(while trying to avoid monopolising the conversation)
The meter still works in manual so either meter off something you think will give an accurate reading (still in manual) or potentially set the app you want and bracket the exposure if you're really not sure. If you're shooting in RAW it doesn't have to be bang on either as you can tweak the image file by a stop or two without degrading the image too much.
Chat Forum
Nikon D90, who has one?
-
Posted 9 months ago #
-
the subject is moving too fast to get a crisp shot at 1/125sec due to the light conditions, so what do I have to do to achieve a faster shutter speed. Stick it on Auto?
That's what shutter priority mode is for. Not the same as manual for me.
You are probably shooting at 1/250 f8 at the moment or thereabouts. Be aware there are some clouds coming over so you'll lose X stops of light so will need to increase your aperture by Y amount, your shutter by Z or increase your ISO
Or.. just get the camera to do it and tweak it with the comp.. it's quicker!
Posted 9 months ago # -
molgrips - Member
You are probably shooting at 1/250 f8 at the moment or thereabouts. Be aware there are some clouds coming over so you'll lose X stops of light so will need to increase your aperture by Y amount, your shutter by Z or increase your ISO
Or.. just get the camera to do it and tweak it with the comp.. it's quicker!
Up above there was a comment about can you guess that for a certain shot you'll need X shutter, Y aperture & Z ISO?
My point was that this guy had been taking photos for so long that he could do this. It was a workshop, he was trying to help up improve our photography so was suggesting things to try. He was able to anticipate the changes we might like to make, judging by what the weather was doing and he was pretty much correct all the time.I think the main reason he mentioned it was because people who were shooting in P or A, might not notice that the camera would start to decrease shutter speed as the cloud came over and this might result in blur. He was suggestion methods to combat this and providing settings that on the whole, worked.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Actually mol, birds against sky are one of the situations I'd probably consider using fully manual.
You're probably wanting to expose correctly to see the bird detail, but all that bright sky will make a (semi)automatic mode (like Aperture-priority) get the exposure to dark. And the chances of hitting the bird with the spot-meter every time are pretty low if you're trying to get it in flight.
Posted 9 months ago # -
that's fine if you know the bird you're going to be shooting before it flies past you, i find I use the fuller features of my cam when trying to get BiF - 3d tracking over 51 focus areas in continuous focus mode on Ap priority unless the light is fading. When the light's fading then start to hop around to get the best combination. Might rarely use manual for really low light just to get a shot.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Sorry - also - you'll need to hit the bird with the spot anyway if you want it in focus so it might be a moot point.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Actually mol, birds against sky are one of the situations I'd probably consider using fully manual.
If I were shooting birds (as I have done, fairly poorly admittedly but the issue has been focusing and holding the camera steady, never metering) then I'd put it on aperture priority for my largest aperture and highest ISO that I could use for the available light, and let the camera choose as fast a shutter speed as it could.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Does anyone have experience with wide angle lenses on the D90? I'm currently looking at the Nikon 12-24 and 10-24, as well as the Tokina 11-16. I'm wondering if the limited zoom of the Tokina is a problem in practice. Any other wide angle lenses to consider for sensible money?
Posted 9 months ago # -
Not had any experience of them but I know a lot of folk who went for the siggy 10-20.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Do yourself a favour and buy one of these books.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Don't mean to be a photographic bore ... but the only thing a reflective meter (i.e. the one in your camera) is going to do is tell you what setting to expose whatever you are metering at ... as the mid tone i.e. 18% grey.
Hence the understanding of manual exposure is pretty important. Nothing like spot metering a nice white wedding dress, and losing the shadow details of the grooms tux, or vise-versa and blowing out the highlights of a dress.
The old adage that I have always followed is to expose for the highlights ... and in the old days develop for the shadows.
