- 8,443
- 2,143
- Joined
- May 4, 2011
You're right I'm prlly over analyzing this whole thing lol
The Official Photography Thread - Vol. 3
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by rap sizzle,
- Start date
You're right I'm prlly over analyzing this whole thing lol
- 33,937
- 39,836
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
Question guys:
So im doing a lot of street photography (@slimcargos) and usually I have someone who takes my pics. Sometimes they know how to work it, sometimes I set up the settings first then give it to them. Usually use the 50mm 1.8 and on a sunny afternoon, I usually am at ISO 100-200, my shutter at anywhere from 80-500 (rarely at 500 though) depending on the brightness and aperture almost always at 1.8.
Now my question is some pics come out blurry or not as sharp I should say. Edges are fuzzy and what not. Im not always looking for a deep bokeh, but I figure a 1.8 aperture means I can go for a faster shutter speed. If it comes out blurry I usually tell em to bump the shutter speed up which usually solves the problem.
Am I getting it right? Or is there a "better" way to go about this?
So im doing a lot of street photography (@slimcargos) and usually I have someone who takes my pics. Sometimes they know how to work it, sometimes I set up the settings first then give it to them. Usually use the 50mm 1.8 and on a sunny afternoon, I usually am at ISO 100-200, my shutter at anywhere from 80-500 (rarely at 500 though) depending on the brightness and aperture almost always at 1.8.
Now my question is some pics come out blurry or not as sharp I should say. Edges are fuzzy and what not. Im not always looking for a deep bokeh, but I figure a 1.8 aperture means I can go for a faster shutter speed. If it comes out blurry I usually tell em to bump the shutter speed up which usually solves the problem.
Am I getting it right? Or is there a "better" way to go about this?
- 13,066
- 7,262
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2007
^^^^^^You are doing it right. That is the beauty of digital. Shoot till you get the shot right. We all do it. I shoot like a 100 shots to get my one good one.
I don't know what to think of the EOS M5. Body price is $979.00. They said the sensor is like the 80D, I would definitely get this camera over the 80D..Even has focus peaking finally too....which took way too long. The size is odd where it's small but not super small like a Fuji. Very Sony-esque looking. I sort of wish they implemented some of this stuff into the 5D Mark 4 from the flip screen, EVF and what not. Still.....they made it under a $1000 technically. I would love to have this as a secondary camera since I have the 22mm f/2, That combo would be the lightest ever.
I don't know what to think of the EOS M5. Body price is $979.00. They said the sensor is like the 80D, I would definitely get this camera over the 80D..Even has focus peaking finally too....which took way too long. The size is odd where it's small but not super small like a Fuji. Very Sony-esque looking. I sort of wish they implemented some of this stuff into the 5D Mark 4 from the flip screen, EVF and what not. Still.....they made it under a $1000 technically. I would love to have this as a secondary camera since I have the 22mm f/2, That combo would be the lightest ever.
- 785
- 199
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2006
light chasing. crazy what 10 minutes will do when the sun is setting.
8G8C1316 by judizzel36, on Flickr
8G8C1461 by judizzel36, on Flickr
8G8C1453 by judizzel36, on Flickr
8G8C1316 by judizzel36, on Flickr
8G8C1461 by judizzel36, on Flickr
8G8C1453 by judizzel36, on Flickr
- 10,580
- 7,874
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2014
I don't personally care much for the 'starburst' type of effect of lights during long exposures so I try to minimize how long my shutter is open. Everything is completely preference, once you take enough shots you'll see what you like and you'll either take note or remember your settings so you get that response as much as possible
- 10,580
- 7,874
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2014
Shots look good, remind me of Halle Berry in Boomeranglight chasing. crazy what 10 minutes will do when the sun is setting.
If I'm not mistaken increasing your shutter speed would have toned down the brightness of the sun behind her and made it less distracting.
Last edited:
kdawg
Staff member
- 11,034
- 12,532
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2003
New glass just ordered. Going away for a few days at the weekend, can't wait to try it out.
Got the Sigma 17-50 - just a replacement for my kit lens. f/2.8 at all focal lengths which should be handy indoors and it looks good for landscapes too.
Got the Sigma 17-50 - just a replacement for my kit lens. f/2.8 at all focal lengths which should be handy indoors and it looks good for landscapes too.
- 3,633
- 3,389
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2002
i don't know about 'better' but a good guide is the effective focal length shutter speed rule (if you are using a 50mm on 35mm you'd want to start at 1/50th - on a crop sensor body you'd multiply the crop factor by the focal length of the lens to get the effective focal length), and if there is any motion, bumping up to at least 1/125th (and adjusting your iso accordingly) is pretty good for getting rid of blur from handheld shots, definitely a 'your mileage may vary' type of thing but it isn't rare to have take multiple shots to get 'the one' you want
many if not all of their previous eos m cameras were actually lighter weight & smaller...definitely seem like a more competent effort, it looks like it might actually be a pretty responsive setup, the flip touch screen is nice and the price is very competitive...but similar to the mark iv, there isn't anything really advanced/exciting such that this camera is 'future-proof' when you look at the comparable offerings from fuji, panasonic, & sony (even the discontinued samsung) have things 4k video & log profiles for video, that make it attractive for those who do both stills & video...
