Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Home | Photography Digest | Active Topics | Newest Pictures(new!!!) | Search | Login | Register | Help
Canon vs Nikon: Which is better?
One camera setting that ruins your pictures
(and more, keep reading):
 

Among our users, we have some of the most talented photographers in the world share advice that you won't find even in the most expensive subscription magazines. That's because some of them only post on our website, so you won't find this information anywhere else! Some of them post under an alias, others disclose their studio name, it's up to them. But in either case you get to read and discover photography techniques that will make you very good at taking pictures.

Unlike other websites, we don't try to pitch DSLRs, lenses, and other gear, while collecting sales commission. We don't sell photography tutorials, books, DVDs and courses, while promising that your photography will improve only if you buy what's being promoted.

Instead, we have other people, who are either professional photographers or serious amateurs, some with decades of experience, share with you what they learned, what gear they use, which products really work and which are useless, which techniques work and which don't.

It's all completely unbiased. Our users simply have no reason to lie to you. They are people just like you.

And we provide a free platform for you and them to communicate. So you get to discover this information straight from the source, from people just like you, not from editors of some magazine or sales reps of some company.

This is what makes us different from other photography websites out there that try to sell you something while claiming they are trying to help you.

If you are a beginner, intermediate, advanced, or a professional photographer, then the benefits of signing up for our free daily photography forum digest are:

• We cover both film and digital photography.

• We talk about professional (D)SLR cameras, mirrorless cameras, mid-range/prosumer models, point-and-shoot, and camera phones.

• We cover all types of photography from portraits to landscapes to action shots to macro photography. (Which one interests you the most? Stop and ask yourself right now. You'll need to be able to answer that in just a minute. No matter what you shoot, you'll get better at just that. Read below to find out why.)

• We cover all aspects of photography from picking gear to composition to working with models, and everything in between.

• Each week you'll be receiving new tips and techniques on how to take the kind of pictures that will make your friends, relatives and peers just stare in amazement, speechless, when they see your work. Yep! That's how good your photography will become.

• Daily, you'll be receiving a photography forum digest with the latest photography tips, tricks, reviews and discussions.

• If you ever have a question or need help, you can always ask, and we'll cover your question in the following newsletter issue.

• And of course, it's all completely FREE!

• Let me repeat that. Since for some reason a lot of people contact us asking if the membership is really free: we are a social website for photographers, so we don't sell anything, and we don't charge any fees. It's as simple as that.

Here is how to proceed and what to expect:

Enter your name and e-mail address below, and you'll be instantly added to our photography mailing list distribution. You'll receive a one-time confirmation e-mail. Right after that, the first e-mail with today's digest will be forwarded to you. The signup process is completely automated, so you are just a few minutes away from discovering what our existing users already received earlier today. You'll get up to speed right away on what's the latest on our website, without any long introductions or other delays.

First name:

E-mail address:

Going forward, the next digest will be released in just a few hours. So if you don't sign up now, you'll also miss everything covered in it too.

 
Photo Analysis
Do my hands shake this much?
(?)
If you would like to post a reply, then please login (if you already have an account) or register (if you don't).
Page: 1 2 3 next>>
Jul 5, 2016 20:05:00   #
timspix
 
This shot was taken using a monopod and a 20mm kenko extension tube. I do get some sharp images with the kenko tubes ... but I also get a lot of soft ones. AND I also get plenty of soft ones w/o the tubes. So it begs the question ... with a shutter speed of 1/80 second, on a monopod, on my back deck, ISO 400 ... is this softness due to camera motion ... or could it be something else? Is perhaps the focus point even nearer to the camera such that none of the flower is in the focal plane?


(Download)
 
Jul 5, 2016 20:11:38   #
timspix
 
OK ... either I was steadier on this one ... or my hypothesis of the first one being entirely beyond the plane of focus may be correct ... this one has some stamens in focus ...


