|
Bridge?
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:55 |
|
|
Oh nice, didn't know Bridge was free. Will also try out Photo Mechanic but yeah $150 might be a bit much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Completely incorrect - Pentax K-mount (still in use on today's Pentax DSLR in autofocus form) is utterly incompatible with Canon FD-mount. Ty for all the info! I'll try to find the lens a good home. Will take some patience to find someone who needs this lens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 09:23
|
|
|
Google photos will do all of that. If she's using an Android phone then it'll all be automatic. If she has an iPhone then she just needs the app on her phone and a gmail account. She can have it automatically backup her phone pics and then they are available, searchable, rateable etc from her Mac (or anywhere).
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
Oh god. Today I was taking pictures at an event at my school. When I came home I noticed that they all look like poo poo and it took me a while to figure out that for some reason my E-M10 was set to only record normal JPGs (not even fine) and the IBIS was off too. Always check your settings before you start shooting!
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
Did exactly that a few weeks ago for some astrophotography. I even checked my settings, but could've sworn it said raw. It didn't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Did exactly that a few weeks ago for some astrophotography. I even checked my settings, but could've sworn it said raw. It didn't. sRAW and RAW look very similar when you are changing settings in a hurry Not so similar when you open the image in LR and wonder why it is so small.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
I've been told that the reason my camera often misses focus on dark / overcast days is because I am trying to take pictures of furry animals, and the contrast focus system doesn't work well on fur, and it would not be improve by moving to a better camera with a fancier focus system from my entry level one. Is that really the case? I would expect something like the D750 / D500 to do much better even in these bad conditions than my D5300.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
Ika posted:I've been told that the reason my camera often misses focus on dark / overcast days is because I am trying to take pictures of furry animals, and the contrast focus system doesn't work well on fur, and it would not be improve by moving to a better camera with a fancier focus system from my entry level one. Is that really the case? I would expect something like the D750 / D500 to do much better even in these bad conditions than my D5300. I'd suggest focusing on something that's a similar distance away as your subject then move your camera while keeping that focus and take your picture. As far as more expensive cameras having fancier focus systems, I'm not sure. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qy3RVRFVmUE
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
You can also manually select a focus point, put that dot on the edge of the animal where their fur meets the background, and focus on that. Then recompose and finish the shot. Aiming at their feet can work too, just gotta identify a spot that has good contrast near the focus dot you're using.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
I can try that when the cheetahs are sitting still. I'm not good enough to do that when they are running around. I had expected the spots, eyes, teeth etc to be enough to go by for contrast. Oh and when I have tried to recompose it often seems like it no longer is focused correctly (or maybe never was focused to begin with). Is it possible for a camera to have a gradient across the sensor which means the correct focus distance for the center isn't correct for the edges? I was asking because I have been trying to decide between the D750, D500, and waiting for a D750 successor, because I'm a bit unhappy with the focusing, and the buffer size of my camera. I also saw this earlier today, D500 focusing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lwbs7S7bGp8 Ika fucked around with this message at 19:38 on Apr 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
Are they fast moving furry animals? D5300 is mid range not low end btw. Need more information on lenses and how you are using the camera, but I suspect changing bodies won't make a lick of difference and it's a sluggish lens, or conditions where manual focusing would be better with any combination of lens and body. The D5200/D5300 has more than enough focus points imo and live view (the screen) uses a contrast system on the both the D750 and the D500 as well - Contrast-Detect AutoFocus Live view are your googlin' words on that one. I cannot stress enough how much of a difference buying an expensive lens over upgrading to an expensive body will make to your photography. edit: lol apparently they are somewhat fast moving.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
