Photography / Camera chat thread.

[Bluefish]

Hi filipe, nah i deleted the photos as was just messing around, but i was shooting in manual and didn't want a shutter speed over half a sec so was changing the apperture to max but was not enough the flash was on auto and so that made it too bright, it;s not that you couldn't get a decent pic in those situations just that it took a while to change the settings and daughter was getting bored. Take pic too bright hold on, adjust exp or flash, and repeat, and repeat again, that's when i thought of changing the iso to manual, guess it's knowing what settings to start from in different situations that saves you time, and so will stop you missing the shot, let me guess, practise practise practise, then practise again, lol

[Filipe M.]

Hi filipe, nah i deleted the photos as was just messing around, but i was shooting in manual and didn't want a shutter speed over half a sec so was changing the apperture to max but was not enough the flash was on auto and so that made it too bright, it;s not that you couldn't get a decent pic in those situations just that it took a while to change the settings and daughter was getting bored. Take pic too bright hold on, adjust exp or flash, and repeat, and repeat again, that's when i thought of changing the iso to manual, guess it's knowing what settings to start from in different situations that saves you time, and so will stop you missing the shot, let me guess, practise practise practise, then practise again, lol

Yup, it's pretty much a practice thing! :lol:
In this particular situation, if you say your shutter speed was in the region of half a second then you were probably getting too much light in even without the flash, which only made it worse... if you're basing your exposure on flash alone you don't need a long shutter speed, so you can safely go manual with shutter at 1/200s (D90 maximum sync speed), choose your aperture and the flash will take care of the rest. It's only when you want to let in some ambient light that you need to start dragging your shutter to slower speeds, and then you will have to be careful about the possible over-exposure, possibly having to use some sort of negative flash exposure compensation (hold the flash button and rotate front command dial).

[Bluefish]

It's only when you want to let in some ambient light that you need to start dragging your shutter to slower speeds, and then you will have to be careful about the possible over-exposure, possibly having to use some sort of negative flash exposure compensation (hold the flash button and rotate front command dial).

Cheers filipe, will have to remember that.

[Messie]

I'm hoping to buy a second hand camera - see here

http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?p=2500434#post2500434

Can anyone help?

[cbay]

Not sure if anyone will be intrested but I'm selling a Canon 70-200mm F4 L Lens.

http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?p=2508554 (http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?p=2508554#post2508554)

[SV400Rob]

Hello. I want to take the next step from a simple point and shoot to something a bit better. I've been looking around and I'd like to spend between £150-£200. The Canon EOS 300D looks a pretty good entry camera but do they still make it? Or if they don't is there a similar camera on the market? I don't mind getting a second hand one but it's always nice to have something brand new!

Rob

[allantheboss]

'nother question for all you camera brains!- I've got a Lumix TZ10, have a mount for the bike, however, I don't want to take my hand off of the handlebar to push a button to take a mid-action pic! Is there any sort of trigger/button I can install on a handlebar instead?

To take pics like this:
http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/207363_10150142728190614_554350613_6879471_3770895 _n.jpg

[Filipe M.]

Hello. I want to take the next step from a simple point and shoot to something a bit better. I've been looking around and I'd like to spend between £150-£200. The Canon EOS 300D looks a pretty good entry camera but do they still make it? Or if they don't is there a similar camera on the market? I don't mind getting a second hand one but it's always nice to have something brand new!

Rob

Hi,

like was said a few pages ago, for that kind of money you won't be able to get a brand new DSLR, and even 2nd hand won't be easy. The EOS300D is pretty old by DSLR standards (stopped being manufactured some 6 - 7 years ago? can't remember), and was replaced by the 350D, 400D, ..., and now the 600D, even though I believe it's spiritual successors (entry level DSLR) are the 1000D / 1100D, while the x00D series have been trying to go a bit upmarket.

As said, pretty much any entry-level DSLR available on the market today, from pretty much any brand, will give you better image quality than a point-and-shoot. Beyond that, you're mainly paying for faster operation and easier access to controls, and some more image quality (but the jump isn't as obvious or "cheap", i.e., the jump from a compact to a cheap DSLR will be much bigger than from that same cheap DSLR to a much more expensive one).

Good luck with your search! ;)

'nother question for all you camera brains!- I've got a Lumix TZ10, have a mount for the bike, however, I don't want to take my hand off of the handlebar to push a button to take a mid-action pic! Is there any sort of trigger/button I can install on a handlebar instead?


Hmmm I believe the Panny's TZ series can't be operated via remotes of any kind... do they come with interval timer?

[allantheboss]

Hmmm I believe the Panny's TZ series can't be operated via remotes of any kind... do they come with interval timer?

Nope... Filipe, you know everything ever in the entire history of everything about cameras. This is amazing

[Filipe M.]

Nope... Filipe, you know everything ever in the entire history of everything about cameras. This is amazing

Nah, not really, but I do know you're screwed now :lol:

[keith_d]

Nah, not really, but I do know you're screwed now :lol:

Well almost. You could get one of these:

http://www.bristolcameras.co.uk/p-cable-release-adapter-for-digital-cameras.htm

But you would need to make a mount by your right thumb for the end you push.

Keith.

[TC3]

Well almost. You could get one of these:

http://www.bristolcameras.co.uk/p-cable-release-adapter-for-digital-cameras.htm

But you would need to make a mount by your right thumb for the end you push.

Keith.

friend had one....worked ok most the time and would be easy enough to attach near hand grip with a fastner

[Jimmy2Feet]

Nah, not really, but I do know you're screwed now :lol:


He is right in what he said, you do know everything there is to know!! :)

[Jimmy2Feet]

hi guys, just a quick one, are you aware of any good photography forums? something like this but all photo?

Cheers In Advance

[tigersaw]

Anyone know of some free (not trial) software that will correct a colour shift - chromatic abberation? I have been sent a 1970 newspaper scan that has some colour fringing that I want to tidy up before printing.
I use photoscape for most things, but its not one of its features.

[Filipe M.]

Have you tried GIMP? It's free, and "they" say it's as good as Photoshop. I hate the interface, but if it's just for a quickie then it'll do...

[tigersaw]

Have you tried GIMP? It's free, and "they" say it's as good as Photoshop. I hate the interface, but if it's just for a quickie then it'll do...

