Nikon D750 Auto ISO
Dec 27, 2014 19:03:47 #
coco1964 wrote:
If you're referring to my 2 photos,
I'm really not clairvoyant! My post was several minutes before you posted those, so I hadn't seen them.
But in general, yes they are a good demonstration because both are wonderful snapshots. Don't mistake any of my discussion for the commonly used derogatory meanings for the term "snapshot"! I shoot a lot of "people photography", and every single shot is taken on the spur of the moment and is technically a "snapshot". I love what goes into Granny's album. And the technical quality of the two you posted is pretty good too. The one of the little boy a just a very nice picture, and the second one is exactly the kind of picture that gains in value every year and will be absolutely precious when that man's grandchildren look at it!
Note that both, while maybe not being compositional works of great art, are technically good pictures. There is enough light, there is good contrast, there is nothing really ugly or totally distracting, the pictures both have at least a little pop, and most of all they certainly capture something of the nature and personality of each person shown. What else is a portait supposed to be!
coco1964 wrote:
that's exactly what they are, snapshots!! That's all I take at Christmas because it's a 3 ring circus and nobody is expecting any more than snap shots. If I get a great shot that's merely frosting on the cake but for the most part it's just a fun day........
Ah, but you do get some great shots! Not perhaps a landscape, not perhaps a sexy body, not perhaps an interesting macro or movie star style head shot. But you'll get many that are the spice of life, that show the significance of Christmas in the context of contemporary life. Not a portrait of the people, but a portrait of their lives! (Which is a good definition of "Street Photography", by the way.)
And we don't usually want to look at Christmas photos any other way. There certainly are photographers who do make a real production out of it, but on the average that isn't true. That type of Christmas shot usually looks staged, and fake, like something taken in November to use in advertisements a month later.
Other times are for other types of photography. The OP's problem is that he didn't get what you did. His images are barely worth keeping, and that only because none are any better. As I suggested, two years from now those are very likely to get culled out on first look, because 90% of the shots will be closer to what you posted.
And as far as needing to learn the basics, of course. And talking about what makes the difference is exactly how to learn the basics, and then to go on from there.
Dec 27, 2014 19:53:39 #
coco1964 wrote:
If you're referring to my 2 photos, that's exactly what they are, snapshots!! That's all I take at Christmas because it's a 3 ring circus and nobody is expecting any more than snap shots. If I get a great shot that's merely frosting on the cake but for the most part it's just a fun day........
Same here. There are some moments and events where the D750 is an expensive camera that takes great snapshots!📷
Dec 27, 2014 20:49:19 #
Frank47 wrote:
Your comments are well taken. I read many of those... (show quote)
Man, I'd bet London to a brick that the D750 and the f1.8 35mm lens combination will be gob smackingly, mind blowingly brilliant. A whole
new universe of IQ.
:thumbup:
Dec 28, 2014 00:55:26 #
Shutter Bugger wrote:
Hmmm, possibly you would have got better results
if you used program mode and let the computer adjust
the shutter as well as the aperture and ISO.
The lens you used is pretty "slow" and apart from that,
Ken Rockwell puts it in the list of the "Top 10 Worst
Lenses" Nikon has produced.
No doubt though, you'l get the hang of it and produce
some wonderful images soon.
if you used program mode and let the computer adjust
the shutter as well as the aperture and ISO.
The lens you used is pretty "slow" and apart from that,
Ken Rockwell puts it in the list of the "Top 10 Worst
Lenses" Nikon has produced.
No doubt though, you'l get the hang of it and produce
some wonderful images soon.
Actually it was the original f3.5-5.6 version Ken placed on his 10 worst list. He likes the newer f4 version much better.
Dec 28, 2014 04:33:44 #
brrywill wrote:
Actually it was the original f3.5-5.6 version Ken placed on his 10 worst list. He likes the newer f4 version much better.
Ok... thanks for the "heads up".
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.