I've got a sigma 150-600mm C version, which is plenty fast on sunny days, especially after the recent firmware update. During December / jan / feb on dark days it wasn't focusing well on stationary stuff either, so its mostly focus in general I am worried about and not just in motion. I'm going to replace the camera either way, having a max of 4-6 photo burst is really frustrating when the cheetahs only run once ever few hours for 5-10 seconds.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Do you have the sigma dock for that? It could be that it's been set in the wrong mode? Blurb: focus speed performance attribute can be configured using the Sigma Dock. Basically, the slower (Sigma references "smoother" instead) the lens focuses, the greater the chance that the lens focuses accurately. The default "Standard" option is designed to provide a balance of speed and accuracy. By configuring one of this lens' two custom modes (switch selectable), faster (Motor's drive speed-priority) and slower (Focus accuracy-priority) focus drive speeds can be selected. You may find the slower speed to be the better low light option while the faster speed may prove great for your high contrast in-action subjects under bright light. Place clearly delineated subject with good contrast on a focus point and this lens locks focus very quickly in "Standard" mode and even faster in "Motor's drive speed-priority". The differences between the three focus speed modes is noticeable, but I used the Standard mode for most of my testing based on the expectation that Sigma made this the default mode with good reason.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
I've had the dock for a month or so now, and set up a action setting and a slow setting, to use accordingly. The first couple of months I had the lens I only used standard mode. It may be something else is going wrong and I haven't got enough experience to figure out what it is. I'll see if I can upload a example of something and maybe you or somebody can say whether I have unrealistic expectations, or it is not a focus issue. When you say the lens locks on very quickly, isn't it the camera that tells the lens how to drive and the lens just drives very quickly? So isn't the camera's phase detection array or contrast detection deciding what to do?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
Ika posted:I've had the dock for a month or so now, and set up a action setting and a slow setting, to use accordingly. The first couple of months I had the lens I only used standard mode. It may be something else is going wrong and I haven't got enough experience to figure out what it is. I'll see if I can upload a example of something and maybe you or somebody can say whether I have unrealistic expectations, or it is not a focus issue. Which AF drive on the camera are you using?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Try using the bog standard lens which came with the body and focusing in the usual darker light and see what happens. If it's better then it's most likely a problem with the sigma lens, if it's much slower or can't lock on then it's something to do with the camera/camera settings . You didn't say if you are using live view or not, I'm assuming not but need to eliminate things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
I've been doing some more digging because you were worried in general and I have "brace yourself for bad news" questions. Have you been turning OS off before removing the lens every time? Have you removed the lens with OS on and the camera turned on? t Sigma lenses, the bigger ones in particular, take longer than other brands to power down and it can cause problems of the "it's hosed" kind with the focusing system and elements if you remove it before everything is locked into place. Good news if it turns out to be this is that they can't tell if it's you that messed up or a fault that has developed because of a bad lens and will fix under warranty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Eesh that's not great. I always turn the camera off, but usually leave the OS on on my 50-150. Maybe I need to rethink that going forward. Speaking of that lens - it weighs about 1.4kg and my d7200 weighs about 750g. Would you mount a tripod to the lens collar or to the body? I often carry the camera one handed in my hand strap with it mounted without it feeling problematic, but maybe I should rethink that too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Eesh that's not great. I always turn the camera off, but usually leave the OS on on my 50-150. Maybe I need to rethink that going forward. Tripod on the lens collar definitely for something that size. As for carrying it around, It should be ok. I guess that you aren't carrying it with the lens horizontal a whole lot, so the leverage the lens exerts on the mounting ring should be minimal most of the time and, when you do have it horizontal then you are probably supporting the lens with your other hand while you compose a shot anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
Ah very true, yeah I tend to hold it pretty much straight down and definitely use a second hand while shooting. I wish I had the strength and stability to shoot single handed, even with light lenses. I've got a spare plate, so I'll mount it on the tripod collar now. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