Ta for that - just done a google and there is a plug in to fix colour shifts, will look at it a bit harder at the weekend

[dyzio]

I've decided that I'll be getting a Sigma 18-250mm lens, from the samples I've seen on the web It'll do for me.

One thing that bothers me is that I found this one on (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=290552581529&ssPageName=ADME:X:eRTM:GB:1123)Ebay, and they are ~£70 cheaper. Can anyone see something wrong with that listing?

The seller says, that they are "a brand new un opened US import model and it comes with a 1 year seller warranty", can anyone see anything dodgy with that listing?

[jambo]

Have you tried GIMP? It's free, and "they" say it's as good as Photoshop. I hate the interface, but if it's just for a quickie then it'll do...
Shotwell Photo manager migth also be worth a look if you're just after the basics :)

[Filipe M.]

I've decided that I'll be getting a Sigma 18-250mm lens, from the samples I've seen on the web It'll do for me.

One thing that bothers me is that I found this one on (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=290552581529&ssPageName=ADME:X:eRTM:GB:1123)Ebay, and they are ~£70 cheaper. Can anyone see something wrong with that listing?

The seller says, that they are "a brand new un opened US import model and it comes with a 1 year seller warranty", can anyone see anything dodgy with that listing?

Not going into the listing itself, but by getting that lens you're basically using a DLSR as a very expensive, heavy and bulky point-and-shoot... just something to consider ;)

[dyzio]

I couldn't find a 70-300mm lens with a HS motor, unless it was an L series, and I'm not really keen on carrying 2 lenses, especially when away for 2 weeks on the bike.

Why not get a point and shoot? I do like some features of the DSLR and it makes life easier that it was with my previous Canon S1 or SX10.

[DarrenSV650S]

Why do DSLR's need different lenses? I don't get it.

[Filipe M.]

I couldn't find a 70-300mm lens with a HS motor, unless it was an L series, and I'm not really keen on carrying 2 lenses, especially when away for 2 weeks on the bike.

Why not get a point and shoot? I do like some features of the DSLR and it makes life easier that it was with my previous Canon S1 or SX10.

Fair enough. ;)

[grimey121uk]

Why do DSLR's need different lenses? I don't get it.

Its just like a pocket cam they all have different lenses with different reach,
Without going into apertures and focal lengths, the more versatile a lens (or the greater range) they less the quality due to it needing more glass and more components, more components introduces more tolerances.

So for landscapes you use a wide angle lens and for distant objects you use a telephoto lens

[DarrenSV650S]

Ahh right ok. I couldn't be bothered carrying different lenses, especially on the bike. The bridge camera I've got takes up enough room as it is. And the quality of the pictures it takes seems fine to me in all sorts of scenarios.

A wide angle lens is definitely something I would love though. It's so frustrating when you have a beautiful landscape and can't capture it all.

[Bluefish]

Ahh right ok. I couldn't be bothered carrying different lenses, especially on the bike. The bridge camera I've got takes up enough room as it is. And the quality of the pictures it takes seems fine to me in all sorts of scenarios.

A wide angle lens is definitely something I would love though. It's so frustrating when you have a beautiful landscape and can't capture it all.

LOL, therein lies the problem, if you could afford it, you probably need a van to carry all the stuff you wanted/needed ;)

[DarrenSV650S]

LOL, therein lies the problem, if you could afford it, you probably need a van to carry all the stuff you wanted/needed ;)

Yep I need to take a tankbag for my camera on the bike. It can sort of fit under the rear seat, but not with its case which means it will rattle about and probably break. And it means I have to remove the tool kit, puncture kit, first aid kit, side stand puck, spare levers, fixer peg, visor cleaner, cargo net etc etc :eek:

[grimey121uk]

Yeah the downside of a dslr is the weight, I went to the states 2 years ago and was dreading them weighing my camera bag, luckily they didnt (it was 10kg over the allowance for hand luggage).

I have a panasonic tz10 I keep in my bike jacket at all times, but the images don't even come close, but an ok image is better than no image

[jambo]

Not going into the listing itself, but by getting that lens you're basically using a DLSR as a very expensive, heavy and bulky point-and-shoot... just something to consider :wink:
I think that might be a little harsh, you'll still have full control over the camera, and the ability to switch lenses or use flash accessories. What these big zoom range lenses do allow is for you to have a better chance of having the right focal length to hand quickly when out and about.
However, there's no denying that most of them are compromised in some area of image quality, light throughput, or cost. In many cases all 3.

Review of this lens here (http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sigma_18-250_3p5-6p3_os_c16/)

Jambo

[grimey121uk]

I think that might be a little harsh, you'll still have full control over the camera, and the ability to switch lenses or use flash accessories. What these big zoom range lenses do allow is for you to have a better chance of having the right focal length to hand quickly when out and about.
However, there's no denying that most of them are compromised in some area of image quality, light throughput, or cost. In many cases all 3.

Review of this lens here (http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sigma_18-250_3p5-6p3_os_c16/)

Jambo

In my student days I worked in camera sales and had the chance to use many superzoom lenses and can conclude in my opinion that they are utter crap. Canon 18-200 was worse in every single way when compared with the kit 18-55is and a the 55-250is , Same goes for the tamron and sigma equivalent.

An extra lens weights 300g and takes 5 seconds to change not a big deal

[DarrenSV650S]

Yeah the downside of a dslr is the weight, I went to the states 2 years ago and was dreading them weighing my camera bag, luckily they didnt (it was 10kg over the allowance for hand luggage).

I have a panasonic tz10 I keep in my bike jacket at all times, but the images don't even come close, but an ok image is better than no image

I've got an old Finepix F31FD that I used to use on the bike because it fitted in my jacket nicely. But now that I have the S200EXR I just can't use the F31 because the image quality is terrible in comparison.

How do you find the battery life on the TZ10? My mum has it and the battery lasts no time at all. On holiday she has to recharge it every day. Where as both my fuji's will go for weeks of use on one charge.

The TZ10 she got was an ex-display model so I said that might be why, and maybe the battery is just knackered. But the guy in the shop said they were all like that and a new battery would be the same.

