-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
GAF Photography Thread of 2016
- Thread starter captive
- Start date
- Status
JadedWriter
Member
Holy shit, yeah don't try night shots with kit lenses, they just don't let enough light in at all. I use one of two lenses for my night stuff now. I either use my Sigma 2.8 17-50 or my Sigma 1.8 18-35.
Taken with my Sigma 1.8 18-35:
DSC_0452 by Marcus Beasley, on FlickrTaken with Sigma 2.8 17-50:
DSC_9737 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_9747 by Marcus Beasley, on FlickrAstral/H3X
Member
Well, if it's APSC, the 18mm end of the 18-55 could get *kinda* close, but the lens/camera combo I was using is not only just a straight up wider lens (by a good margin, to boot), but is also full frame, widening it *even more*. There would be an appreciable difference between the two lenses taking the "same" photo at the same spot. You could step back a bit to get the same things in view, but the "look" wouldn't be the same.
Also, at 4.5, you'd have to jack the ISO up, *or* use an even longer exposure, but it wouldn't be impossible.
EDIT: I have just finished adding location data to the biggest chunk of my photos where it would be relevant, so you could actually GPS your way to my photo if you really wanted haha. It'll be a while before it shows up though.
JadedWriter
Member
It would most likely be impossible handheld. I very rarely have a tripod on me and I really don't have the time to set one up as I'm walking about randomly to catch a train or not interfere...too heavily with people walking behind me. So if this person has to deal with that then it's pretty impossible.
supernormal
Member
JadedWriter
Member
It helps unless you want to start using a tripod. I'm not a tripod person so I try have some good large aperture glass at my disposal. The other person does a lot of astrophotography and macro stuff as well so probably always has a tripod on him. I have one, I just don't carry it with me.
Nice angle, and you're not shooting up their damn nose like I have done on several occasions. Did you use one flash for this? Diffuser umbrella as well cause I think I see it in his glasses.
Astral/H3X
Member
Oh yeah, definitely not gonna happen handheld. He mentioned "a photo like that", so I said what I did to get it. 
"Cleanliness" is a matter of your ISO, and that's the biggest factor in noise for low light photos. To get around it, you need a combination of Aperture and Shutter Speed, though you can make up for one with the other (so a tripod could allow you to increase shutter speed to make up for a slow aperture, and a wide aperture can make up for handheld shooting). But in general, yeah it's always better to start off with the widest aperture you can.
"Cleanliness" is a matter of your ISO, and that's the biggest factor in noise for low light photos. To get around it, you need a combination of Aperture and Shutter Speed, though you can make up for one with the other (so a tripod could allow you to increase shutter speed to make up for a slow aperture, and a wide aperture can make up for handheld shooting). But in general, yeah it's always better to start off with the widest aperture you can.
JadedWriter
Member
I mean he could probably just shoot the thing with 4000 iso or some other ungodly number and attempt to clean it up in Lightroom, but he's just going to further destroy that image in the process cause toning the noise down too much would just seem to either crush or do something else to the image quality.Oh yeah, definitely not gonna happen handheld. He mentioned "a photo like that", so I said what I did to get it.
"Cleanliness" is a matter of your ISO, and that's the biggest factor in noise for low light photos. To get around it, you need a combination of Aperture and Shutter Speed, though you can make up for one with the other (so a tripod could allow you to increase shutter speed to make up for a slow aperture, and a wide aperture can make up for handheld shooting). But in general, yeah it's always better to start off with the widest aperture you can.
Astral/H3X
Member
One thing he *can* do is image stack noise reduction, where you just take 5 shots super quick, and then LR/PS can reduce the noise, but that basically requires a static scene and steady hands. Not impossible, I've done it for a few photos where it was pitch black and I didn't have a tripod.
I'm sorry dude, you seem like a cool person and all, but this comment really rubbed me in the wrong way. First of all, don't ever tell anyone not to try things for themselves. Ever. period. Sure, you can read and have all this knowledge about everything, but practice and seeing how it works and getting used to your equipment is a whole different story. No amount of books will replace the knowledge you grain by just trying things out and questioning them and finding it out for yourself. Photography more than anything is just about experimenting and trying things out. You should never limit yourself because your equipment is this and that. Hell, I accepted paid jobs that I did not have the equipment for in the slightest, but the client was happy in the end. Under pressure you just make it work and think creatively on how to do so. Outside the box and all that.
I feel like there's too many comments on this thread about what equipment you should have to do this and that. I mean, sure, technically you need a certain type of equipment to achieve certain looks, but it's not nearly as important as you make it sound in the comments. As we've seen, you can take awesome photos with an iPhone. That's what photography is all about, the creative thinking behind the lens, rather than the piece of tech you've got. This is not PC master race, i7 superior and all that crap and I'd hate to see it turn this way.
