Saturday, February 22, 2014

what kind of dslr should i get?




zodiac-sai


hi right now i am using a canon sx210 and i am 15 going into softmore year and i am taking photography and want to step up to a dslr... i like taking macro pictures animals cars and landscapes night and day... i have been looking at d3100 t3i t2i sony a33 sonny a35 sony a55... one thing that is also very important to me is the video quality which is why im leading towards the sony but idk how good there photo quality is compared to the others
under $800



Answer
The still-image quality of the Sonys are comparable to any D-SLR from Canon or Nikon at around the same price range for the individual camera. So, if you drop $800.00 on a Sony, you're going to get image quality practically equal to the image quality you'd get from a Canon or Nikon that also sells for around $800.00 - When it comes to image quality, the brand doesn't matter as long you stay within the same price range and stick to one of the reliable manufacturers: Nikon/Canon/Sony/Olympus/Pentax - one is just as good as another.

The sony AXX (A35, A55, for example) series, however, use a translucent mirror design - this is preferable for video. So, if video is really important to you, I'd say go with a Sony - it will offer you more control over your video work. For video quality and control out of a D-SLR, the other manufacturers can't yet compete with Sony's SLT series cameras. The trade off is the SLT design of the Sonys cause you to lose between one-third to a half a stop of light. So, when taking still images, the Sonys will perform just slightly less efficiently in low-light situations - you'll need to open up between 1/3 & 1/2 a stop to get the same exposure you would on non SLT camera. The SLT Sonys also use an electronic viewfinder - these have both advantages and disadvantages over optical viewfinders - so it's largely a matter of personal preference. But, if you're used to shooting though an optical viewfinder, they can take some getting used to - if you're used to shooting with live-view, it wont be a problem.

*** EDIT: To address George Washington below: (1) Canon and Nikon are no more or less "trustworthy" than Sony. And, Nikon and Canon users better hope that's true, as both Canon and Nikon USE SONY SENSORS in their cameras. (2) Everybody that knows anything about Cameras knows about Sony's full-frames - they were the first to introduce anti-shake on a full-frame sensor. Offered the highest resolution of any full-frame available when they were introduced. And, their full-frames still have the biggest and brightest viewfinder in the industry. Sony's full-frames rocked the D-SLR market when they were introduced. And, they're about to do it again, with a 36mp full-frame due for release in 2012. (3) The availability of relativley inexpensive, yet high-quality Sony lenses dwarfs both Nikon and Canon - AND EVERY SINGLE lens you put on a Sony is stabilized - EVERY SINGLE ONE. And, since every Minolta A-mount lens made by ANY manufacturer going as far back as 1986 will mount on a Sony - That's one HELL OF A LOT of stabilized glass available!!!! I'm sorry, no offense, but George Washington clearly has no idea what he's talking about.

And, regarding the claimed substandard performance of Sony's electronic viewfinders: From a review of the A77 @ Alphamount World: "I had my wife take a look through the viewfinder, she was unaware that the new cameras didnât have optical viewfinders. Sheâs owned her own KM7D for a few months now that has a very decent optical finder -so sheâs no stranger to using an optical finder. For the first minute or so, she just commented on how large the view was in the A77 and how much information was displayed. Then it hit her, and she asked me how the viewfinder auto dimmed and brightened on its own and how all that information was on the screen. It was then that I revealed to her that it was an electronic viewfinder, not an optical one.âWowâ she exclaimed. â.

Can you explain exposure time in photography to me?




Tommy


I've seen many night photos with a caption that says something like, 5 minutes exposure time, or 2 minutes, or 60 minutes, you get my point. My question is, what does that all mean? How do you set the exposure to a certain duration of time? Thanks in advance.


Answer
The longest night exposure I've made to date is 30 seconds. The exposure times you're mentioning are probably for star trails or perhaps a landscape lit by a full moon.

First and foremost you'll need a tripod and a locking remote release (we could suggest a remote IF we knew what camera you have). However, for exposures of 30 seconds or less you could use your camera's self-timer.

Second, for exposures longer than 30 seconds you'll have to place your shutter speed dial in the "B" (Bulb) position which will allow you to keep the shutter open as long as you want with the locking remote release.

Third, you'll need to turn the AF on lens and camera to "OFF" because the camera won't be able to focus on a dark scene.

Fourth, you'll need to check in the Owner's Manual for any precautions when making long exposures. Digital sensors heat up during long exposures. You'll also want to check for LNR - Long Exposure Noise Reduction.

Star Trails: http://www.danheller.com/star-trails

True astrophotography requires very expensive equipment but here are two methods for determining exposure time that (supposedly) prevent star trails.

"500 Rule" http://www.davidkinghamphotography.com/blog/2012/11/how-to-avoid-star-trails

This is just simple division. Divide 500 by the focal length of your lens and round that down and then divide it by the crop factor of your camera.

EX. 1: Sony, Pentax, Nikon with 1.5 crop factor. 500/18 = 27.7. Round down to 27. 27/1.5 = 18. So 18 seconds is your exposure time.

EX 2: Canon, 1.6 crop factor. 500/18 = 27.7, Round down to 27. 27/1.6 = 16.8. Round down to 16. So 16 seconds is your exposure time.

http://600rule.com Robert Howell Photography

Same principle except using 600.

EX 1: Sony, Pentax, Nikon. 600/18 = 33.3. Round down to 33. 33/1.5 = 22. So 22 seconds is your exposure time.

EX 2: Canon. 600/18 = 33.3. Round down to 33. 33/1.6 = 20.6. Round down to 20. 20/1.6 = 12.5. Round down to 12. So 12 seconds is your exposure time.

Here is where some experimentation is needed. I thoroughly read over both sites and didn't see any mention of ISO or Aperture to use. So if you're using the 18mm end of your zoom at f3.5 I'd say try ISO 800 and choose which "Rule" you prefer - 500 or 600. If your images are too dark at ISO 800 go to 1600. As I said, you'll have to experiment.

I also use and recommend this site for low-light exposures:
http://www.calculator.org/exposure.aspx I used ISO 200 and the Scene 'Distant view of city skyline or floodlit buildings' for these.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/drifter45h/4048051455/ 100mm @ f11, exposure of 30 seconds.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/drifter45h/4048796836/ 200mm @ f11, exposure of 30 seconds.




Powered by Yahoo! Answers

No comments:

Post a Comment