[grimey121uk]

I've got an old Finepix F31FD that I used to use on the bike because it fitted in my jacket nicely. But now that I have the S200EXR I just can't use the F31 because the image quality is terrible in comparison.

How do you find the battery life on the TZ10? My mum has it and the battery lasts no time at all. On holiday she has to recharge it every day. Where as both my fuji's will go for weeks of use on one charge.

The TZ10 she got was an ex-display model so I said that might be why, and maybe the battery is just knackered. But the guy in the shop said they were all like that and a new battery would be the same.

Turn the gps off it halves the amount of shots plus it's alway on and updating the position even when the camera powered off,

To turn it off put gps into airplane mode

[DarrenSV650S]

No way! It's got gps?! No wonder it's so thirsty

[Filipe M.]

I think that might be a little harsh, you'll still have full control over the camera, and the ability to switch lenses or use flash accessories. What these big zoom range lenses do allow is for you to have a better chance of having the right focal length to hand quickly when out and about.
However, there's no denying that most of them are compromised in some area of image quality, light throughput, or cost. In many cases all 3.

Review of this lens here (http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sigma_18-250_3p5-6p3_os_c16/)

Jambo

You know me, harsh is my middle name ;) :lol:

In my student days I worked in camera sales and had the chance to use many superzoom lenses and can occlude in my opinion that they are utter crap. Canon 18-200 was worse in every single way when compared with the kit 18-55 and a the 55-250 , Same goes for the tamron and sigma equivalent.

An extra lens weights 300g and takes 5 seconds to change not a big deal

I do get the advantage that it is to use a single lens for everything. It's not just the convenience of having every focal length available to man on a single lens, it's also the fact that every lens change means you have your camera innards exposed to the elements, so you increase the chances of getting crap on your sensor. Of course you can be extra careful / quick, and point your camera downwards yada yada yada, but the chances are still there.

Unfortunately there is a (sometimes big) quality hit you take, and the longer the range, the worse it is, plus these lenses get really slow at the tele end. Honestly, the usual f/5.6 for "cheap" lenses is already too slow, let alone f/6.3. Yes it's only 1/3 of a stop, but with autofocus systems that are designed to work with lenses up to f/5.6, in low light you run the risk of the camera simply not finding focus at all. Add to that the fact that cheaper lenses are usually very soft wide open and you need to stop them down 1 or 2 stops to get better results, and you'll find yourself shooting at f/9 to f/13 more often than you'd like...

I'll stick with changing lenses, tyvm. ;) If I were in the situation where I had to choose between a DSLR with that superzoom or getting a top range bridge camera with a faster lens, I know what I would go for! :lol: Yes, I'd lose the big sensor, but honestly, compared to what I'd lose with that specific superzoom, I'd risk it.

[DarrenSV650S]

Oh no sorry it's the TZ7 she's got

[grimey121uk]

You know me, harsh is my middle name ;) :lol:



I do get the advantage that it is to use a single lens for everything. It's not just the convenience of having every focal length available to man on a single lens, it's also the fact that every lens change means you have your camera innards exposed to the elements, so you increase the chances of getting crap on your sensor. Of course you can be extra careful / quick, and point your camera downwards yada yada yada, but the chances are still there.

Unfortunately there is a (sometimes big) quality hit you take, and the longer the range, the worse it is, plus these lenses get really slow at the tele end. Honestly, the usual f/5.6 for "cheap" lenses is already too slow, let alone f/6.3. Yes it's only 1/3 of a stop, but with autofocus systems that are designed to work with lenses up to f/5.6, in low light you run the risk of the camera simply not finding focus at all. Add to that the fact that cheaper lenses are usually very soft wide open and you need to stop them down 1 or 2 stops to get better results, and you'll find yourself shooting at f/9 to f/13 more often than you'd like...

I'll stick with changing lenses, tyvm. ;) If I were in the situation where I had to choose between a DSLR with that superzoom or getting a top range bridge camera with a faster lens, I know what I would go for! :lol: Yes, I'd lose the big sensor, but honestly, compared to what I'd lose with that specific superzoom, I'd risk it.

Lens changes do not pose any threat from dust etc, if you do it properly, I spent 3 years urban exploring in absolutely filthy places, taking around 10k images and changing lenses often, after that I had 1 dust spot on my 40d which was only visible at f22 while Taking a snap of a white wall.

I think the issues arise from poor storage tbh, my main 2 exploring lenses were a sigma 10-20 and a 17-40l, the sigma isn't even "weather sealed" and I had no issues despite it being on 75% of the time

In term of the superzoom lenses you need to shoot at f8 to get anything reasonable, what use is that on a 250mm lens in anything other than a stunningly bright day.

[dyzio]

In my student days

An extra lens weights 300g and takes 5 seconds to change not a big deal

When were these student days? And did you use the mentioned lens.

If you're trying to squeeze 2-3 weeks worth of clothing and camping stuff into your tailpack, the extra lens would become a pita. Not to mention the extra 500 pounds to buy one. Unless you know a cheap lens up to 250-300mm with a high speed AF, the size of the earlier mentioned Sigma.

[Filipe M.]

Lens changes do not pose any threat from dust etc, if you do it properly, I spent 3 years urban exploring in absolutely filthy places, taking around 10k images and changing lenses often, after that I had 1 dust spot on my 40d which was only visible at f22 while Taking a snap of a white wall.

I think the issues arise from poor storage tbh, my main 2 exploring lenses were a sigma 10-20 and a 17-40l, the sigma isn't even "weather sealed" and I had no issues despite it being on 75% of the time

And therein lies the problem, not everybody knows how to do it, and most people will be too afraid of breaking something to do it fast.

[grimey121uk]

When were these student days? And did you use the mentioned lens.

If you're trying to squeeze 2-3 weeks worth of clothing and camping stuff into your tailpack, the extra lens would become a pita. Not to mention the extra 500 pounds to buy one. Unless you know a cheap lens up to 250-300mm with a high speed AF, the size of the earlier mentioned Sigma.

I used the 18-200, the old version along with a raft other others.

The 18-250 costs around 400quid, depending on what camera system you are using you can get a lot more for less, any kit lens will outperform it in the wide range and then you can get half decent 70-300mm lenses from most manufactures for under 300quid.