...
Just putting it out there. Please don't take it personally. I don't want people who can't afford equipment to be discouraged and not take photos because they don't think they can achieve this and that with what they have. Always use up what you've got to it's maximum potential, whatever that may be.
Astral/H3X
Member
1.8 on a tripod? It'd be great. There you're getting a fairly fast aperture with the ability to go any shutter speed you want. At that point the only reason you'd raise your ISO is A) you don't want to wait that long or B) it's a scene with moving bits.
VisceralBowl
Member
afaik the Sigma 18-35 1.8 is made for crop sensor cameras.
I still think you should consider just using what you have and see how that works for you.
I still think you should consider just using what you have and see how that works for you.
What kind of sensor camera is the 60D?
Based on this page alone, I feel like it'll be impossible for me to get anything great at night with the equipment I have. =/
VisceralBowl
Member
Astral/H3X
Member
20150916-_DSC9664.jpg by Hunter Mauro, on FlickrThis was taken with my kit lens, sooooo
On the a6000 as well.
JadedWriter
Member
I'm sorry if what I said came off the wrong way. I've made and still make a craptastic amount of mistakes and yeah I'm definitely going to agree with you there that doing is the best teacher considering that's pretty much how I'm learning to do it to begin with. I guess me saying "don't do this and use that" and so forth is taking away from some of the fun of discovery with this whole thing. Yeah I actually do have to echo you on the you can do stuff without the "right" equipment sentiment. I've shot numerous portraits with focal lengths I'm not "supposed" to use, but still got great results with them regardless. So yeah to the new poster I've been talking with don't let my comments dissuade you from experimenting, I just get caught up in a knowledge thing and spout stuff as at times trying to help people. I was eventually just going to tell you to experiment with what you got anyway cause honestly that's the best way you're going to learn and figure out what works for you, sorry about that Koriandrr.
Nothing is technically impossible.
I took these at close to night with a bridge camera, you use what you have a lot of it is just improving your technique through experience.
Untitled by Marcus Beasley, on FlickrThis is definite night, though being at a concert helped:
Untitled by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
Untitled by Marcus Beasley, on Flickrsupernormal
Member
Honestly I don't think you need anything more than your tripod. You should use one anyway if you're doing landscape shots whether it's day or night so you can take various shots at different exposure for a cleaner image. I personally would never shoot a landscape shot at such a wide aperture because I would assume you want a depth of field that allows the whole image to be in focus. I guess if you're shooting hand held it would be a necessity to shoot wide open, but the ideal situation is locked down on a tripod. Try it out some long exposures with your kit lens and hold off on thinking you need to buy a fast lens for dark landscape shots.
supernormal
Member
Just the light seen reflected on his shades.
JadedWriter
Member
Oh ok, it definitely has an umbrella shape to it.
I do my best not to be completely wide open unless I absolutely have to be. Even stopping down even a little bit helps nail down the sharpness and depth of field better. I really need to try out some long exposures at some point. It might just be something I plan to do some where out of the way and by myself at some point. I'm assuming everybody uses a remote shutter release for long exposures?
jongkookie
Member
Kit lenses are fine... I took these a few years ago using the Nikon kit lens
:
Just go out there and shoot. Don't worry about having the right or wrong gear, what matters is that you actually went and took some pictures.
(and yes that's the band Mutemath)
Just go out there and shoot. Don't worry about having the right or wrong gear, what matters is that you actually went and took some pictures.
JadedWriter
Member
Sometimes I swear that my girlfriend doesn't understand this. She once commented that I take a lot, granted that was early on in the relationship before I hope to god that she just got used to it. I do wish she'd use the camera I gave her more often but that's besides the point. Kit lenses are great learner lenses though. I honestly think I got lucky and was handed a really good prime lens as one of my first lenses.Kit lenses are fine... I took these a few years ago using the Nikon kit lens:(and yes that's the band Mutemath)
Just go out there and shoot. Don't worry about having the right or wrong gear, what matters is that you actually went and took some pictures.
This is my night shot from last night. It turned out terrible, and I had to turn up the ISO a whole lot. It was handheld though, but I'll try with a tripod in a few moments. It's getting dark here now anyway.
night by Madridista, on Flickr
night by Madridista, on Flickr
VisceralBowl
Member
Your shutter speed should be in whole seconds territory.
