File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
I currently run a D50 with a 18-135 with just the standard flash :(

Is there anyway to get sharper photos without the flash? it seems the ONLY way to get zoomed in and be sharp is with a flash.

Pic related
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D50Camera SoftwareVer.1.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/5.7Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern824Focal Length (35mm Equiv)120 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:05:05 14:42:24Exposure Time1/15 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length80.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2256Image Height1496RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used800Image QualityFINEWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeAF-AFlash SettingNORMALFlash Compensation0.0 EVISO Speed Requested800Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EVAE Bracket Compensation0.0 EVTone CompensationAUTOLens TypeNikon D SeriesLens Range18.0 - 135.0 mm; f/3.5 - f/5.6Auto FocusDynamic Area, Center Selected, Top FocusedShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModeLandscape sRGBLighting TypeNATURALNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations2615Image OptimizationNORMALSaturation 2NORMAL
>> Anonymous
Steady hand, Fast shutter speed, Image Stabilization, Faster (wider open aperture) lenses

(generally in that order)
>> Anonymous
TRIPOD
>> Anonymous
Thanks for the list. I guess i need to work on my steadiness or stick with a flash. Zooming in with my lens kills the arperture such that any decent shutter speed is going to be way underexposed :(
>> Anonymous
No replacement for Wide aperture lenses.

Also you missed Raising the ISO, Another way to get faster shutter speeds
>> Anonymous
>>56565
He went to ISO 800 which from what I hear is the highest usable ISO on the D50.
>> Anonymous
>>56566
I meant as an option, Also ISO 1600 works fine (just use a bit of noise reduction, Noise is always better than a blurry pic), And you can get the full range inbetween 800 and 1600 with Auto ISO on
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>56556

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D50Camera SoftwareVer.1.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/5.7Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)120 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2007:05:05 14:42:24Exposure Time1/15 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length80.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2256Image Height1496RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used800Image QualityFINEWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeAF-AFlash SettingNORMALFlash Compensation0.0 EVISO Speed Requested800Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EVAE Bracket Compensation0.0 EVTone CompensationAUTOLens TypeNikon D SeriesLens Range18.0 - 135.0 mm; f/3.5 - f/5.6Auto FocusDynamic Area, Center Selected, Top FocusedShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModeLandscape sRGBLighting TypeNATURALNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations2615Image OptimizationNORMALSaturation 2NORMAL
>> bw !ef8V18P/FY
>>56556
Buy Nikon's 50mm 1.8 D lens. It's cheap ($115 brand new), razor sharp, and collects 8 times more light than your lens does at the long end. You do have to zoom with your feet sometimes, but the low-light ability and sharpness of any 50/1.8 makes it worth it. (Frankly, every SLR owner should have a 50/1.8 in their bag. There's no reason not to own one.)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/247091-USA/Nikon_2137_Normal_AF_Nikkor_50mm.html
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>56581
Agreed.
>> annoyingmous
I am happy to see someone discussing "normal" lenses for digital nikons. You recommend the 50mm 1.8 - but it ends up being the equivalent of a 75mm doesn't it? (with a x1.5 crop). So what would be a good buy for a digital SLR? Is there a good cheap 35mm, or should you just go for a 50mm f/1.4 for the same money (around 300$)
Also: What is the difference between f1.8 and f1.4, and for that matter between f1.8 and f3.0, is there a place online where I can see comparisons?
>> bw !ef8V18P/FY
>>56594
The OP said he was looking to be zoomed in, and 50mm on a crop-factor camera would be better for that than a 28mm or 35mm. (I could also just be biased. I don't shoot wide very often. I like a bit of stand-off distance and limited depth of field. Personal taste, I suppose.)

As for differences in f-stops, the short version is that each step doubles the amount of light collected. Full stops are 1, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22, 32, etc. Most cameras also do half or third stops. f1.4 collects just 2/3rds more light than f1.8, while f1.8 collects 3 1/3rd stops (a little more than 8 times) more light than f5.6. f16 and above suck, never use them. (Wikipedia for "diffraction" as to why.)

The exact numbers have to do multiplying the square root of 2. The above numbers are rounded off to a single decimal place by tradition so that we all don't go nuts trying to remember f1.414213562 or f5.656854249.
>> Anonymous
>>56583
>Frankly, every SLR owner should have a 50/1.8 in their bag. There's no reason not to own one.
There are no 50/1.8 lenses for some SLRs, namely Olympus and Panasonic/Leica ones.

Although I screwed an old, manual, but free 55/1.8 Takumar on my E-500 and I'm quite happy.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>56600
...which is one of the main reasons why the 4/3 system sucks.
>> Anonymous
>>56601
50/1.8 wouldn't be of much use on it anyway, due to the 2x crop factor. It's too long even on APS-C cameras.