(Download)
Jul 5, 2016 21:01:25   #
robertjerl (a regular here)
 
timspix wrote:
This shot was taken using a monopod and a 20mm kenko extension tube. I do get some sharp images with the kenko tubes ... but I also get a lot of soft ones. AND I also get plenty of soft ones w/o the tubes. So it begs the question ... with a shutter speed of 1/80 second, on a monopod, on my back deck, ISO 400 ... is this softness due to camera motion ... or could it be something else? Is perhaps the focus point even nearer to the camera such that none of the flower is in the focal plane?


Use a tripod and a higher shutter speed, also mirror lockup. F/11 or f/16 might help also, more DOF. I use f/20 and about 1/500 on outdoor flowers that the breeze might move. I also use a speedlight sometimes. Most of my macro is done with a 6D, some with a 7DII. I let the ISO float on auto with a limit set of 6400 on the 6D and 3200 on the 7DII. I tried 6400 on the 7 but then noise reduction in PP spoiled the sharpness.
Jul 5, 2016 21:24:13   #
timspix
 
thanks ... I recently tried going up to f16 (max on the 50mm 1.8) and 22 on the 70-210 ... and got soft results as well ... I put that down (maybe erroneously) to diffraction issues ... so here I did a quick couple of shots using a monopod and middle range aperture ... the low DOF is not bothering me as I am trying out an idea to put together a series that focuses just on the stamens / pistils as being in focus.
Jul 5, 2016 22:36:45   #
robertjerl (a regular here)
 
timspix wrote:
thanks ... I recently tried going up to f16 (max on the 50mm 1.8) and 22 on the 70-210 ... and got soft results as well ... I put that down (maybe erroneously) to diffraction issues ... so here I did a quick couple of shots using a monopod and middle range aperture ... the low DOF is not bothering me as I am trying out an idea to put together a series that focuses just on the stamens / pistils as being in focus.


If that is what you are aiming at I really recommend a tripod because those are small targets for handheld or monopod (which I think of as a swaying pod because it still moves, just not as much.) I just got a geared head that I have yet to try for macro, I plan to team it with a geared focus rail on my bigger/heavier tripod for macro. Use the head and rail to get everything framed and the subject in focus, remote shutter release, delayed shutter and mirror lock up. Then try to time it so the wind isn't moving the flower.
Jul 5, 2016 23:03:52   #
timspix
 
Had a little better luck with the spider plant blossom ...


(Download)
 
Jul 6, 2016 00:05:56   #
robertjerl (a regular here)
 
Jul 6, 2016 06:53:29   #
OnDSnap
 
timspix wrote:
This shot was taken using a monopod and a 20mm kenko extension tube. I do get some sharp images with the kenko tubes ... but I also get a lot of soft ones. AND I also get plenty of soft ones w/o the tubes. So it begs the question ... with a shutter speed of 1/80 second, on a monopod, on my back deck, ISO 400 ... is this softness due to camera motion ... or could it be something else? Is perhaps the focus point even nearer to the camera such that none of the flower is in the focal plane?


Using a mono pod with such shallow DOF, (maybe a 1/4" or so) I think you could be swaying to and fro without realizing it ...also your breathing could be enough to cause the the rig to sway. Try using a tripod to eliminate the possibility of the above. At the very least, you'll eliminate a possible cause.
Jul 6, 2016 06:57:50   #
Day.Old.Pizza
 
timspix wrote:
This shot was taken using a monopod and a 20mm kenko extension tube. I do get some sharp images with the kenko tubes ... but I also get a lot of soft ones. AND I also get plenty of soft ones w/o the tubes. So it begs the question ... with a shutter speed of 1/80 second, on a monopod, on my back deck, ISO 400 ... is this softness due to camera motion ... or could it be something else? Is perhaps the focus point even nearer to the camera such that none of the flower is in the focal plane?


