Take a picture once a day, whether you need to or not

[NowhereMan]

Here's a shot of the London skyline from my new Canon S90. I messed about a little with it in the editor, not really sure if it improved it or not. Any tips on taking better shots or editing would be appreciated as despite reading these threads from time to time I've got no clue about photos and this is my first 'proper' camera (i.e. not just point and shoot)

[Mosesandstick]

People have posted some cool stuff over winter.

[01101010]

People have posted some cool stuff over winter.

Every time I see that wheel I can't help but think of it as the antenna from Dr. Who.

[Teleku]

Wow, great shots.  What kind of camera are you using?

[Mosesandstick]

We should get everyone to post their pictures of the london eye!

Nikon D90 on a nice, sturdy tripod with various glass.

[Mosesandstick]

From a place where the snow fits:

[Sir T]

[Merusk]

Moose, you keep getting some fantastic night shots.  What are you using for them?

[apocrypha]

Nikon D90 on a nice, sturdy tripod with various glass.

 

[Mosesandstick]

If you're inclined, click on the pics and it'll send you to my flickr. You can check all the stats there if you click the right things (it's called an EXIF if you ever hear someone bandy that term).

Thanks Merusk. All of my pictures nowadays are taken with a Nikon D90 and various "fast glass". The lenses I mainly use are a Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 and a Nikon 35/1.8. The small numbers represent apertures, and the smaller the number, the more light you can take in, and the better your photos at night.

The first set of pictures on this page were taken on a tripod. If you click on them, you'll be able to get to the original size (4.2* 3 MP). It's still sharp at that size, which would fit something like a 40" monitor  . The second set were handheld at night. From the first one, you can see the mountains are practically pitch black. For the second one I had to use a high ISO setting and stabilise myself properly. The key is to not breathe. Or take some diazepam.

[Sky]

Noticed a lot of deer tracks in the woods when I was out skiing yesterday, so when the cat was on point last night, I had a feeling this is what I'd find:



Some squatters in the backyard. 10 second exposure.

[Merusk]

Nikon D90 on a nice, sturdy tripod with various glass.

 

Camera body != Lens and F-stop.   


Moose - Thanks for the info.  I've been learning all this since buying my own DSLR early last year, but I have yet to acquire a low F-Stop lens.  My lowest is the 5.4 that came with the body, so upping the ISO for those dark indoor shots or night shots makes them look horrible.  That night shot of the town looks just amazing so I wanted to know what you used so I might go and get my hands on that next instead of the flash I've been thinking about.  Thanks for the info!

[Teleku]

Yeah, those night shots look great.  I have a Canon Rebel Xti with the (newer) kit lens.  Sometimes I can get my night exposures to come out that good, often not.  Still trying to figure out how to get consistent.  I'll probably upgrade to a newer Camera pretty soon here and start buying some nicer glass.

[apocrypha]

Nikon D90 on a nice, sturdy tripod with various glass.

 

Camera body != Lens and F-stop.   

I wasn't mocking the gear at all! They're really nice pics, I was just pointing out that the question had been answered only a few posts beforehand.

[Merusk]

You misunderstand again.  I wanted to know the exact lens and aperture, which he kindly shared.   

[apocrypha]

Ahh ok 

Apocrypha. Misunderstanding Teh Internet since 1992!

[Mosesandstick]

For night shots, you really need a tripod, or to get creative with your placing. In the last shot I posted, I think I was resting on the railing, or my camera was.

If you're going Canon, the easiest and cheapest fast piece of glass is to obtain is the 50 f/1.8. Otherwise you're a bit out of luck, cheap and fast don't go together photography wise. You could get the Tokina 11-16 like me though. Otherwise you can get a wide angle prime lens, and the cheapest route to go is probably buying a Sigma lens.

In order of importance:

Tripod --> Lens --> Camera.

If you're going to upgrade and stick with Canon, don't get a 50D. Either try and get a nice, cheap refurbed 40D, bling it out for a 7D, or wait. A lot of waiting involved when it comes to buying photography stuff...

[Sky]

Ditto tripod. I sometimes think about taking mine on trips, because I always end up with a few shots where I wish I had it, it's just so damned bulky.