Now where's my fucking 30/1.4, you Sigma bastards?
>> Anonymous
Two things:

1. I understand that 50mm is actually a very slight telephoto, and that it became the standard, "normal" lens because slightly longer lenses were easier to make well in the early days, and that the closest focal length to the ideal of normal that 50mm supposedly replicates is about 42mm.

Coincidentally, that is exactly what a 28mm lens is on a 1.5x crop sensor.


2.>>56598
>limited depth of field
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dof2.shtml

I was skeptical at first, too, but I shot with this article in the back of my mind for a few weeks and realized it was true.

>>56601
I don't think the four-thirds system sucks. It's smaller and lighter than other systems, optimized for the way digital sensors work, and the only inherent disadvantage is more noise. It also would have more DoF, because of the smaller sensor, but that can be a positive or a negative, depending on one's style and needs.

Now, from everything I hear, the cameras being made with it aren't worth it, but the system itself is sound. And if one really wants a 50mm f/1.8 (or rather, a 100mm f/1.8, unless anyone here is shooting with a full frame camera, a 28mm f/1.8 on a Nikon, or a 31.25mm f/1.8 on a Canon, they're not shooting with a 50 f/1.8) I understand there are adapter rings that will fit other mounts to four-thirds cameras.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>56611
I mean more the lack of fast primes in general rather than the lack of a 50/1.8 in particular.

And a ~100mm equivalent f/1.8 lens would be nothing to sneeze at.
>> Anonymous
>Now, from everything I hear, the cameras being made with it aren't worth it, but the system itself is sound.
E-300, E-330, Panasonic L1 and Leica Digilux 3 just plainly suck. E-400 and E-500 are passable. New E-410 and E-510 look very good in reviews for now, but time will tell.

>>56620
>I understand there are adapter rings that will fit other mounts to four-thirds cameras.
Any other mounts with greater flange focal distance, but this basically equals "any other SLR mounts". But all non-native lenses will work only in manual mode due to obvious reasons.
>> Anonymous
I saw that too, i like damn almost!
>> Anonymous
>>56558
Fast speed without the flash = darker pictures.

The problem lies with the way cameras are set up. Without the flash, the camera automatically leaves the shutters open longer in order to let more light in, so it takes longer to take a picture. Within that time, your hands WILL shake a little, and even a little shake messes up the picture.

What you need is a tripod or somewhere stable to place the camera on something steady like a table, and don't frickin move at all.
>> Anonymous
>>56621
According to http://www.4-3system.com/modules/lenses/ there are quite a few different fast primes for 4/3. The problem is, they are either very expensive or impossible to get.

...Speaking of which, where's my fucking 30/1.4, you Sigma bastards?
>> Anonymous
http://www.4-3system.com/modules/lenses/lens.php?id=31

There's your 50/1.4 for the four-thirds system.
>> Anonymous
>>56630
That's all well, but there is another problem. The subject will probably move. Humans move constantly, and I often find myself shooting a perfectly sharp background with blurry humans fucking it up.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>56636
Huh.

I stand corrected.
>> Anonymous
>>56636
This is all kinds of nice, but:
1) It has a MSRP of about $1,500.
2) You can't buy it anywhere.
>> Anonymous
sharper photos?
what about sticking in shutterspeed priority @ 1/60, shooting your stuff, and losing some colors after in photoshop? a bit of levels can save your topic later...
People usually can't take 1/20 photos sharp...
1/60 is the "normal" and I stick with it.. even with IS lenses going 1/40 or 1/50 doesn't work for me...
you are zooming with 1/20 barehanded and want a sharp picture? you'll get as sharp as myspace chicks does with their selfbody shots with no flash in 1/8
>> Anonymous
>>56642
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/484209-REG/Panasonic_LX025_25mm_f_1_4_Leica_D.html

B and H, $799.95. A little expensive, but pretty good considering it's a Leica-designed lens.

Does anyone know whether Leica's four-thirds mount lenses are made in-house, as with the M and R lenses, or whether they're produced by Panasonic, as with the lenses it designed for Panasonic's Lumix series?
>> Anonymous
>>56677
The four-thirds Leica 25/1.4 is made by Panasonic in Japan, but I'm willing to bet that Leica has their own folks sitting in on the quality control process in the factory.
>> Anonymous
Tip for Professionals: Use a fucking flash.
>> Anonymous
>>56682
I've heard that they even do this with the Leica lenses stuck on the Lumix series, but I'm not sure about that.

