A DSLR warning...

[Shutter.]

Hi folks...

Okay, I'm first going to clarify by saying that I love a lot of things about my 10D and newly obtained SD9... but... take a moment to appreciate your S85, 505, 707, P45, P50, P93948309, 717, and yearn for the 828...

BUT... you may yearn after the higher clean ISO's. That's good, because you're going to need them. What do I mean? Well... the Ziess lens has a 2.0-2.8. Yummy. Very fast. But not just fast, it has a very forgiving depth of field. To some this is a negative. It's very difficult to isolate or go for the really fine arty photos with a "pro-sumer" (I still laugh about that term. I'd rather have them label photographers as pro-sumer) camera's depth of field, i.e., 2.8. A 2.8 on a 717 just isn't as thin as a 2.8 on a 10D. So, if you want the whole kid's face in focus, you need to go up to f8. To go up to f8 you need to go up to ISO 400, or even 800. Sorry, but ISO 800 on a 10D does not equal a 7x7 at ISO 100.

What does this mean? This means that you can handhold a 7x7 (and more delictably an 828) in much lower light and expect a decent dof than you can a dslr - using the same ISO.

Keep in mind this only matters if you're a handheld shooter. If you shoot with a tripod all the time, then you're fine. But I'm having a hard time shooting at 1/8th handhel at what would have been 1/90th with my 707.

So, what woudl be an example? Take this shot. I was sitting out in my yard with fellow STFer MikelJ when my neighbor came out with her one-year-old. I leave all my cameras at ISO 100, because, well, duh. No, not so. With a DSLR you're better off leaving it at ISO 400 to make sure you can get a shot with decent light without a ridiculous dof. So, because of this, and set in aperture priority at 5.6 on a dslr, I didn't have enough light to get this shot at 6:00 in the afternoon on a bright day without motion blur. My 707 would have captured this shot wonderfully. Easily. Even at it's smallest aperture (f8). Instead, I have a person standing still a little soft because I couldn't hold the camera still.

Sorry for the large photo, but you have to view it large to see what I mean...



--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries

 

[kyutip]

on whether to go for D Rebel or 828.

That is a good way to see the difference shooting style of DSLR & regular DC.

One question though, will it make a difference if you use 50mm 1.8 lens on DSLR to take that shot ?

I don't know much about lenses or DSLR but with 50mm at 1.8, can you get a decent shutter speed to be handheld ?

--
http://www.pbase.com/bochie

 

[Brad Morris]

Careful Jim,

Some of the people round here might want a lynching!

Heresy! Just mentioning a Canon SLR and a Sony cam in the same thread is enough to generate a 150 message thread.

DSLRs help you walk on water dont they? ;-)

But seriously....You are dead right. In my film SLR days, I gave up trying to use ISO 100 film and started using exclusively ISO400 stock cause I could never get enough light in most of the situations where I wanted a hand held shot. (I am talking 20 years ago now) The ISO 400 grain and colour quality at that time was discouraging enough for me to stop taking pics and loose interest in photography until Digital came along.

Technology is a wonderful thing that I can now use my 707 to get more shots of what I want. Sure having ISO 1600 or more would be nice at times but Photoshop is a wonderful thing and I am now pretty good at fixing underexposed Jpegs that contain almost noise after I have finished my post processing work.

Cheers

Hi folks...

Okay, I'm first going to clarify by saying that I love a lot of
things about my 10D and newly obtained SD9... but... take a moment
to appreciate your S85, 505, 707, P45, P50, P93948309, 717, and
yearn for the 828...

BUT... you may yearn after the higher clean ISO's. That's good,
because you're going to need them. What do I mean? Well... the
Ziess lens has a 2.0-2.8. Yummy. Very fast. But not just fast, it
has a very forgiving depth of field. To some this is a negative.
It's very difficult to isolate or go for the really fine arty
photos with a "pro-sumer" (I still laugh about that term. I'd
rather have them label photographers as pro-sumer) camera's depth
of field, i.e., 2.8. A 2.8 on a 717 just isn't as thin as a 2.8 on
a 10D. So, if you want the whole kid's face in focus, you need to
go up to f8. To go up to f8 you need to go up to ISO 400, or even
800. Sorry, but ISO 800 on a 10D does not equal a 7x7 at ISO 100.

What does this mean? This means that you can handhold a 7x7 (and
more delictably an 828) in much lower light and expect a decent dof
than you can a dslr - using the same ISO.

Keep in mind this only matters if you're a handheld shooter. If
you shoot with a tripod all the time, then you're fine. But I'm
having a hard time shooting at 1/8th handhel at what would have
been 1/90th with my 707.

So, what woudl be an example? Take this shot. I was sitting out in
my yard with fellow STFer MikelJ when my neighbor came out with her
one-year-old. I leave all my cameras at ISO 100, because, well,
duh. No, not so. With a DSLR you're better off leaving it at ISO
400 to make sure you can get a shot with decent light without a
ridiculous dof. So, because of this, and set in aperture priority
at 5.6 on a dslr, I didn't have enough light to get this shot at
6:00 in the afternoon on a bright day without motion blur. My 707
would have captured this shot wonderfully. Easily. Even at it's
smallest aperture (f8). Instead, I have a person standing still a
little soft because I couldn't hold the camera still.

Sorry for the large photo, but you have to view it large to see
what I mean...



--
Jim Fuglestad
Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase.
-Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries

--
http://bradm.instantlogic.com ,
http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=13628

 

[Brad Morris]

You might be able to get a properly exposed shot wide open at 1.8 but you will get next to no Depth of field in the shot.

on whether to go for D Rebel or 828.