The worst thing about these super-zooms other than IQ has to be AF performance, theory often claim to have ultra sonic motors etc but in reality they use the ultrasonic micro-motors not "proper" ones, that coupled with poor light performance which on the long end is technically beyond 90% of cameras design spec, in fact the only reason they do AF at the long end is because they trick the camera into thinking it has a larger aperture than it does.

An superzoom lens is very much like an adjustable spanner compared with a traditional spanner, they just don't work any were near as good but in theory you only need 1 tool

[grimey121uk]

And therein lies the problem, not everybody knows how to do it, and most people will be too afraid of breaking something to do it fast.

Very true but if your buying a changeable lens system then you need to know how to use it,

However with the price of entry level cameras now, 90% of low end dslr's are destined to become a very expensive and large point and shoot

[dyzio]

Unfortunately, the 70-300mm lenses were described as a bit slow by users.

Yes, they cost about ~350 pounds, but if I sell my current lens that's only 200 pounds extra.

[dyzio]

Very true but if your buying a changeable lens system then you need to know how to use it,




Go on, tell us :)

[jambo]

Go on, tell us :)
press, twist, yank
push, twist, click

Hope this helps ;)
Jambo

[dyzio]

press, twist, yank
push, twist, click

Hope this helps ;)
Jambo

Ok, so how do you mess it up? :)

[mattneighbour]

Hi guys, been lurking here for a while.

Nice to know some other people like photography too! Thought you might like to see my weapon of choice:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4037/4298375150_893d514bba.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/stumayhew/4298375150)

No joke, that's my Shen Hao 5 x 4 inch large format film camera. I'm a film guy all the way. I have a medium format TLR and some 35mm AF Minoltas too, I develop my own black and white and colour negative film.

Anyway, thought you should know that there's another (very) photo-mad SV rider out there!

Matt

[dyzio]

Slight off topic but what's with the "I'm not a terrorist" note?

I found it also when browsing sample pics from the link mentioned by Jambo earlier.

http://g2.img-dpreview.com/ACF023E9DAB547E4B036546218EC8161.jpg

[mattneighbour]

I was at a huge rally in Trafalgar Square last year, to raise awareness of the erosion of photographers' rights, protesting against too many people being stopped by police whilst taking perfectly legal photos. It was great for getting shots of my camera, everyone loved it!

http://photographernotaterrorist.org/

[Filipe M.]

Hi guys, been lurking here for a while.

Nice to know some other people like photography too! Thought you might like to see my weapon of choice:
(...)
No joke, that's my Shen Hao 5 x 4 inch large format film camera. I'm a film guy all the way. I have a medium format TLR and some 35mm AF Minoltas too, I develop my own black and white and colour negative film.

Anyway, thought you should know that there's another (very) photo-mad SV rider out there!

Matt

Now that's a beautiful piece of equipment there. :o Welcome! :D

Any tips on developing film at home? I still use 35mm every now and again, and I've been toying with the idea of developing it myself (both B&W and colour negs), but never got around to doing it... :|

[grimey121uk]

Ok, so how do you mess it up? :)

You cant unless your daft TBH,
Just store it in a case when its not in use rather than living it out where dust will settle on it
It must be noted that dust a a sensor can be cleaned off, its not the end of the world

I have changed lenses in absolutly filthy places, one being some air raid shelters carved out of sandstone with sandstone dust 3" think on the ground and I had no issues with over 10k shots.
Trust me walking around didnt half kick up some dust
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3463/3231954320_63d75f4946_o.jpg

Unfortunately, the 70-300mm lenses were described as a bit slow by users.

Yes, they cost about ~350 pounds, but if I sell my current lens that's only 200 pounds extra.

Or you could keep you lens you already have and buy one that fills the extra range you require.
The AF on the superzooms is absolute junk especialy on the long side, for a starters the lens at f/6.3 is beyond the specificatio that non pro cameras were designed to use, I used the 18-200 and in a well lit building it stuggled to lock focus, from my experiance any budget lens beats every superzoom I have ever used in terms of IQ and AF speed, with the expectation of the canon 75-300 / 90-300 (not to be mistaken with 70-300)


Although these are just my opinions based on my own experiance and expectations, if needs must then get a superzoom, like I sad in an earlier post any picture is better than no picture

[markc123]

Eventually when swapping lenses I did get dust on the sensor despite being careful.

Fixed with a decent wet swab cleaning kit - camera is over 12k shutter now so was to be expected. I now carry said kit with me on holiday - it was impossible to find one on Malta last year :-(

[TC3]

Dont believe in using wet system to remove dust from sensor and have managed for many years using a Visibledust arctic butterfly sensor brush. much safer in my opinion. Basically i take lil care where i change lenses but do power off camera and have it face down when i do. Always give it a swipe with the sensor brush everytime camera goes out....takes a minute.

[mattneighbour]

Any tips on developing film at home? I still use 35mm every now and again, and I've been toying with the idea of developing it myself (both B&W and colour negs), but never got around to doing it... :|

Hi!

Well tip number 1 is you don't need a darkroom like most people think. You just need a changing bag, basically a fabric bag with sleeves that is light tight. You load a reel with film in the changing bag and put it in a daylight tank. Once the lid is on the tank you can remove it from the bag without exposing it to light - the daylight tank allows chemicals to be poured in and out without exposing the film to light.

There are two types of tanks/reels, plastic and stainless steel. I use steel, it's reported to be better for colour due to temperature conduction, but most colleges use plastic which some find easier to load. Plastic can screw up if not kept perfectly clean and dry.

To outline the processes:

Black & white:

1: Presoak the film in water (helps remove blue dye)
2: Developer, usually 4 to 11 minutes, see developer datasheet or online
3: Stop bath - rinse and pour (stops the residual developer)
4: Fixer, 2 - 5 minutes
5: Wash

C41 colour negative:

1: Colour developer, 3min15sec at 37.8 degrees
2: Bleach, 6min30sec
3: Wash, a few changes of water
4: Fix, 6min30sec
5: Wash
6: Stabilizer, 1min30sec

The colour stuff has to be done at ~38 degrees. I use a washing up bowl filled with water from my hot tap. After standing the chems in it whilst I load the film they usually reach the desired 37.8 degrees C +/- a degree or so.