The blossom is turned. The side closest to the camera is in focus, but the other side, further away from the camera is not. This may be caused by a too shallow depth of field. Try it again, but decrease your aperture opening (if again shooting from an angle) or keep your original settings, but take your shot from where the entire flower is the same distance from the camera.
Jul 6, 2016 08:10:33   #
zigipha
 
OnDSnap wrote:
Using a mono pod with such shallow DOF, (maybe a 1/4" or so) I think you could be swaying to and fro without realizing it ...also your breathing could be enough to cause the the rig to sway. Try using a tripod to eliminate the possibility of the above. At the very least, you'll eliminate a possible cause.




put the camera on a chair or table (stepstool) and try again see if the dof issue can be eliminated (does not matter the subject)
Jul 6, 2016 08:35:09   #
rmm0605 (a regular here)
 
timspix wrote:
This shot was taken using a monopod and a 20mm kenko extension tube. I do get some sharp images with the kenko tubes ... but I also get a lot of soft ones. AND I also get plenty of soft ones w/o the tubes. So it begs the question ... with a shutter speed of 1/80 second, on a monopod, on my back deck, ISO 400 ... is this softness due to camera motion ... or could it be something else? Is perhaps the focus point even nearer to the camera such that none of the flower is in the focal plane?


It looks like more than one issue. First one is depth of field. DOF is too shallow to capture the whole flower. You need to shoot at f5.6 or higher, depending on how close you are to the subject. Second, there may be some motion, but it may just be a focus issue.
 
Jul 6, 2016 10:41:14   #
Kuzano (a regular here)
 
Easy enough to test.

Simply take you out of the equation. For a "do I shake that much" test.... set up your shot with a good tripod, and use a remote shutter release. This proves whether or not you are part of the problem.

Also, is the shot a "set up" tabletop shot or are you outside and might natural movement from wind, etc be the problem.

Have never had much luck with Mono pods. I get better results for stability with a "String Pod" (home made) and most certainly with a good tripod. My current tripod is a Bogen 3021... It's a tank and tall enough that I don't need to use the center post--the flaw in any tripod--extensive extension of the center post.

Anyway, if you're not touching the rig and not snapping the shutter, you didn't create the problem. Monopod... Phooey!!! Great for a walking stick-Not so with a camera! Carry a string pod in your pocket or bag.
Jul 6, 2016 11:37:09   #
canon Lee (a regular here)
 
timspix wrote:
This shot was taken using a monopod and a 20mm kenko extension tube. I do get some sharp images with the kenko tubes ... but I also get a lot of soft ones. AND I also get plenty of soft ones w/o the tubes. So it begs the question ... with a shutter speed of 1/80 second, on a monopod, on my back deck, ISO 400 ... is this softness due to camera motion ... or could it be something else? Is perhaps the focus point even nearer to the camera such that none of the flower is in the focal plane?


Hi camera shake is a real problem with a shallow depth of field. If you do a lot of macro shooting I would suggest putting the camera on a tripod and using a WIFI device like CamRanger.com, which your camera would be controlled hands free remotely. It also operates on a iPad which will give you large detail.
Jul 6, 2016 13:33:40   #
cambriaman (a regular here)
 
The comment from canon Lee seems correct. I suggest settling on one systemic protocol (such as tripod, cable release, extension tube, fast shutter, moderate
f ./stop) and to practice it until it is consistent in results and automatic. Good thing you aren't using film!
Jul 6, 2016 20:56:06   #
Szalajj (a regular here)
 
timspix wrote:
Had a little better luck with the spider plant blossom ...

I'm going to ask a question about the white flower, and yellow stamens.

Were you only trying to get those stamen tips in focus?

There have been lots of comments about the out of focus white flower, but I'm guessing that you were actually trying to obtain the effect you got.

But, as someone earlier mentioned, the angle is wrong to get all of them in focus, when you are using such a shallow depth of field.

So, getting back to the discussion about your hands shaking, and using a monopod. They might work for BIF, but when you're trying to shoot in an up close or macro setting, they are worthless. Tripods are needed in these situations, and a slightly faster shutter speed to freeze any movement of your subject that could be caused by a breeze.
Page: 1 2 3 next>>
          
Photo Analysis
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2016 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.