JadedWriter
Member
Yeah put it on a tripod, bump that shutter speed up a lot, use the widest focal length, about 18 or so depending on how you want the composition and turn the iso down a bit. Take numerous shots at different settings and examine what you have. Oh god just realized that's the widest you can go. If AF is just hunting on you, just try manual focus as well. Also do your best to be aware of the what light meter is telling you in your camera so you have a decent idea of what your exposure is doing. It'll help you figure out what settings to use or augment.This is my night shot from last night. It turned out terrible, and I had to turn up the ISO a whole lot. It was handheld though, but I'll try with a tripod in a few moments. It's getting dark here now anyway.
night by Madridista, on Flickr
supernormal
Member
This is my night shot from last night. It turned out terrible, and I had to turn up the ISO a whole lot. It was handheld though, but I'll try with a tripod in a few moments. It's getting dark here now anyway.
night by Madridista, on Flickr
It's all about the long exposure on a tripod. And also take various shots at different shutter speeds because you won't get everything evenly lit in the same shot. I'm not a big night time urban guy but this next shot was a very low light shot composed of various shots.
In one shot you'd have the sky full of color and detail but the trees would be way too dark. So you make another shoot with a longer exposure to get the trees properly lit and combine both in photoshop.
Sunrise by Samuel Vasquez, on FlickrI always do manual focus though. Everything is manual.
Yeah, the light meter is also something I already use. I try to make it a little bit brighter than keeping it in the middle.
Oh wow, am I going to combine photos now? I have never tried this. I have played around with Photoshop for years, so maybe it's just combining the layers.
I'm gonna go try set up the tripod now.
VisceralBowl
Member
Just to make sure - you are using a light meter of some sort (either a handheld one or the one built into your camera as a basis for your exposure, correct?
Yes. The one built into the camera. I normally just change the exposition based on the meter in my viewfinder.
VisceralBowl
Member
Okay good.
Not sure if this is the sort of thing people want to see posted but I did see some milky way shots earlier so I thought people might like these too.
So here's a few astro photos from this season.
NGC7000 (data from Nov.) by Olli Arkko, on Flickr
55 minutes total exposure
Moon mosaic 21-1-2016 by Olli Arkko, on Flickr
mosaic from around 100GB of raw video data
Pleiades (11/10/2015) reprocessed by Olli Arkko, on Flickr
1h 55min total exposure
Rosette Nebula in H-alpha by Olli Arkko, on Flickr
1h 20min total exposure
The Fireworks Galaxy (NGC 6946) and the star cluster NGC 6939 by Olli Arkko, on Flickr
just shy of 3h total exposure
All of these shot with a Nikon D7000 and most of them from extremely heavy light pollution too. Only the pleiades shot is from a half dark sky site type location. Rest of them are backyard shots.
So here's a few astro photos from this season.
NGC7000 (data from Nov.) by Olli Arkko, on Flickr
55 minutes total exposure
Moon mosaic 21-1-2016 by Olli Arkko, on Flickrmosaic from around 100GB of raw video data
Pleiades (11/10/2015) reprocessed by Olli Arkko, on Flickr1h 55min total exposure
Rosette Nebula in H-alpha by Olli Arkko, on Flickr1h 20min total exposure
The Fireworks Galaxy (NGC 6946) and the star cluster NGC 6939 by Olli Arkko, on Flickrjust shy of 3h total exposure
All of these shot with a Nikon D7000 and most of them from extremely heavy light pollution too. Only the pleiades shot is from a half dark sky site type location. Rest of them are backyard shots.
JadedWriter
Member
Much better!
Yes, I see the improvement already. I wonder if I can take even better shots. It was very hard to set up the tripod, because there weren't much room for it, so I had to put it at an angle and adjust the legs but it was a lot of fun.
Here's my edited version (I didn't go for a natural look):
Copenhagen by Madridista, on Flickr
Any feedback on this?
[edit]
I just noticed the noise around the smoke.
Here's my edited version (I didn't go for a natural look):
Copenhagen by Madridista, on Flickr
Any feedback on this?
[edit]
I just noticed the noise around the smoke.
JadedWriter
Member
It kind of reminds me of a Command and Conquer base.Yes, I see the improvement already. I wonder if I can take even better shots. It was very hard to set up the tripod, because there weren't much room for it, so I had to put it at an angle and adjust the legs but it was a lot of fun.
Here's my edited version (I didn't go for a natural look):
Copenhagen by Madridista, on Flickr
Any feedback on this?
[edit]
I just noticed the noise around the smoke.
Dr.Horrible
Member
Loved these. This is something I'd love to try at some point.
Yes, I see the improvement already. I wonder if I can take even better shots. It was very hard to set up the tripod, because there weren't much room for it, so I had to put it at an angle and adjust the legs but it was a lot of fun.