It normally takes me about 30 minutes to process a roll.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4010/4299058042_81fdb24d45_m.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mattneighbour/4299058042/in/photostream) http://farm1.static.flickr.com/57/4086318236_da7db20386_m.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mattneighbour/4086318236/in/photostream)

[Filipe M.]

Hi!

Well tip number 1 is you don't need a darkroom like most people think. You just need a changing bag, basically a fabric bag with sleeves that is light tight. You load a reel with film in the changing bag and put it in a daylight tank. Once the lid is on the tank you can remove it from the bag without exposing it to light - the daylight tank allows chemicals to be poured in and out without exposing the film to light.

There are two types of tanks/reels, plastic and stainless steel. I use steel, it's reported to be better for colour due to temperature conduction, but most colleges use plastic which some find easier to load. Plastic can screw up if not kept perfectly clean and dry.

To outline the processes:

Black & white:

1: Presoak the film in water (helps remove blue dye)
2: Developer, usually 4 to 11 minutes, see developer datasheet or online
3: Stop bath - rinse and pour (stops the residual developer)
4: Fixer, 2 - 5 minutes
5: Wash

C41 colour negative:

1: Colour developer, 3min15sec at 37.8 degrees
2: Bleach, 6min30sec
3: Wash, a few changes of water
4: Fix, 6min30sec
5: Wash
6: Stabilizer, 1min30sec

The colour stuff has to be done at ~38 degrees. I use a washing up bowl filled with water from my hot tap. After standing the chems in it whilst I load the film they usually reach the desired 37.8 degrees C +/- a degree or so.

It normally takes me about 30 minutes to process a roll.


Thanks, I really must look into doing it. I've recently shot a roll of Ektar (the new one) and the thing made me fall in love with film all over again.

[Jimmy2Feet]

Hi, I am looking at purchaseing a teleconver, and have seen one on flebay,

I am a little confused as to will it fit my camera etc.

I set up it a nikon d3100, and the camera body doesn't have a AF motor build into it, therefore i need AF/s len's to use Auto Focus.

The teleconverter i have seen is:

JESSOP MC 2X N/AF D. should this work? i know that it is a nikon fit, and i assume that with the AF in the description it should allow the AF motor in the lens function? but what does the N and the D stand for?

Cheers in advance

[jambo]

I would think not.
The N is likely Nikon.

AFS & AFI lenses have internal focusing. AF-D have auto focus but this is from the body I think.

To be honest I'm not as up on Nikon kit as some here.

Also note not all lenses work with teleconverters as it can cut down the light coming in to the point that the camera's AF doesn't work properly, unless the lens starts off letting a lot through (a fast lens such as F2.8 / F4). The cut down amount of light being passed through also slows down shutter speeds, and the extra elements can lead to a softer / less crisp image with more colour fringing.

Jambo

Edit: You may want to try the photography chat thread here (http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?t=161209)

[Jimmy2Feet]

hey guys,

Have posted a thread in idle banter, but as suggested have put it here as well, so here we go.......

I am looking at purchaseing a teleconver, and have seen one on flebay,

I am a little confused as to will it fit my camera etc.

my set up it a nikon d3100, and the camera body doesn't have a AF motor build into it, therefore i need AF/s len's to use Auto Focus.

The teleconverter i have seen is:

JESSOP MC 2X N/AF D. should this work? i know that it is a nikon fit, and i assume that with the AF in the description it should allow the AF motor in the lens function? but what does the N and the D stand for?

Cheers in advance

[jambo]

As before in IB:

I would think not.
The N is likely Nikon.

AFS & AFI lenses have internal focusing. AF-D have auto focus but this is from the body I think.

To be honest I'm not as up on Nikon kit as some here.

Also note not all lenses work with teleconverters as it can cut down the light coming in to the point that the camera's AF doesn't work properly, unless the lens starts off letting a lot through (a fast lens such as F2.8 / F4). The cut down amount of light being passed through also slows down shutter speeds, and the extra elements can lead to a softer / less crisp image with more colour fringing.

Jambo

Edit: You may want to try the photography chat thread here (http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?t=161209)

[Jimmy2Feet]

cheers again!! :)

[alastairb]

i can't help you with the if it will work as i am a canon person, but the 2x tc will lose you two stops of light, so a f/2.8 lens will becomes f/5.6.

As until you get up to pro bodies they can't af unless the lenses maximum apperture is f/5.6 or above you will need a lens that is at least f/2.8 throughout the zoom range.

unless you get a tc which is non reporting so the camera doesn't know it is there, but then you will still have issues focusing unless it is a very bright day as two stops of light is a lot of light to lose for the af system.

and as Jambo said the image will be signifincatly softer with the optical flaws magnified compared to using the lens on its own.

In my opinion 2x TCs need top of the range lenses to be of any use

HTH

alastair

[Jimmy2Feet]

I fully understand that, and if i had the money to purchase a 600mm lend, that is defo ware i would go, I am only purchaseing the TC for extention for casual shots, mates out in water surfing, looking to go on a safari for our honeymoon, and although i will definatly try and not use the TC, i will always try and get the shot with the Lens alone, i feel that if i can pick a cheap one up from Ebay, is a usufall tool to have in kit.

[alastairb]

yes TCs definitely have their place and do enable you to get a shot that you otherwise wouldn't be able to get :thumleft:

[Jimmy2Feet]

indeed, if as and when i ever have the money, i will definatly upgrade everything, camera body and lens' but only being 4 months into the start of my new hobby, i dont think i can start spending 1000's of £ on kit just yet!!!

[alastairb]

i know that feeling, i have spent more than I ever imagined I would on it. I am actually too scared to add everything up :P

[Jimmy2Feet]

haha!! i am sure! after only 4 months i am scared to look at how much i have spend, and i know i am only just about at the 4 didget mark! :)

[Quedos]

Jimmy - know how you feel wait till you go old school and have the medium format and dark room stuff

[Jimmy2Feet]

see now 35mm just makes me feel well out of my depth, an old girlfriend was into photography, and her grandad was a pro, and was awsom looking at all the kit he had, but i am much more confident with a computer and a mouse.......and before you say anything, i know i am sure i am missing out on a load and i am sure that locking yourself away in a dark room is good fun, but i was sat in the garden yesterday, out in the sun, with a glass of wine, and my laptop going through all the RAW files, cant do that with film!!! :)

[Filipe M.]