I'm always using the viewfinder + phase contrast detection, except for movie mode obviously. For OS: I've only taken the lens off once or twice since I got it, the first time when I was testing it together with a friend I probably left VR on, but the cameras definitely were powered down, but every other time I did turn it off. On a particularly cold day I did have to jiggle the lens in the mount some a few times because the camera stopped recognizing that a lens was attached. I also never have noticed a visible VR effect in the viewfinder, but I also don't have it tuned to be aggressive. Focus system definitely is still moving the elements and changing focus fine. Is it possible that the VR system is making the photos worse instead of better? I'll try turning it off sometime. I always carry my camera by holding onto the lens body, but in my case its >2kg Here are some examples, all of these are 100% crops. Maybe its also partly just a lack of MP to resolve fur details. I'll leave out a bunch which are obviously missed focus either due to speed or because it was just really dark that day and I was focusing on something far away. Perfectly fine: 480mm // ISO 640 // 1/800s // f10  I'm guessing missed focus for whatever reason: 480mm // ISO 640 // 1/800s // f9  This looks like shake blur, but should that happen at this exposure time? 480mm // ISO 640 // 1/1600s // f8  Not sure about this, most of it looks fine but the whiskers are blurred (walking slowly) 370mm // ISO 640 // 1/1000s // f10  Not sure whether this is bad focus, or shake, or something else. Sitting still, it just doesn't seem as sharp as it should. Similar size to the first photo, so I would like to see a similar amount of details. 600mm // ISO 1000 // 1/1250s // f6.3 
Ika fucked around with this message at 23:56 on Apr 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
Lens is fine  second and third picture is camera shake, fourth is depth of field if you think the whiskers are out of focus, but I don't think it detracts from the picture myself, and fifth is soft, could be missed focus or could be the aperture. Are you using VR/OS with it mounted on a tripod? It could be that it is causing problems or it could just be the usual VR/OS misses with a lens that long.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 07:00
|
|
|
Well, I initially posted because of how often the camera misses focus on stationary subjects, not the lens, so good to know some of these are shake and not just focus issues. Fourth seems weird to me because depth of field should be quite large at F10 and lots of hair in various parts of the body is perfectly sharp. (Mostly if the photo is nice enough I ignore minor blur issues like these, because even when printed as 20x30cm it isn't visible, but I want to understand what is causing it) All of those are handheld. I have been going with the inverse focal length rule and doubling it for exposure time for stationary subjects, and for movement I start with 1/1000th and go up as the light allows, which is why I thought it wouldn't be shake. But I guess with 600 (900) mm even a tiny bit of shake is magnified a lot for stuff that is far away.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
VR/OS isn't perfect, sometimes you get off shots and mirror slap can sometimes be a factor but it's mostly random. Some people swear by putting Nikons in silent mode to help with this if you are not using mirror up but I've not tried it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 08:39
|
|
|
So I borrowed a friend's D750 today to try it out. Focusing seemed to be more consistent, but I still get some shots that are off like the last one before. This is the same cheetah at roughly the same position as the last one before, with me roughly the same distance away. Same 2000 x 2000px crop, but the 1.5x crop is missing. It looks like it may have slightly more detail. Maybe its mainly me not having steady enough hands and needing to use a monopod / tripod instead of just resting my elbow on a convenient surface,, or I need to halve the exposure times again. Part of it may also be not having enough MP to resolve fur well at these distances, and the blurry fur looking like DOF / camera shake. E: This is what I would like to have these long distance shots look like, but maybe that is just not feasible to have them appear just as detailed as ones that are much much closer. 
Ika fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Apr 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
If you're shooting at like 1/1000 you don't need a tripod.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
Ika posted:So I borrowed a friend's D750 today to try it out. Focusing seemed to be more consistent, but I still get some shots that are off like the last one before. This is the same cheetah at roughly the same position as the last one before, with me roughly the same distance away. Same 2000 x 2000px crop, but the 1.5x crop is missing. It looks like it may have slightly more detail.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:If you're shooting at like 1/1000 you don't need a tripod. I've got shots at 1/2000th that have the whiskers on them twice. Ric posted:You missed focus again: the foreground grass and the wrong part of the cat are perfectly sharp. There's nothing wrong with your kit. Keep practicing. Don't feel the need to post the next attempts for review. Good to know what is wrong there, its hard for me to tell the difference between camera shake and focus when its not obvious with duplicated fur.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
Ika posted:I've got shots at 1/2000th that have the whiskers on them twice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
If the focus miss is consistent, you either need to go through the AF fine tune and be meticulous, or have the camera/lens combo calibrated by Nikon. If it's back and forth, it's ether user error, lens error, or within expected tolerances. I'm super anal about focus too, I have to let it go most of the time. I swear most of the time you see things so incredibly pin sharp it's been helped in post a lot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Gotta say though, not many people learning to do photography have such interesting subjects to practice on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