That shot of the deer in the yard never would've happened without a tripod. Though I just have a P&S Canon because real cameras are $$$.

[Mosesandstick]

How big is your backyard? That looks like a forest to me.

[Sky]

It's a little patch of woods, you can see a street light, the little burned out section of the photo. There was supposed to be another street behind my house but it never got put in, actually that dude on the left pulled some strings at city hall to build in the landlocked lot a few years ago and royally pissed off everyone, because it was all woods back there before and he built a mcmansion. Beyond that it's miles of woods, though, I'm at the edge of town. The deer come down out of the hills because there are armed men trying to kill them right now.

[Teleku]

For night shots, you really need a tripod, or to get creative with your placing. In the last shot I posted, I think I was resting on the railing, or my camera was.

If you're going Canon, the easiest and cheapest fast piece of glass is to obtain is the 50 f/1.8. Otherwise you're a bit out of luck, cheap and fast don't go together photography wise. You could get the Tokina 11-16 like me though. Otherwise you can get a wide angle prime lens, and the cheapest route to go is probably buying a Sigma lens.

In order of importance:

Tripod --> Lens --> Camera.

If you're going to upgrade and stick with Canon, don't get a 50D. Either try and get a nice, cheap refurbed 40D, bling it out for a 7D, or wait. A lot of waiting involved when it comes to buying photography stuff...

Yeah, I always use a tripod when I can.  Just seems that even then the shots will sporadically look like yours, and sometimes not.  I always set the camera to a 2 second delay so the camera isn't wobbling when I press the button.  Now that other obligations are out of the way, I'm hoping to start investing in some good glass, so hopefully that will help a lot.

Why do you recommend the 40D over the 50D?  Hell, I was even sort of looking at the 500D.  Has a lot of nice features at a pretty cheep price.  Also, do you actually think one is better than the other in Canon Vs. Nikon?  I've always liked Canon, but Ive always heard there really isn't any difference.  Any advantages to going to Nikon?

[Bunk]

I'm a little curious on the 50D comment as well. Is it just the price point? The 50D is fair upgrade over the 40D in a several areas, including newer chipset, better ISO performance, larger display, and 15 MP vs 10 MP.

The Canon 50 f/1.8 is a great little lens. I picked mine up used for about $100 a few years ago, and love it. It does take some practice to use that fast a lens though, especially for outdoor shots, since the depth of field is so shallow at that apeture. The low depth of field makes for a great portrait lens though:

[Mrbloodworth]

Shes perdy.

[Mosesandstick]

If your  images do look different to mine, I really can't tell you why. I try and do the things you and I have already mentioned. As long as I'm tripoded, use a high aperture as well. Shoot a lot I guess? 90% of my hand-held photos go straight in to the bin. Otherwise use HDR techniques and you can push your photos beyond the boundaries of your sensor. Maybe it's the post-processing? Pretty much everything I takes goes through photoshop.

If we're comparing low light performance, we basically need to take a close look at camera sensors. Canon have been going towards sensors with higher MPs (500D, 50D 15MP, 7D 18MP, ) whilst Nikon has stuck at 12MP with the D90, D300, D300s, D5000, D700 and D3. Due to the physics, less Megapixels on an equal sized sensor means more photons and better low-light performance in terms of dynamic range, colours and noise. It's actually really, really, hard to compare which sensor has the best performance, because pretty much all cameras have some sort of processing that you can't remove even if you shoot RAW. There are sites that do comparisons (DXOmark and a lot of review) sites, people post 100% crops and compare, and people come to differing conclusions. When you take an aggregate though, Nikon high ISO performance seems to best Canons.

For most of the shooting anyone will do, Nikon and Canon do nearly exactly the same job. But there are differences. For example, when you watch F1 or other sports, the majority of photogs have had white lenses and Canon bodies attached.

Hate to sound like a broken record, but the most important thing by far will be how the camera feels to you. You've got to enjoy taking the photos and pressing all the fiddly little buttons. Secondly, especially since you're buying you're (2nd?) dslr, you should try and have some sort of idea where you're heading with the hobby. If you want to stick with the cheaper APS-C cameras you've got a different decision to make then if you want to go FF (full frame).

