This is Photography

[Reichart12]

IS or VR whatever your brand calls it, actually makes a difference when handholding. I like it better than not having it.

For the MP discussion, I had a d3100 for three years and it worked great for most pictures. Obviously upgrades are always helpful but images can be nice with the older models. They key thing really is, an interesting subject will make the most difference in how captivating your images are.

[Wschnitz]

Make a good point, Im not upgrading to full frame/more MP's for a while though, I guess I may be being overly picky with my shots. I definitely need to expand my lens lineup first, My mother seems to want to switch to sony mirrorless so ill pick up her 24-70mm Prime, then I think I want to grab something even longer for macros or for telephoto.

The lens for those shots have IS? Ive been kinda wondering how worth it an IS equipped lens is.

[BlackbirdM3]

20171225-IMG_1169 by Wschnitz, on Flickr
20171225-IMG_1208 by Wschnitz, on Flickr
20171224-IMG_1084 by Wschnitz, on Flickr

Took some okay pictures over christmas, really need to get better at taking sharp photos though, have to give the sharpness filter the beans in lightroom and it feels terrible, Or mask the blur with editing.

Here is the thing, you are shooting with a 50mm lens and only 18mp. Your camera doesn't have the resolution to make things super sharp at distance. I don't see any motion blur, but I do see a lack of resolution. The thing I find really odd in your bridge shot is that the water doesn't show more movement. 1/40 sec should show at least some, but I don't see any. I don't think your settings or technique are wrong, you simply don't have the resolution for a super sharp pic. I discovered this same problem with my Nikon D7000. It was a 16mp body, and I was pulling my hair out trying to get sharp pics at distance. As it turned out, it wasn't my settings or technique, it was simply the camera's inability to capture the details at the distances I was shooting at. When I upgraded to my D600 with 24 mp, things totally changed. Here is an attempt to show the difference.


D7000 with 70-300Vr lens

D600 from the same location and same lens at about the same distance

D600 with my Nikon 200-500, same location.

The Nikon 70-300 lens isn't the greatest lens beyond 200mm, it goes very soft, very fast, much like not having enough resolution. Still, I shot all 3 shots from exactly the same spot (within about a foot or so). All three shots are within about a 2 second flying time distance of one another, so all at nearly the same range. (They were shot 3 years apart from the first to the last.)

I hear time and time again "Oh you don't need crazy high resolution" After shooting nearly the same picture from the same place with 2 different bodies, and 3 different lenses, I beg to differ. That said, more resolution means its less forgiving. If your F stop is too high, it becomes a really noisy shot, if your panning isn't perfect, the fine detail will be blurred.



I think this was my best shot from the hillside this year. I was using a D810 (36mp) with my 200-500. The shot is good, its pretty sharp, but you can see the digital noise and there is a hint of motion blur if you look at the rivets in the plane. More resolution is a double edged sword, yeah its awesome when you get everything right, but if you don't, it shows.

Will

[mrsleeve]

^
More ISO and faster shutters speeds will help a bunch and a micro adjustment to your A/F drive if needed can help too

[Wschnitz]

20171225-IMG_1169 by Wschnitz, on Flickr
20171225-IMG_1208 by Wschnitz, on Flickr
20171224-IMG_1084 by Wschnitz, on Flickr

Took some okay pictures over christmas, really need to get better at taking sharp photos though, have to give the sharpness filter the beans in lightroom and it feels terrible, Or mask the blur with editing.

[mrsleeve]

it snowed a little the last few days so after 4 hours moving snow around I went for a little drive after it cleared off and the sun came out

IMG_1428 by mrsleeve, on Flickr

IMG_1417 by mrsleeve, on Flickr

And one from the front yard looking at the ski hill about sunset

IMG_1440 by mrsleeve, on Flickr

[Wschnitz]

Yeah its hard to tell its a 19K x 4K picture on a webforum, Im just bored waiting to fly home.

[Reichart12]

Ive never been a pano person. I would say mainly just because I don't have any good ways to view them. Social media pages don't really do well with long skinny images.

[Wschnitz]

Tried out a Pano, Im not expert but im happy with it for a 30 mins time plus some walking to take pics.

LakeMenomPano by Wschnitz, on Flickr

[Wschnitz]

20170517-36905307941_92059bbe0d_o by Wschnitz, on Flickr

Probably just that its winter and cold.

That and unless you snipe the right time of day it looks nasty and slushy here. So I've just been editing old pics.

[Reichart12]

What happened to this thread? Last update in February.

[obbie785]

If anyone uses digital photo frames, let me know please. I am thinking of buying one, cause I have too much photos to put them on a wall. Just need an advice which one should I choose

https://www.bestadvisor.com/digital-photo-frames

[obbie785]

If anyone uses digital photo frames, let me know please. I am thinking of buying one, cause I have too much photos to put them on a wall. Just need an advice which one should I choose

https://www.bestadvisor.com/digital-photo-frames

[Herr Faust Schinken]

I took some pictures before my schools car meet a few days ago, they came out really dark though.
E30Ingarage.jpg by Matthew Wiseman, on Flickr

IMG_0010.jpg by Matthew Wiseman, on Flickr

IMG_0012.jpg by Matthew Wiseman, on Flickr
[
url=https://flic.kr/p/N6QZFZ][/url]IMG_0014.jpg by Matthew Wiseman, on Flickr

[mrsleeve]

^
I have casually been looking at pawn shops and yard sales and so on for on OM4 or OM4-TI I really like the old Oly stuff. Look into their telephoto primes, their top tier stuff was some of the best there has ever been.