs. screen is how hard it is to see a screen display in bright sunlight, especially with polarizing sunglasses on.

The awesome thing about digital is that it doesn't use costly silver compounds, or persistent organic compounds, to make an image, and because it's so inexpensive to take multiple shots and then just keep the best ones, almost anyone can get decent shots of anything they want to. I also find that my girls are much more willing to experiment and "goof around" with their cameras, trying new things, than I was when I got my first camera (a Canon snappy 35mm point-and-shoot. Anyone remember those?) I think the downside is in the inconsistency of how photographs display, or are printed, with computers. I don't have the patience to sit down and figure out the numbers of color so sometimes what I think is a decent red turns out to be overblown and fake. That gets annoying.

[dstrawn9889]

cy you hit it on the head, the last time i was at disney, the T1i was in sports mode for most of the wandering around i did. would get several shots to be sure i got one without the blur... i even used that mode during MSEP, and got some great shots (Smee being the exception, not a shot without a major blur)

[Len90]

But you're not "old school" like us, Len90 - I'm surprised you still like the viewfinder as well.

Think about how you hold the camera for each. When you are doing telephoto w/o a tripod the viewfinder gives you more control of the camera and I feel allows for straighter shots.

As for the super zooms, Image Stabilization has been a great addition.

Jacca: sounds like your issue comes from too slow a shutter speed. I always go by a speed of 1/2(x) with x being the zoom distance. So if I have something at 200mm I will know that the slowest shutter speed I can use without getting motion blur is 1/400th of a second. Of course I can go a lot slower and still be okay but I usually like that as a rule of thumb. In low light you need a very slow shutter and a wider opening to allow the camera to capture as much light as possible. Of course this leads to the motion blur you are experiencing. I personally try to just compensate with a slightly faster shutter and bump up the ISO. I feel a little grain is better than a lot of motion blur. As for fireworks, I really don't have a fool proof plan for capturing them yet. However, sometimes I do get lucky.

[Jacca5660]

cy you hit it on the head, the last time i was at disney, the T1i was in sports mode for most of the wandering around i did. would get several shots to be sure i got one without the blur... i even used that mode during MSEP, and got some great shots (Smee being the exception, not a shot without a major blur)

Not to sound stupid, but is "THAT" what the sports mode for?

[Len90]

cy you hit it on the head, the last time i was at disney, the T1i was in sports mode for most of the wandering around i did. would get several shots to be sure i got one without the blur... i even used that mode during MSEP, and got some great shots (Smee being the exception, not a shot without a major blur)

Not to sound stupid, but is "THAT" what the sports mode for?

I personally think sports mode is meant to capture lower light and faster action pictures. So in theory that could work for nighttime parade shots.

And to fulfill my promise, here is a link to some sample pictures I took at the hockey games I have been to this season. All were taken with my new 7D and all but one were with the 70-200 f4L. http://s23.beta.photobucket.com/user/FD ... y%20Season

[dstrawn9889]

cy you hit it on the head, the last time i was at disney, the T1i was in sports mode for most of the wandering around i did. would get several shots to be sure i got one without the blur... i even used that mode during MSEP, and got some great shots (Smee being the exception, not a shot without a major blur)

Not to sound stupid, but is "THAT" what the sports mode for?

except for low light conditions... yeah, still too timid to play with f-stops and shutter speeds yet
try taking shots on btmrr without blur...

[Jacca5660]

except for low light conditions... yeah, still too timid to play with f-stops and shutter speeds yet
try taking shots on btmrr without blur...
Image

GREAT SHOT!!!

[Mousekedude]

We're currently using the Nikon D3100 with the 18-55mm lens it came with...

Wow, I miss a few days and this thread is already 2 pages long!
MmeLeota, that is exactly the same camera we have. But we also have a 70-200 zoom lens for it, and a 35mm prime lens that I got specifically for low-light situations because it has the lowest f-stop setting (1.8, if I remember correctly). As I was saying, I've been a little disappointed that I can't have more control over what the camera does. It's definitely designed for novices in that it will automatically compensate for what it "thinks" is not the right setting if you try to set any of the priorities manually. Of course, I've never read the manual (I'm like Len.. I like to try to figure it out on my own... ), so I guess I shouldn't complain. However, it's been a little messed up ever since Mouseoholic dropped it (....long story...), so I'm not sure how much of the problem comes from that. Not long ago the shutter stuck open, and I took the body apart and managed to fix that, but now all the shots are dim and lacking in color. And worse than that, the autofocus stopped working completely right in the middle of an important family event. So I'm not happy. But again, it's all probably because she dropped the darned thing, and I'll have to take it in for service I guess. All that stuff aside, I have a couple other comments:

Yeah, I hang with the old-school guys.... I like my viewfinder. The LCD screen display is a pain as far as I'm concerned, especially in bright light or "action" situations.