In terms of lenses and cheap options, both brands are pretty shit. The main differences between the two is that Nikon has a 35mm 1.8, which is practically a must-have lens, and that Canon's walk-around fast zoom (17-55) is image stabilised. Nikon also has a fisheye lens. If you look at the more expensive lenses designed for FF cameras (but still usable on APS-C), I think it comes down to personal preference and having thousands of bucks to burn, though Canon does generally have cheaper options. Nikon's good stuff is rediculously expensive. At the very least they view themselves as better than Canon 

My personal preference? I prefer the Nikon's feel and hold (like the two dials), and having a camera with less megapixels and better low-light performance. Until I start printing very large (ANYBODY WANT TO BUY SOME PRINTS?) the resolution doesn't matter much to me. The 35 f/1.8 is also a gem of a lens at only 200 bucks (assuming you can actually find it in a store).

Don't take my word for why you shouldn't get the 50D. Google it yourself. Google 40D vs. 50D (it's even on the wiki page). The 7D seems to be a jump in technology that despite the higher MPs it still has good performance in other areas.

Ok, that was too many words. If I could summarise, there are differences between cameras, and there are differences between the lenses available. The majority of the time, in the majority of situations, it'll make very little difference. If you know what you like to shoot, then it's easier for you to make a choice of Canon vs. Nikon. Oh yeah. Video could also make a difference. Any of Canon's cameras with video (7D, 5DMII) kick Nikon's ass.

Here's a photo with the obsolete, old, lousy, Nikon D40 to make up for that essay:

[Ookii]

The d40 was never lousy  , I also think you also meant low aperture when you said high aperture.

D5000 this sex, d90 is sex, get a cool prime lens and the 11 dollar remote and you can take all the cool pictures you want.

I know jack shit about Canons except that their Video is 1000 times better and their autofocusing systems kinda sucks.

[Merusk]

Shoot a lot I guess?

Pretty much this. My sister's a photo major, and my Aunt is an artist in the Atlanta area.. both say the same thing. Take a ton of pictures because you'll only use a few of them.   I seem to recall the guy on the DVD that came with my D60 saying the same thing.  It's digital, so it's not like you're paying for film processing anyway. Hold that button down.

The 35 f/1.8 is also a gem of a lens at only 200 bucks (assuming you can actually find it in a store).

I've had lots of luck at Ritzcamera.com, but yeah they list that one as out of stock at the moment.     They do thave the 50mm f/1.8 in stock if anyone's interested.

[Ookii]

It's also worth mentioning that all of you guys have APS-C sensors so you'll want to multiply those prime values by 1.5. My 50mm prime is actually 75mm on my d90, your 35 is actually 52mm or so.

[Samwise]

Ditto tripod. I sometimes think about taking mine on trips, because I always end up with a few shots where I wish I had it, it's just so damned bulky.

I've got a miniature tripod with bendy legs that's come in handy on a number of trips.  Since it's not full-height you still need to be creative in finding things to perch it on, but it gives you much better control of the angle.  The bendy model is nice because you can perch it on uneven surfaces or wrap it around branches.

[Stewie]

The Canon 40d has better ISO performance than the 50d for the reasons that mooseandstick mentioned.
Canon aps-c is actually a 1.6 (nikon is 1.5 I believe) and all the newer canons have fstop/iso and shutter speed on separate easy to use dials.

That being said good advise here. Really the difference between Nikon and Canon is marginal at best. It really does come down to feel.
I have a Canon 40d and see no reasons that I will have to upgrade anytime in the forseeable future. I dont even know that  FF camera like the 5dmkii is even worth it as the canon 10-22 is pretty uber.
40d with the canon10-22 From a previous post of mine
 

[voodoolily]

Using iPhone and Shake It (Polaroid) app.

[JWIV]

People are going to be digging out for awhile up here.

[Viin]

Gotta love street parking!

[Khaldun]

One asshat student left his car in the main college lot on Saturday despite an all-campus email to clear the place for the plow. Rather than screw with getting a tow, the plow guy just basically piled all the snow he could on top of the car. It's not getting out any time soon, especially given that there's another 1-2 foot snowfall coming on Wednesday.

[Strazos]

I'm wondering if I am going to have to work this week...

[Sky]

I wish we had snow like that, it's too patchy to ski in the woods behind my house.