Something like this, though, I'm almost certain Leica would.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Sometimes the natural colour > flash

OP here, i already have a 50mm 1.8 which is great, but unfortunately sometimes i really could use the zoom :D If not photos like that would be dam small, and even cropping it would be pretty hopeless. Heres some more of what i got that day.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D50Camera SoftwareVer.1.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.6Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern824Focal Length (35mm Equiv)30 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:05:05 14:35:39Exposure Time1/50 secF-Numberf/3.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length20.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2256Image Height1496RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used800Image QualityFINEWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeAF-AFlash SettingNORMALFlash Compensation0.0 EVISO Speed Requested800Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EVAE Bracket Compensation0.0 EVTone CompensationAUTOLens TypeNikon D SeriesLens Range18.0 - 135.0 mm; f/3.5 - f/5.6Auto FocusDynamic Area, Center Selected, Top FocusedShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModeLandscape sRGBLighting TypeNATURALNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations2593Image OptimizationNORMALSaturation 2NORMAL
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
heres one of two i took with a flash.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D50Camera SoftwareVer.1.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/5.7Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern824Focal Length (35mm Equiv)157 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:05:05 14:40:06Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashFlash, Auto, Return DetectedFocal Length105.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2256Image Height1496RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used800Image QualityFINEWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeAF-AFlash SettingNORMALAuto Flash ModeBuilt-in,TTLFlash Compensation0.0 EVISO Speed Requested800Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EVAE Bracket Compensation0.0 EVTone CompensationAUTOLens TypeNikon D SeriesLens Range18.0 - 135.0 mm; f/3.5 - f/5.6Auto FocusDynamic Area, Center Selected, Top FocusedShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModeLandscape sRGBLighting TypeSPEEDLIGHTNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations2608Image OptimizationNORMALSaturation 2NORMAL
>> Anonymous
>>56842

Wow, just look at how she opens her legs. How inviting.
>> Anonymous
i just masturbated but i'm going to do it again
>> Anonymous
lol.

I was very lucky i went on both days of the Autosalon. The first day these girls were showing it all like that. The second day i presume someone (probably a mother or something) complained and they had to use hats to cover their spread.
>> Anonymous
all these pictures are crap.
>> Anonymous
whats ur point?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>56925
me too :(

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeHewlett-PackardCamera ModelPhotosmart M627Camera SoftwareVersion 1.0001Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)36 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:06:13 16:09:40Exposure Time1/5 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/2.8Brightness-0.7 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceFluorescentFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length6.00 mmExposure Index200RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
learn what shutter speed does, k thnx
>> elf_man !fBgo7jDjms
>>57059
Give it up, man. Geez.
>> Anonymous
>>56677
Heh, it's still "Out of Stock". Either Sigma makes like 10 of these lenses a month, or it's a conspiracy... :D
>> Anonymous
I would say, "poor Heavyweather," but somehow that seeems inaccurate.

Poor Heavyweather's lover.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
Get a fast prime, shoot at 1600 ISO, convert to black and white, apply film grain using photoshop. Shazam, passable low-light photography!

PS: I arrived.
>> Anonymous
>>57133
pure hotness!

YOURE A LUCKY SOB WEATHER, ONE LUCKY SOB
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>571331600 ISO, convert to black and white, apply film grain using photoshop

LOL.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>57171
???

It's digital, son. I shoot film too. In fact, I shot a bunch with some Tri-X with my K1000 that night. Gotta get that developed...
>> Anonymous
>>57198
I know it is, it just cracks me up to no end. Hours of fucking around, and results are at best a moderately average imitation. In a 36 frame scale, I bet I could develop (minus natural drying time) and scan stuff in faster than process equal number of digital shots. And it wouldn't look all plastic-y, either.
>> Anonymous
>>57133
heavyweather, stop posting pics of your girlfriend here, you're making anonymous feel like coming out of his basement!
>> Anonymous
>>57213
more like im comming out of my pants!
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>57133
thats some pretty over the top film grain you added there
>> Anonymous
>>57298
LOL'D
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>57211
I agree, it's a bit much, and while it attempts to emulate natural grain by appearing more in the midtones than in the highlights and shadows, it's kind of hit or miss. It's not my photoshop action.
>>57304
Speaking of photoshop actions... this took me 15 seconds of twiddling my thumbs while the photoshop action did its work. If I had a better computer, that would've been 3 seconds. Digital workflows don't have to be slow. If they are for you, you gotta do something about that. I'm not hating on film, I love film, but it's irrational to talk about them in terms of which process is faster, unless you're working in spot news or photojournalism. Look to the end result and no further.

But I'm with you guys, I really need to make my own film grain action, I've read up on a few different processes, and I just need something that fits my bill.