Understanding that a white dress falls 2 to 3 stops over mid grey means you can meter the dress, transfer the same readings to manual exposure and adjust either aperture / shutter speed the required amount. Knowing that skin tone is typically mid tone also helps, or even grass for that matter. Knowing what the histogram means will also help prevent clipping (or better yet purchase an incident meter and understand it)
Relying on in build meters IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES can cause confusion for newcomers, as the tone priority of a scene changes, your camera will automatically compensate (i.e. zooming in, recomposing). Don't get me wrong, "P" or auto modes certainly have their uses, but you may as well learn what your camera is doing, so you can then apply it correctly.
If you are serious about photography, id highly recommend learning about light, Ansel Adams developed the "bible" as such (ok there are detractors but Im going with what I know) and his Zone system can shed some light (no pun intended) on the situation.
As to the example above or shooting a bird in flight, if the same light is reflecting off the bird, as is reflecting off a nearby tree ... simply spot meter off the tree for your mid tone and set your camera to manual. You will sacrifice your highlights (sky) but Id assume the subject matter is more important.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Elf: yeah we know, read back a bit further
Alright bluddyell only trying to be elpful jeeze....
So when you (or anyone else that wants to answer) want to take a (fully) Manual shot where you know the meter is going to be fooled then how do you pick the correct shutter speed?
Pends on the subject, lens in use, desired effect etc dunnit? Faster shutter speed to freeze action, and the rule of thumb I use is to pick a minimum speed 'similar' to the focal length of the lens you are using, so 1/250th for a 200mm lens, 1/60th for a 50mm, 1/30th for a 28mm etc.
Faster shutter will necessitate larger aperture which is useful in portraiture of course.
'Rule's are there as guidelines though really. Useful, but not always appropriate:
Fast shutter, 1/250th of a sec or something, just enough to stop the rider but allow for a tiny bit of wheel blur:
Slow shutter, half a sec or something, to create blur and accentuate movement:
Posted 9 months ago # -
Don't mean to be a photographic bore ...
FTFY.
On a more serious note. Do you consider the second photo to be a good photo, Elfin?Posted 9 months ago # -
If I were shooting birds
I don't think we want to know such things on a Family Forum Mol, thank you very much.
You're not one of those 'glamour' tographers are you? You dirty......
Posted 9 months ago # -
I like both of freds pics.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Do you consider the second photo to be a good photo, Elfin?
Well, in that I achieved the effect I was going for, I spose yeah. As for it's greater appeal, I'll leave that for others to decide.
Could do with a tighter crop, the colour's a bit off (was shot on film and I've not tweaked it bit of a magenta cast), mebbe a tiny tiny bit of flash on rear curtain sync cooduv picked the rider out from the background by just a little touch....
Considering the bugger was tooling along at over 30mph and I weren't using a tripod/monopod to steady the pan, I think it ain't turned out too bad really. The lighting's not ideal as it's a bit too side on but there's now I could do about that.
Posted 9 months ago # -
I kind of like it, but from my point of view, I don't think it's a good photo, or shall we say it could be improved upon (IMO).
This'll sound lame cos I removed the bit I was going to write about the photographers intentions.
The lighting's not ideal as it's a bit too side on but there's now I could do about that.
Move?Posted 9 months ago # -
Fair enough, I'd be inertested in hearing your views actually.
Posted 9 months ago # -
It's all personal choice and if it's your intention and you achieved your objective, then it's perfect.
Pesonally I prefer shots with movement to have at least some in focus element. I'm not overly keen on the full rider being fully focussed, kind of like this.
I don't like ^^^^^^ It's flat and not too challenging.
I prefer something like this.
Where we have the movement and a bit of action.
But my favourites have more movement, like this...
Or
Also bear in mind that non of these have been near Photoshop or any other editing software shite.
Feel free to criticise and comment.Posted 9 months ago # -
Looking at the two that you posted elfin, I didn't realise you took the second :oops:, is the first one of yours too?