Adding to what has already been said about image quality and autofocus, be careful about what lenses you use the TC with, as something might get damaged in the process (depending on how it's built).
Nikon's TCs come with a compatibility list of what lenses can and can't be used with them, not only because of feature set (variable f/5.6 zooms will turn out to be f/11 zooms with a 2x TC, rendering them pretty much useless for anything that can't be done with manual focusing), but also because of protruding lens elements. If the TC or lenses have any round elements that may come in contact with each other during normal use (focusing / zooming), something might break.

[Jimmy2Feet]

Adding to what has already been said about image quality and autofocus, be careful about what lenses you use the TC with, as something might get damaged in the process (depending on how it's built).
Nikon's TCs come with a compatibility list of what lenses can and can't be used with them, not only because of feature set (variable f/5.6 zooms will turn out to be f/11 zooms with a 2x TC, rendering them pretty much useless for anything that can't be done with manual focusing), but also because of protruding lens elements. If the TC or lenses have any round elements that may come in contact with each other during normal use (focusing / zooming), something might break.

Really! i wasn't aware of that! very interesting indeed, maybe hold out and get a nikon TC to be on the safe side!

[keith_d]

As before in IB:

I would think not.
The N is likely Nikon.

AFS & AFI lenses have internal focusing. AF-D have auto focus but this is from the body I think.

To be honest I'm not as up on Nikon kit as some here.

Also note not all lenses work with teleconverters as it can cut down the light coming in to the point that the camera's AF doesn't work properly, unless the lens starts off letting a lot through (a fast lens such as F2.8 / F4). The cut down amount of light being passed through also slows down shutter speeds, and the extra elements can lead to a softer / less crisp image with more colour fringing.

Jambo



Jambo's pretty much spot on.

However, one of the reviews I read about the Nikon converters said that they were keyed to prevent anything except f/2.8 AF-S lenses mounting on them. That would make them pretty useless with a consumer zoom.

Edit - I've just checked the manual and there's a whole list of lenses they don't work with.

[keith_d]

haha!! i am sure! after only 4 months i am scared to look at how much i have spend, and i know i am only just about at the 4 didget mark! :)

There's good news and bad news on that front.

The good news is that if you keep spending that kind of money you'll have quite a decent collection of lenses in a few years.

The bad news is that you probably will. :)

[alastairb]

There's good news and bad news on that front.

The good news is that if you keep spending that kind of money you'll have quite a decent collection of lenses in a few years.

The bad news is that you probably will. :)

So true!!

[keith_d]

From a completely different perspective, having expensive camera gear doesn't make great photos. But having gear you're happy with can help you make them. As well as spending money on camera kit you need to spend time taking photos and looking critically at what you bring back.

If you fancy a summer project go out of the office every lunchtime for a week, from Monday to Thursday, rain or shine, and try to bring back one really great picture each day (and some others). On Friday lunchtime spend the whole hour reviewing your best pictures from each day and thinking about what went wrong and what was right.

Then have a week off. But spend your time looking at people and things, and how you would photograph them. Leave the camera at home so you're not thinking about the mechanics of photography, instead you're thinking about making pictures. This is why artists make such good photographers, they've already learned to make images, they just need to learn how to capture their vision with a camera.

On the third week spend your lunchtimes looking at other people's images, artists and (non-advertising) photographs. Try to understand what they're trying to convey, and why they chose to make the image the way they did. On Friday of your third week look again at your images from the first week.

Then it's back to week 1 again. Take the camera out every lunchtime and try to make better images. Think about the styles you saw in week 3, and whether you can apply them. Go back to the places you identified in week 2 and try to photograph some of the images you envisaged.

Repeat as necessary.

Great photographers aren't born, they're developed.

[fizzwheel]

I've merged the thread in IB into this one, just so all the discussion is in one place.

[Jimmy2Feet]

That is a that is a really good suggestion. The only problem i hav is never having enough time in the day to have lunch let alone go out with camera!!:)

I have always tried to work with those guidelines however. Always looking for show, and always wishing i had the camera with me!!

Cheers also for the help with the tc. I think i Kay need to do a little more research before purchase!

[Filipe M.]

From a completely different perspective, having expensive camera gear doesn't make great photos. But having gear you're happy with can help you make them.

Absolutely right. Everybody knows (or should know by now) it's not the camera, it's the photographer that makes the shot, but if you're out there in the field getting frustrated at a slow, non-intuitive camera that doesn't fit your hands and you just can't ignore that fact, then it's almost granted your pictures will show just that. On the other hand, if the camera feels like an extension of your body, responding to your inputs without hassle and generally just doing what you want it to do, then your pictures will probably improve.

As well as spending money on camera kit you need to spend time taking photos and looking critically at what you bring back.

If you fancy a summer project...

*snip* insert excellent method to develop your skills here *snip*

Repeat as necessary.

Great photographers aren't born, they're developed.

Couldn't agree more. =D>

[TC3]

That is a that is a really good suggestion. The only problem i hav is never having enough time in the day to have lunch let alone go out with camera!!:)

I have always tried to work with those guidelines however. Always looking for show, and always wishing i had the camera with me!!

Cheers also for the help with the tc. I think i Kay need to do a little more research before purchase!

never had luck with a 2x tc as image quality was just too poor when used on a consumer zoom. however i found a pro photographer selling a tamron sp 1.4x nikon fit tc which i picked up for 50 quid on eekbay. have tried it and it is not that bad to be honest but you do get just as good cropping. the tc helps with getting the background more out of focus though. apparently he used to use it on a nikon 300mm prime and sold photos with that combo

[Jimmy2Feet]

having looked into it more, i think that for now i will just keep using my 300 and crop, there isn ot going to be that many times that i will need more than 300mm and therefore i think that to save the money and get another a better camera to go alongside the 3100 will probable be a better use of money and give better results,

Would you agree?


and on that point, question for nikon users, i obveously have a D3100 ATM, fantastic camera for a starter IMO, but i am aware that it is a budget, starter DSLR, therefore i know in time i will want to upgrade it, would i notice a big jump up on quality, usability etc with a D7000?