Here's my edited version (I didn't go for a natural look):
Copenhagen by Madridista, on Flickr
Any feedback on this?
[edit]
I just noticed the noise around the smoke.
Often for night shots or low light shots in general I will just find something to rest my camera on, bench, table, post etc. if I do not have a tripod, or if there isn't a place to set one up. To avoid camera shake you can just use the timer function on your camera if you don't have a remote shutter release.
Also try not to get hung up about stuff like noise, image quality is important for certain commercial purposes, but try not to let it affect your enjoyment of the hobby. I have been using kit lenses pretty much exclusively for the past year and have never felt like they were a hindrance to my progress learning photography. Learning how things work and why you would use certain settings at what time is far more important than the gear you carry around.
This is the photo that won the 2015 World Press Photo of the Year contest. Subject matter is always more important than everything else at the end of the day, not the amount of pixels or how sharp they look.
http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2016/feb/18/world-press-photo-of-the-year-goes-to-image-of-child-crossing-border-fence#img-1
Astral/H3X
Member
Not sure if this is the sort of thing people want to see posted but I did see some milky way shots earlier so I thought people might like these too.
So here's a few astro photos from this season.
NGC7000 (data from Nov.) by Olli Arkko, on Flickr
55 minutes total exposure
mosaic from around 100GB of raw video data
1h 55min total exposure
1h 20min total exposure
just shy of 3h total exposure
All of these shot with a Nikon D7000 and most of them from extremely heavy light pollution too. Only the pleiades shot is from a half dark sky site type location. Rest of them are backyard shots.
Oooooooofffffffffffffffffffffffffff.
Okay, these are amazing. These are what I'm trying to do, but sadly don't have the skill to do. Are you using any filters ie a broadband filter?
Ah, an h alpha modded camera. Oh man, these are beautiful. And you said you took these in heavy light pollution?
Oh, I got your point after that photo. I should try not to get too much hung up on it. It's a little hard though, as I want very clear pictures hehe. I'll try.
Also, I don't think I were using a kit lens? It was the Ultrasonic 55-200mm I used. It was bought separately, and not part of the camera package.
I'll try this.
Having clear pictures is definitely something you want for landscapes
Just in general I mean when you are learning try not to stress too much about everything being perfect, keep trying different things and find what you do and don't like.I use a bunch of filters depending on the target and the shooting location. For backyard shooting I've got a broadband light pollution filter, for emission nebulae an UHC filter, for narrowband I've got Ha 7nm, OIII 8nm and SII 8.5nm set and for planetary / lunar stuff a smaller UV/IR cut filter. And those filters are always attached to a field flattener.
Filters are definitely the most expensive part of the setup, however the good part is that there's really no point in buying all of them immediately because each of them is going to require a technique of its own anyway so there's a bunch to learn with each one.
And yeah I'm in a red/white zone right next to a big city.
Also about the camera, yeah it's H-alpha modded, however that only really matters if the target emits in Ha. Galaxies, reflection nebulae, some emission nebulae, etc. are all fine without a mod. And even those Ha emission areas are possible without the mod, the exposure times will just need to triple or something for the same SNR.
Though the mod really isn't that hard either assuming you've got some old DSLR (though preferably not too old). For most nikons it's just taking the motherboard out, taking the PCB with the sensor out and then removing a single filter stack above the sensor.
http://i.imgur.com/2YeWAcZ.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/vY328j4.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/B3cNoJN.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/H48QhkC.jpg
Having clear pictures is definitely something you want for landscapes
Yeah, I guess I'm just stressing out, because I know, that when I go to the modelling event in Asia next month, and have to meet some high profile models, I don't want to let them down with photos that aren't that good.
But that's also why I go out to practice every day. I think, I might even go out tonight at around 2 o clock, and get some more night time experience.
Well said. There are very few things that are impossible because of gear limitations. Like you say, limitations in your equipment may just force you to think outside of the box in order to achieve the type of shot you want. I'll be honest; when people ask me for advice on what camera/lense to buy, I steer them away from the kit lenses. But I actually think it's a useful experience to start with those lenses. It kinda makes you work a bit harder to get good pictures.
Astral/H3X
Member
I do want to eventually find some filters, but yeah they are so expensive. T-T I think I could get by just with a broadband filter for most uses though.
JadedWriter
Member
Do you know what the lighting situation is going to be for this modeling thing? Lighting isn't even half of my problem half the time any more. My main problem depending on what it is and what's allowed for me might actually just be flat out reach at this point.
That's what makes me nervous. I have absolutely no idea, which was why I also wanted a lens which could zoom a lot, but I'll have to do with the equipment I have.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked