Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: bkellyusa
Page: <<prev 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 25 next>>
Apr 7, 2016 09:26:42   #
mwsilvers wrote:
No longer correct for two of the newer Canon bodies. It's available on them in manual mode when using Auto ISO. It gives you the best of both worlds. Auto ISO to give you the "correct" exposure for a given aperture and shutter speed, and the ability to override the ISO, and therefore the exposure, by applying EC. Auto ISO still works with EC applied, but it takes the amount of compensation you've chosen into consideration. Traditionally in manual mode with auto ISO you would have less control over the exposure since whenever you changed the aperture or shutter speed Auto ISO would compensate for what the camera identified as the best exposure. You would have to manually select an ISO setting to get around that. With manual mode EC in Auto ISO it basically allows you to shape the ISO being applied without having to select explicit ISO settings. It's a very cool feature on my 7D2.

Both the 7D Mark II and the brand new 80D have it. I suspect it will be on the new 1Dx Mark II flagship as well. I shoot in manual mode and use EC quite often.
No longer correct for two of the newer Canon bodie... (show quote)


This is also the way my Sony A6000 works in manual using Exposure Compensation.
Go to
Apr 7, 2016 01:44:16   #
Apaflo wrote:
EC is available and works extremely well in manual mode on most cameras. All Nikon DSLR's have EC in manual mode, though only some Canon models do.

Manual exposure mode combined with Auto ISO is very useful, but only because Exposure Compensation is used to fine tune the auto adjustment of ISO.


So far I can see the merit in fine tuning the Auto ISO settings quickly and being able to adjust exposure while holding the camera up to your eye but if there is much in the way of usefulness beyond that I still see that but "Thanks" to everyone who responded to this topic.
Go to
Apr 7, 2016 00:23:31   #
RWR wrote:
No one has mentioned white balance til now.


Well then, how did the white snow turn gray just based on a difference in exposure?.
Go to
Apr 6, 2016 23:59:59   #
LarryFB wrote:
Sorry, but if you expose for snow, guess what, it appears to be grey. The exposure is determined for an 18% grey scene, a typical scene, Not one that is mostly white.

The same thing happens in reverse if you at taking a picture of a subject against a pure black background.


Once again, maybe I just don't get it. What does white balance have to do with exposure?
Go to
Apr 6, 2016 23:11:09   #
Apaflo wrote:
You are not really wrong, but your vision has not yet developed a great deal of depth or width.

What you described is perfect, for Manual Exposure mode with Auto ISO turned off. A great example, that few folks seem to catch on to, of when that works would be shooting a basketball or volleyball game. The lighting does not change from shot to shot, so there is no need to have any kind of automatic adjustment enabled. At the start of the game, determine the correct exposure, set aperture, shutter speed and ISO and then forget about it until halftime!

All the world does not happen on an evenly lit gymnasium floor! If you are walking down the street and may take a in shot bright sunshine one instant and then in the shadows of an alley the next... auto something is useful. Take your pick, auto aperture, shutter, or ISO... or all three. Now Exposure Compensation is essential!

Once anything in the Exposure Triangle is set automatically, the only way to manipulate it to the bias you choose is by setting EC up or down.
You are not really wrong, but your vision has not ... (show quote)


I should admit that I almost never shoot outside of the Manual Mode. Not because I am a camera snob but one, because I am so use to it and two it gives me the most control. For example, if I want to change the exposure I want to decide which of the three components of exposure I am willing to change to get the result.
Go to
Apr 6, 2016 21:44:12   #
SteveR wrote:
You're right, in manual mode exposure compensation is not available. It is only available in shutter or aperture priority where it does come in handy.


Well, the trouble for me with that concept is that if you are in AP mode it adjusts the shutter speed. If you are in SP mode it adjust the aperture. I don't understand why someone would do that rather than just going to manual mode to begin and have full control over everything.

On my A6000 and maybe other cameras the advantage you have is that if you have an ISO range already set you can sort of fine tune the ISO in the steps between the stops with Exposure Compensation. Other than that the use for Exposure Compensation seems limited.
Go to
Apr 6, 2016 21:00:10   #
dirtpusher wrote:
rarely shoot snow without using it.