[alastairb]

depends on what you want to do with the photos, there is a limit to cropping that prints large well but saying that I have printed massive crops before and they still look great :)

like i already said i am not a nikon person but i have heard very good things about the d700 and the sensor in it, i don't know about the change in usability, does it have two control wheels? as i know the entry level canon bodies just have one and i find that a pain in the ass but nikons may be different?

[Filipe M.]

The Nikon D7000 does have two control wheels, plus a host of other buttons that allow quicker access to settings when compared to the D3100.
Build quality is also a lot better (magnesium body.... mmmmmmmmm *drools*), it'll make your D3100 feel like a toy camera (but still a very good one at that). As for image quality, yes it will probably be a lot better than the D3100 under specific conditions, but I don't think the difference will be as noticeable under normal conditions as much as the usability / build quality differential.

[Jimmy2Feet]

depends on what you want to do with the photos, there is a limit to cropping that prints large well but saying that I have printed massive crops before and they still look great :)

like i already said i am not a nikon person but i have heard very good things about the d700 and the sensor in it, i don't know about the change in usability, does it have two control wheels? as i know the entry level canon bodies just have one and i find that a pain in the ass but nikons may be different?

Yes i think it does have two wheels, but not 100% sure, again this is just speculation, i will not be going out spending £800 on another body less than 6 months after purchaseing my first!!! but like to keep options open!

[AndyBrad]

Hello there folks,

Im wondering if you can give me some camera advice. Previously ive messed about with point and shoot compacts. I then ventured into a 350d that basically i didn’t use out of auto and didn’t take anywhere because it was too big. Im now in the market for something a little better than a cheap compact but don’t know what. My dads got a G10 and tbh its a superb camera but again i don’t think it would get the usage a small compact would.

The sort of things imm be taking pictures of are
Skiing holidays.
Landscapes when out on the bike
Pictures of bikes and cars on track.

So generally things that are moving i would have said. I hate missing the shot so something with rapid fire would also be nice. Looking at around 250 quid?


Any ideas?

[Jimmy2Feet]

i think most bridge cameras would meey all your needs, i have been looking at the Nikon L120 for something a little more portable than the DSLR, and not as expensive to break in certain sercomstances, and although will not get as good a result as a SLR, i think if you once again are using in Auto mode i wouldn't think you will notice a difference, and will still be better than most compact cameras.

At the same time however, what i have read, most higher end compacts are coming close to compeeting with the bridges, and have the benefit of being pocket size!

[AndyBrad]

looks good and tbh everyting i could ask for really.

appart from its bloody massive

[keith_d]

I have just bought a compact specifically for taking on the bike.

I chose the Panasonic LX5 though there were a lot of very good contenders. My reasons were:

a) manual control as well as auto mode
b) wide aperture, f/2.8-3.3
c) decent wide angle, 24mm equivalent.
d) 52mm filter holder available

I've subsequently found that I like having the option to shoot in a range of formats from square to 16:9.

The main downside for me is that the macro mode has bugger all working distance, so it's not much use for shooting insects.

It also has limited telephoto capability, around 100mm equivalent. That's fine for people and general travel photography, but it's not much use for shooting bikes or cars on the track. A digital SLR with a long lens is still the best option there.

Keith.

[DarrenSV650S]

When you change to 16:9 do you see any extra at the sides? On my fuji it just chops some of the picture from the top and bottom to make it widescreen. Didn't really see the point in that when I can just edit the exact size I want in photoshop after.

[dyzio]

Pic borrowed from another thread.


How do I take pics like this??

Fancy camera? Fancy lens, any particular settings?

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee161/BigMitch41/bigmitchkep.jpg

[keith_d]

Looking at the degree of foreshortening I'd go with something like a 300mm lens, tripod and an afternoon kneeling in the sun.

[keith_d]

When you change to 16:9 do you see any extra at the sides? On my fuji it just chops some of the picture from the top and bottom to make it widescreen. Didn't really see the point in that when I can just edit the exact size I want in photoshop after.

The square format is just a crop of the 4:3 image but it's not a simple as that for the other formats.

[4:3] 3648x2736 (10M pixels)
[3:2] 3776x2520 (9.5M pixels)
[16:9] 3968x2232 (9M pixels)
[1:1] 2736x2736(7.5M pixels)

For me, the advantage is that I like composing in the camera rather than trying to guess where the crop lines will be. But that's probably just personal preference.

Keith

[Filipe M.]

Pic borrowed from another thread.


How do I take pics like this??

Fancy camera? Fancy lens, any particular settings?


Looking at the degree of foreshortening I'd go with something like a 300mm lens, tripod and an afternoon kneeling in the sun.

When I first looked at the pic I was thinking the lens would probably be a bit shorter than 300 based on the behaviour of depth of field and lack of motion blur: the mountains aren't motion blurred (indicating a high shutter speed), but the front tyre is already slightly out of focus (wide aperture). A lens as long as a 300 at those settings would probably throw the background a lot more out of focus...

Then there's the angle, which is easier to achieve on a camera with a vertical grip...

... and then I had the idea of checking the picture for properties and EXIF, and this is what I got:

Canon 1Ds Mk. III (as fancy as Canons get, short of the 1D Mk. IV... speaking of which, where is the 1Ds Mk. IV everyone is expecting ever since the D3x? :lol:)
f/5.6, 1/1600s, ISO 200
90 mm focal length (can't be arsed to open this with a proper EXIF reader, but I'd guess this is the 70-200L f/2.8 - again, as fancy as they get).

As for the afternoon sitting in the sun, I'd say Keith was absolutely spot on! :lol:

[Filipe M.]

The square format is just a crop of the 4:3 image but it's not a simple as that for the other formats.

[4:3]3648x2736 (10M pixels)
[3:2]3776x2520 (9.5M pixels)
[16:9]3968x2232 (9M pixels)
[1:1]2736x2736(7.5M pixels)

For me, the advantage is that I like composing in the camera rather than trying to guess where the crop lines will be. But that's probably just personal preference.