Id say it looks like the biggest problem is the focus calibration between the body and lens like EL BROMANCCE said. My old D3200 and 70-200 had a similar issue and it would focus behind my subject at longer ranges. I could look at my focus point as shot and it was blurry and just behind it was nice and sharp. I had to figure out how to manually adjust it on that body since it has no fine tune in the software. It was like a whole new lens after.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 07:34
|
|
|
Don't think the D5X00 has AF fine tune, you would have to send it off to be calibrated.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 08:10
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:Don't think the D5X00 has AF fine tune, you would have to send it off to be calibrated. Luckily the sigma lens itself can do fine tune via the dock. Its probably the body which is miscalibrated though, my first lens also had problems and I assumed that was me not knowing what I was doing since I picked up the camera + 55-300 lens a couple of months back as my first DSLR. Guess I know what I'll be doing next weekend. Thanks for all the help. I'll try and post a couple of decent ones in the wildlife thread one of these days,, instead of just the blurry ones. Ika fucked around with this message at 08:45 on Apr 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 08:39
|
|
|
I have a Canon 400L 5.6 and I bought a 7D to use with it because the AF on my 5DII left something to be desired. I thought that the 7D would be super accurate compared to the 5D, and I would be getting crisper, in-focus shots more often. What it really does, though, is focus faster. And across more of the frame. And offer more flexible modes like zone and spot AF that are really great for tracking motion. They can help bring subjects into focus faster when e.g. panning across the sky following a bird in flight. Unsteady hands, mirror slap, shutter shock, having a strong pulse when holding the camera up to your eye, the wind, and (this is a big one) the inherent nature of phase detection autofocus will all constantly gently caress up your final image, and it will always be a game of picking a few keepers out of a plethora of images that are just a little off. Even if you have OS on and are at 1/1600, if your camera locks focus on a subject and you flinch and the camera moves a few millimeters as you depress the shutter, it could result in an apparently out of focus shot. In spite of all this, and the knowledge that my lens & camera body have been carefully calibrated with AF micro adjust, I still sit down after a day of shooting birds or something and wonder if there's something 'wrong' with my lens or camera, because there are so many photos that are blurry, or focused on the wrong spot. I'd say 50/50 sharp/not on a good day. Should I buy some newer kit? Send my poo poo in to Canon or try to get my 400L replaced under warranty? I wonder about it, but I think the conventional wisdom that low keeper rates are generally more the fault of the user and the shooting conditions than the gear is the answer most of the time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
A 50/50 ratio sounds pretty good for a telephoto with no image stabilizer and a max aperture of 5.6. Your AF system is gimped at 5.6, I bet you'd get some incredible results if you rented a 400/2.8.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
Are you hand holding with that? because much respect is due if you are. In my experience the shutter speed/XXXmm when hand holding thing is meaningless in real life when you get lenses over a certain length ( I mean length as in the physical dimensions of the lens) and weight, and it all depends on how steady your own wrists are. I know it's my own hands shaking under the strain of trying to keep a larger lens simply pointed the right way that causes my misses with them - Admittedly I am a weakling with sticks for arms. I ended up switching to a Panasonic 100-300mm f/4.0-5.6 which is 200-600mm equivalent I know the IQ on MFT isn't as perfect as you would get with L glass and the like but it's a compromise as I don't get much if any shake blur and it's better to have lower IQ than unusable. Slowest example I have of that lens on the internet with fur, hand held 188mm (376mm equivalent) 1/250s https://500px.com/photo/99694699/the-thinker-by-learnin-curve
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
I was moving a bunch of photos from 1 folder to another in Lightroom today and noticed during the move process that 2 separate folders were getting their photo count increased. Half'ish of the photos was being moved to the folder i specified and the other half to a random folder. A bunch of the photos ended up as missing after this. I managed to get the photos to their correct folders but now i have almost 100 photos missing. Lightroom built a preview for them so they did exist, but now they are nowhere to befound. What the hell happened here? I haven't gotten around to getting angry yet because i still really can't believe lightroom made a ton of my photos dissapear. They are no on other harddrives or in the recyclebin either. What are my options now?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:55 |
|
|
I'm headed to Jazzfest tomorrow with my 7D and 17-55 and 70-200 F4. Any recommendations or tips on shooting at a festival?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 22:27
|
|