Why wouldn't you just expose for the snow to begin with? That's what kills me about this feature. it doesn't do anything that you wouldn't already have adjust in manual to begin with.
Go to
Apr 6, 2016 19:35:25   #
I am still pretty new to photography at this level but I work very hard at it and study all the time. However, the one thing that still confuses me is Exposure Compensation. I just don't see the need for it. Why would I use Exposure Compensation to adjust exposure when I can simply adjust any parameter such as aperture, shutter speed or ISO as much as I want to anyway.

Please tell me where I am going wrong.
Go to
Apr 2, 2016 20:13:57   #
Reinaldokool wrote:
In fact I looked for a flash for my a6000 and purchased a Neewer 320S (Which is really a Meike) Neewer buys a product and relabels it. It was less than half the cost of Sony's flashes and has more capability.

I am very happy with this flash. It is light weight and capable. Makes an excellent bounce flash source. It is a little low power in comparison to my Nikon SB800, but quite sufficient for most flash purposes that don't call for studio lighting.


I'd love to know what additional capabilities the Newer/Meike 320 flash has. I've looked at that flash several times and if I hadn't read that the TTL was not than accurate (I think I've read that it under-exposes but maybe it over-exposes) I would have already purchased it. Depending on what you say I might reconsider.

What I really like about it is that it will tilt and swivel more than most but not completely to the right.

Anyhow, I will be interested in hearing anything you have to say about that flash since you are the only one I know of who has any real experience with it.

Thanks in Advance.
Go to
Apr 1, 2016 11:00:50   #
I haven't purchased one yet but I have studied up hard on this issue trying to make my choice. I know cheaper is always better but every cheaper aftermarket solution I have looked at has some sort of drawbacks. From what I can tell at this point the best all around flash for the A6000 or A6300 is the Sony HVL 32M. It is full featured, with accurate TTL and it's reliable. It's not cheap but I am thinking that it's probably worth the extra money.
Go to
Mar 31, 2016 22:03:51   #
krashdragon wrote:
Or add a few drops of glycerine to very soapy water to make giant bubbles.


D you mean like in blowing bubbles? If that is the case I will try that with my granddaughter tomorrow.
Go to
Mar 31, 2016 21:42:41   #
SharpShooter wrote:
BK, one of my professors, whom has shot more than 100 magazine covers in the last 40 years always recommended Karo Syrup. Exactly how much you cut it down is dependent on the spritzer that you use. Good luck. ;-)
SS


I've heard the Karo syrup recommendation before but not nearly as much as the glycerin. I went and bought some glycerin today and tired mixing it to see how it worked and how much it took.

I'll probably try the Karo syrup recommendation next just to see what i like.

From reading several articles on the subject I've come to realize that the additional tools like spray bottles, toothpicks, needle and syringe and Q-tips that go with this technique might be just as important as the wetting agent.

As it is I am looking forward to working on this technique.
Go to
Mar 31, 2016 15:31:16   #
Shellback wrote:
You may want to experiment with how much of each you need to get the water droplets that you want, I would start with 1 part glycerin and 3 parts water or 1 part glycerin and 2 parts water. Good luck!


Thanks for your help. In the last few minutes I started fooling with mixture rations as a result of your and Bob's suggestions.

Thanks again.
Go to
Mar 31, 2016 15:28:16   #
rmalarz wrote:
Go to google.com

enter

glycerin in flower photography

--Bob


Bob, Tanks or you help. I am embarrassed to admit that I had no idea it would be so simple to find that information on line. I think I am too old for all of this Google stuff. It's not truly real to me.

Thanks again.

h
Go to
Mar 31, 2016 13:22:29   #
I bought the glycerin to use in replacing water in macro flower photography as others have suggested but I am a little spooked about how to use this stuff since it is so much thick than water. There would be no spraying this on like water. So, my question is, so how is it done?
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 25 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.