Lenses: Len is right about "once you choose a camera you're stuck with it..." because lenses are not interchangeable. But I will say that I do like the Nikon lenses. All of ours have the automatic vibration reduction feature which helps alleviate motion blur. That's a big plus in my book.

ISO: I have yet to figure out the best way to use ISO in relation to the other settings... probably because of the "auto-compensate" tendency of the D3100, as I've already mentioned. But I will say that I definitely don't like the "graininess" of a higher-ISO shot and would rather not take the shot at all if that's what I have to deal with. Of course, to be fair, I have had some really great night shots at Epcot and so forth that were taken with higher ISO settings, and they're some of the most beautiful shots that I have because they add more of a "glow" to the sky and clouds in the background and such. So I guess for me the bottom line is that I need to do three things: 1) educate myself a little more about photography in general, for which I'll lean on Len and other "pros" for more advice , 2) get my camera serviced and repaired as necessary before completely giving up on it, and 3) read the manual so I can know all about its capabilities and limitations before I decide whether or not to upgrade.

[mindflipper]

cy you hit it on the head, the last time i was at disney, the T1i was in sports mode for most of the wandering around i did. would get several shots to be sure i got one without the blur... i even used that mode during MSEP, and got some great shots (Smee being the exception, not a shot without a major blur)

Not to sound stupid, but is "THAT" what the sports mode for?

I personally think sports mode is meant to capture lower light and faster action pictures. So in theory that could work for nighttime parade shots.

When I fostered some kittens a few years back, I used to sports mode to take photos of them as well. The room was not brightly lighted, and the kittens ran around quite fast. Sports mode was great to capture their antics with a camera (much better actually than video).

[Len90]

M-dude: definitely time to bring the camera in for service. However, it may not be that cost effective to service it with what seems like multiple problems going on. I know your camera is probably around 2 years old given it was released in summer of 2010, but the D3200 (body only) is out and can be found for just under $600 now. However, I would think about going up a level. I'm really not sure what that would be with Nikon being a huge Canon person. However, I would assume something like the D5200 or maybe the D7000 would be a great choice for you. If you want to go full frame sensor then there is the D600. I personally am holding off on getting a full frame sensor since I think in the coming years the price will drop on them.

So my new lens finally arrived today. I did end up getting the 24-105 f4L which on a crop sensor like mine is a 38-168, which will be my ultimate walk around lens. I tested it out today, but the lighting is the best with partly to mostly cloudy skies. I will say that in terms of image quality I will not be using anything other than Canon L lenses now. Such a huge difference in quality and sharpness when compared to my Sigma 17-70DC or the 28-135IS Canon kit lens my 7D came with. This definitely completes my needs as I have the Sigma for wide angles and my 70-200 f4L for telephoto. I also have a 50mm prime f1.8 for low light that I barely use though.

Somehow I only posted a link to the album in my other post, but here is what I just recently took with the 7D 70-200f4L.

[Jacca5660]

Great shot!!

[Mousekedude]

Yeah, that is a good shot!
Thanks, Len. That gives me some good food for thought.

[cy1229]

M-dude, I know what you mean about going away for a couple of days and this thread exploding! Sheesh!

I have something to add to the discussion from Wednesday about blurred shots. Don't be fooled into thinking all blur is bad blur. It depends upon what the subject of your photo is. For example, when I take photos of the girls going off the blocks at a swim meet, I track with them as they start, which keeps them in sharp focus but blurs the background. The result is pretty cool. In fact, on my other computer I have some good shots that illustrate this exact point that I'll upload to Photobucket in a couple of minutes.

M-dude sounds like your camera needs the sensor recalibrated. Or something. Len might be right, get an estimate on repairs before you agree because in the long run, a new body might be a better deal.

Jacca, wrt sports mode, I use it any time things are moving faster than I can catch them without a completely blurry shot, not just sporting events. If it's a dimly lit or dark environment, sports mode might be the only way to go. It just kind of depends, and you have to screw around with it. I keep coming back to that, play, practice, experiment - but really that's the only way I've improved and found my photographic "voice."

[cy1229]

Here's what I mean by "blurry shots that work" :









Although, I will say, I don't like that the lane lines in the last one are sharp and the swimmer is blurry. But still, it illustrates my point.