Keith

Yup, Panasonic are known for doing the different crop modes with different pixel counts from the same sensor. To some that might sound like a waste of pixel space (judging from those numbers, the max picture size the LX5 is able to achieve would be 3968 x 2736, at 1.45:1 aspect ratio), but others prefer to compose in camera and the different modes are perfect for that. I guess the only mode missing there would be the classic 5:4, which sometimes I love using for portraits. :eek:

[dyzio]

Canon 1Ds Mk. III
70-200L f/2.8



http://www.mds975.co.uk/Images/homer_simpson_doh_01.jpg

[Filipe M.]

http://www.mds975.co.uk/Images/homer_simpson_doh_01.jpg

The funny thing is that picture is a perfect example of photographer technique over fancy camera.
It was taken with the 1Ds Mk.III / 70-200L f/2.8 because he is a pro photog, and that's what he uses, but I'd say that this picture could have taken with pretty much any decent DSLR on the market with a good piece of glass in front of it.
Any DSLR in the market right now will have shutter speeds in excess of the 1/1600s he used, and even the "budget" telephotos will open to f/5.6. Of course the lens will contribute to the sharpness, contrast and overall quality of the image, and the 1Ds Mk III will put out 21 MP of pixel goodness, but at web publishing sizes everybody might have a hard time finding the differences...

If we were talking about big, high-res prints, there the story would be slightly different... :lol:

[dyzio]

You've cheered me up then.

I was just about to throw away my camera and use my mobile for taking pictures :D

[alastairb]

The funny thing is that picture is a perfect example of photographer technique over fancy camera.
It was taken with the 1Ds Mk.III / 70-200L f/2.8 because he is a pro photog, and that's what he uses, but I'd say that this picture could have taken with pretty much any decent DSLR on the market with a good piece of glass in front of it.
Any DSLR in the market right now will have shutter speeds in excess of the 1/1600s he used, and even the "budget" telephotos will open to f/5.6. Of course the lens will contribute to the sharpness, contrast and overall quality of the image, and the 1Ds Mk III will put out 21 MP of pixel goodness, but at web publishing sizes everybody might have a hard time finding the differences...

If we were talking about big, high-res prints, there the story would be slightly different... :lol:

+1! Though some entry level bodies may struggle with af tracking a bike in that position as it will be travelling fairly fast towards the camera which is the hardest job AF will ever have to do, though can just be made better by using a smaller aperture which should have been used anyway IMO (see below)

though i might add with regards to that picture

the crop of that picture imo is horrible! just can't get on with that angle.

the shutter speed was too fast as you can still see the tread in the tyres

and doesn't look like it has been sharpened as much as it should have been after resizing for web

Mega pixels are not everything at all, my 10mp 1d mark 3 creates far better image even after being heavily cropped than my 18mp 7D did in my opinion, and thats including printing large (18"x12")


just my 2c

alastair

[anna]

I love this months entries, but have to say that there are those "almost" amazing shots in the thread.

Minimorecomb if only the horizons and the crop hadnt cut out the boat that would have been a great shot, and G that was a fantastic shot if only those horizons were straight.

I get how playing with horizontals and verticals are part of the artistic licence in photos but, when you are taking photos of water then you have to make sure those horizon lines are straight. The reason, its water, and water will "run off the page" if not balanced straight. There are many, many rules to photography and many can be known and ignored if the artistic reason behind them applies but, you also have to know and be aware of why the rules are there in the first place.

Im certainly no expert, was just answering the question that others had posted about why it mattered so much.

opps wrong thread ... sorry

[Bri w]

Help!

Was out yesterday with the new lens, 70-300 Tamron on a Nikon D5000. In the main the results were poor. For example, one taken from about 20feet with a low sun behind me. 180mm - Auto(ISO400) 1/1600 @ F/5. Set the focus on the mrs. The tree next to her is crystal clear but she is out of focus.

Seriously thinking of switching Auto off and doing it the old fashioned way just like when I had a SLR.

Taken on board the suggestions about switching from Auto to A, changed AF-A to AF-C and got off my a5re and got out and about pretty regular. Took pictures of all sorts rubbish just to try and work out this new fangled digical photog stuff.

Alleybloodylooyah!

They may not be pretty but at least I'm getting something I can actually see.

[Filipe M.]

Taken on board the suggestions about switching from Auto to A, changed AF-A to AF-C and got off my a5re and got out and about pretty regular. Took pictures of all sorts rubbish just to try and work out this new fangled digical photog stuff.

Alleybloodylooyah!

They may not be pretty but at least I'm getting something I can actually see.

:D fantastic.

[Lucas]

Looking to replace my 'walk around lens' sigma 18-125mm for my canon 20D. The sigma has no image stabilising so is rubbish at indoor/low light/telephoto etc...

So after looking through reviews on the net I found three lens that seems good for the job.

A. Canon EF-S 17-85mm f4~5.6 IS USM RRP350

B. Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS RRP295

C. Canon EF-S 18-200mm IS RRP385

Question is will I notice the difference in quality between the lens A & B/C as I only have a 20D with 6MP?

Also, is it worth £80 for lens C's 65mm extra zoom when compared to B? But it seems a bit heavy at 600g to be a 'walk around' lens...

Cheers.

Ps. Anyone interested in a sigma lens for £100 :rolleyes:

[keith_d]

Sorry, I know nothing about the image quality from Canon lenses. But have you considered keeping your existing lens for daytime and adding something like a 35mm f/2 for low light conditions. Used ones are going for less than £200 on Ebay.

Just a thought,

Keith.

[Jimmy2Feet]

Hi,

I have been trying to work out what i have been doing wrong, to try and put it right, (if anything)

In low light photography i have been getting a really grainy result. i have been able to get rid of it mostly through photoshop when it does happen, but there must be something i am doing that is causing it.

Is it a setting? technique? or my equipment?

I am trying to keep my ISO setting as low as poss, normally 100 or 200, but is there something i am missing.

As an example went out in the lightning tonight and got the following pic, but as i am sure you will also see there is a lot of grain/noise in the photo.

Any ideas would be appreciated.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3456/5694553914_842314234a_b.jpg


Taken with:

Nikon D3100
18-55 kit lens @ 24mm
F/8
Shutter on bulb mode, total exposure 6.3s
ISO 200

Cheers in advance