The first one doesn't give me the idea of speed, there's nothing to gauge speed with. Track cycling is very fast and one of my favourite subject. To be honest I don't know if the guy in the photo was racing or posing, you know like the mags do.
Speed.
The second photo as I said above. [Remember, you can't see the wheel on the right, ok?]Posted 9 months ago # -
Put the above on Talkphotography for a
flamingopinion, on the last you really need to get rid of the tyrePosted 9 months ago # -
Why? I'm not particularly interested.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Feel free to criticise and comment.
Posted 9 months ago # -
I'm interested in Fred's opinion and anyone else here. Not that interested in the views from a photography forum, I guess it'd probably be like here and the bike forum. I spend a lot of time in the chat forum.
And you missed the dirt on the censor too.
Posted 9 months ago # -
And no, the photography one is useful and not full of bullshat
Posted 9 months ago # -
Just stuck some up, it could be quite good fun.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Seriously, they give alot of good advice
Posted 9 months ago # -
Need to use the Critique prefix
Posted 9 months ago # -
Need to use the Critique prefix
apparently there are rules already and I don't do rules very well.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Don.. your track cycling one doesn't do it for me.. I think it's the lighting of the rest of the building. It looks cold, depressing, grimy.. that overshadows the coolness of the racers for me. Pretty tricky to light, that.. I think perhaps some post processing would be good.. black and white, dim the background a bit, that sort of thing, but I am not really experienced in such things.
I like the cyclocross one best - brings to my mind the effort and the struggle of racing. The movement of his limbs and body shows effort, which is harder to capture in cycling other than facial gurning.
Am I waffling enough for this?
Shots two and three are ok but just so obvious - bloke on a bike, like every magazine cover. I guess that's more me than you tho
I love Elf's B&W track shot - looks retro, brings to mind a century of history and heritage which over-rides the rider's high-tech getup. But I guess those things are only meaningful to me as a cyclist. It's also very crisp and clean which emphasises him slicing the air and being very neatly tucked up on his bike. The blurry one tho I'm not so keen on. Not quite blurred enough to be all zoomy and abstract for me, and the blur on the rider isn't going in the right direction. Colours are nice tho. Maybe I'd crop it heavily to show just a bit of the bike and background, make it a proper abstract splodgy thing that would just hint at cycling, so you might see it you might not.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Be interesting to see what feedback you get on TP.
For me, I like them although the "effect" could be overused and end up looking like you can't get the shutter speed right.
Posted 9 months ago # -
It's all personal choice and if it's your intention and you achieved your objective, then it's perfect.
Well I wanted an image that summed up the intoxicating excitement of the event, when all the noise, movement, colour etc blur together and leave a more abstract idea. That was the effect I was trying for; seen it done with sports photography before and like it.
With yours, they're a lot more 'standard' sports photography, technically very good, you can see what's going on etc, identify the riders and stuff. The bottom CC one I like a lot; great photo. The others just seem like 'standard' biking pics to me; they don't convey much more than a description of what's going on, for me. But they serve their purpose perfectly. If I was charged with providing visual information about an event, I'd be well pleased with them. The CC one is an great shot; full of movement, chaos and excitement.
Your track one; nice idea, but you're hampered by the difficult lighting conditions, and it has the look of a 'snapshot' taken with a compact, to me. It's a nice idea though, just not as well executed enough to do the concept sufficient justice.
But there's more than one way to skin a cat.
Anyway I posted those two as examples of using different shutter speeds, not as entrants to a photo competition.
Move?
Have you ever tried to get a good vantage point at a TDF Prologue?
Posted 9 months ago # -
Elf, you said almost the same things as I said about simon's pics
Posted 9 months ago # -
No I'm not being negative; I think they are technically great photos, and serve their purpose perfectly.
And I've said I love the CC one. That's the only one, for me, which transcends ordinary description and becomes something beyond that. Really sums up the ethos of Cyclocross racing, for me. The others are just technically good shots of bods on bicycles.
All very subjective though.
Posted 9 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