Last edited:
- 33,937
- 39,836
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
Repped guys.
Is there any reason why id bump my aperture up to 5.6 or 8 or whatever and lower the shutter speed/up the iso as opposed to leaving it at 1.8/fast shutter/low iso?
I dont really need a deep bokeh all the time, but bokeh at 1.8 is pretty darn nice.
Is there any reason why id bump my aperture up to 5.6 or 8 or whatever and lower the shutter speed/up the iso as opposed to leaving it at 1.8/fast shutter/low iso?
I dont really need a deep bokeh all the time, but bokeh at 1.8 is pretty darn nice.
Last edited:
- 6,047
- 3,719
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
M5 looks nice. Random, but dude needs to let the hair go. I kept imagining the guy from Scary Movie.
- 3,633
- 3,389
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2002
when you want deep(er) focus, if if you want to get that starburst effect from being at a smaller aperture, or when your subject is close to your minimum focus distance you will almost have to stop down to get more than a narrow depth of field...
- 25,931
- 22,899
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2013
there are plenty of reasons ... Thing is that I can't cover all of them ... Here are a few ..
Is to dann bright outside .. The shutter speed of 1/8000 might not be enough to give you properly expose picture thus the pictures will come out blown.
You need to get more than your subject in focus ... 1.8 is very low to get more than your subject in focus (forground and background will be out of focus)
Lanscape at a 1.8 you aren't going to get those beautiful crisp pictures you most likely admire .. You need to stomp down and find the sweet Spot.
Studio/storbe work ... 1.8 is not going to work period ..
At night flattening water and having great long exposures.
And so on .. Hope that helps ...
PS this last one is why you also shoot with. Higher aperture. To get that beautiful starburst effect ... Is more about aperture and less about exposure time.
Last edited:
- 13,066
- 7,262
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2007
Man.....get a reflector or a cheap flash. It would add some really cool lighting and also you'd not lose the sunset. Your definitely getting better shots though. Good stuff.
- 785
- 199
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2006
thanks a lot, man. really appreciate it!
- 542
- 135
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2014
Ok so i want to start giving natural and stylized edits to people i shoot. I have mastin labs but any lightroom presets you guys reccomend? I dont want film presets as i have mastin labs and i dont want to pay.dont care for vsco either lol.if you guys can send me some that would be cool. I am just trying to get some presets so i can get ideas for stylizing my own photos. Will see what a few i like are doing and will get an idea on how i want to process them
Last edited:
- 12,061
- 5,112
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
honestly man, make your own.
experimentation is key.
all a preset is, is someone else editing their photo their way with the same sliders you have at your disposal. applying that to your image 9/10 wont do you much (if any) good.
For example, adjusting highlights can do much different things depending on if your subject was lit through an ambient light source or a direct light source.
i have about a dozen of my own presets but when it boils down to it, i typically just edit from scratch each raw file under the same lighting situation / camera settings then sync and do QA on those synced images.
Also, getting free lightroom presets usually means you're going to be put into someone's marketing funnel.
- 13,066
- 7,262
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2007
No doubt.
I did it again if you don't mind. I don't shoot portraits but I do love editing them. Makes me feel like I need to shoot portraits more. I checked your Flickr and the shot again wasn't totally tack sharp. I wonder if you should do some back button focusing or something. If you had a sharp photo, this edit would even be more clear. I sharpened it a lot in PS but the face area got sort of muddy.
- 39,330
- 19,774
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2009
Hey guys, long time I don't post in here, had the pleasure to fly out to Punta Cana once again to cover a wedding...one of my fave shots of the day!
- 542
- 135
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2014
Yeah i know. I just simply dont know what i want to do yet. I have been looking around flickr for inspiration and ideas though. Thought maybe i would find preset that would help give me an idea quicker. I probably wont use a preset. I will look at how a few are set up and go from there
I will keep playing with lightroom though. See what i can get on my own
Last edited:
- 12,061
- 5,112
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- 4,024
- 876
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
I asked the same question when starting out. Basically, to have a greater depth of field. (more things in focus)
That, or there's too much light for your maximum shutter speed.
- 785
- 199
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2006
nah... I don't mind at all-- looks great! my focusing is getting better.. still needs some work, for sure... we were up 30 floors and it was windy as all... that's why I kept missing some. I think I'm going to start bringing my tripod, as you recommended...
- 10,580
- 7,874
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2014
If you're having difficulty focusing, using a tripod and live view helps a lot. When I was taking pics for the poetry events I would set up my cam in one spot and turn live view on and zoom as much as I could and manually adjust it to the best focus and just remotely snap shots. Was super easy and made it more exciting when I would eventually review my shots
- 542
- 135
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2014
Heres a bunch pictures from a shoot with a friend on wednesday. first time shooting with my canon 60d. any feedback?
Last edited:
- 33,937
- 39,836
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
Looks like it was shot from an iphone bruh. Full manual mode or auto? Focus is all off.
Similar threads