That is a good way to see the difference shooting style of DSLR &
regular DC.

One question though, will it make a difference if you use 50mm 1.8
lens on DSLR to take that shot ?
I don't know much about lenses or DSLR but with 50mm at 1.8, can
you get a decent shutter speed to be handheld ?

--
http://www.pbase.com/bochie

--
http://bradm.instantlogic.com ,
http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=13628

 

[Shutter.]

I don't know much about lenses or DSLR but with 50mm at 1.8, can
you get a decent shutter speed to be handheld ?

Well, this shot would have been impossible with the 50 because I was fully extended with a 70-300 zoom. She would have been but a speck. But yes, theroretically at 1.8 I could have obtained a faster shutter, but nothing like I could have with my 707. And I'm not sure I could have even had her whole body in the dof at 1.8. Really, 1.8 is VERY thin. I can't even get a whole face in the dof at 2.8 at 8 feet let alone at 1.8 from 50 feet!

All this said, you gain a thin DOF when you want it. So, if you shoot a lot with a tripod, it's not a bother and can be a real benefit. Just a little heads up.

Jim

--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries

 

[Mark J]

Or an IS enabled sensor like the A1?

I mean, something that assists you in the handheld shooting arena?

Mark J

Shutter. wrote:

 

[Harry Behret]

Hey Jim,

I'm still feeling my way around my D100. Getting used to the narrower DOF has not been easy. As I've said before I'm glad that I kept my 717. My best buys for normal shooting situations were the 50mm 1.8 lens & the 80Dx Speedlight. If you want to maximize your DSLR experience you need to buy good glass and that becomes a very expensive proposition. The next lens on my shopping list is the 70-200/2.8G AV-S VR ($1600).

One thing i've found is that the D100 with the battery grio is mush easier to hold steady than the 717 so i can shoot at slower speeds than I could with the 717.

Hows the SD-9?

Harry
http://www.pbase.com/hpb

 

[Mark J]

Or an IS enabled sensor like the A1?

I mean, something that assists you in the handheld shooting arena?

Mark J

Shutter. wrote:

 

[Shutter.]

Good question, but I think the answer is no. Keep in mind that this is 6:00 in the afternoon on a bright sunshiny day! Now, I'm in the shade of the sun from the houses, but still... should I need IS to handhold a shot at ISO 100 at 6:00 in the afternoon on a bright sun-shiny day in August?

Basically, you just lost the benefit of cleaner ISO's....

Or an IS enabled sensor like the A1?

I mean, something that assists you in the handheld shooting arena?

Mark J

Shutter. wrote:

--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries

 

[Shutter.]

Hi Brad,

I think the key here is whether you're used to using a tripod. I'm not. I don't like it. If you want super clean images then you had better get used to using a tripod. But fortunately clean images are secondary to getting the shot, so I don't mind trucking around at higher ISO's. My biggest thing is that Iwant to be able to get the "easy" shots like I used to be able to get.

Jim

Some of the people round here might want a lynching!

Heresy! Just mentioning a Canon SLR and a Sony cam in the same
thread is enough to generate a 150 message thread.

DSLRs help you walk on water dont they? ;-)

But seriously....You are dead right. In my film SLR days, I gave
up trying to use ISO 100 film and started using exclusively ISO400
stock cause I could never get enough light in most of the
situations where I wanted a hand held shot. (I am talking 20 years
ago now) The ISO 400 grain and colour quality at that time was
discouraging enough for me to stop taking pics and loose interest
in photography until Digital came along.

Technology is a wonderful thing that I can now use my 707 to get
more shots of what I want. Sure having ISO 1600 or more would be
nice at times but Photoshop is a wonderful thing and I am now
pretty good at fixing underexposed Jpegs that contain almost noise
after I have finished my post processing work.

Cheers

Hi folks...

Okay, I'm first going to clarify by saying that I love a lot of
things about my 10D and newly obtained SD9... but... take a moment
to appreciate your S85, 505, 707, P45, P50, P93948309, 717, and
yearn for the 828...

BUT... you may yearn after the higher clean ISO's. That's good,
because you're going to need them. What do I mean? Well... the
Ziess lens has a 2.0-2.8. Yummy. Very fast. But not just fast, it
has a very forgiving depth of field. To some this is a negative.
It's very difficult to isolate or go for the really fine arty
photos with a "pro-sumer" (I still laugh about that term. I'd
rather have them label photographers as pro-sumer) camera's depth
of field, i.e., 2.8. A 2.8 on a 717 just isn't as thin as a 2.8 on
a 10D. So, if you want the whole kid's face in focus, you need to
go up to f8. To go up to f8 you need to go up to ISO 400, or even
800. Sorry, but ISO 800 on a 10D does not equal a 7x7 at ISO 100.

What does this mean? This means that you can handhold a 7x7 (and
more delictably an 828) in much lower light and expect a decent dof
than you can a dslr - using the same ISO.

Keep in mind this only matters if you're a handheld shooter. If
you shoot with a tripod all the time, then you're fine. But I'm
having a hard time shooting at 1/8th handhel at what would have
been 1/90th with my 707.

So, what woudl be an example? Take this shot. I was sitting out in
my yard with fellow STFer MikelJ when my neighbor came out with her
one-year-old. I leave all my cameras at ISO 100, because, well,
duh. No, not so. With a DSLR you're better off leaving it at ISO
400 to make sure you can get a shot with decent light without a
ridiculous dof. So, because of this, and set in aperture priority
at 5.6 on a dslr, I didn't have enough light to get this shot at
6:00 in the afternoon on a bright day without motion blur. My 707
would have captured this shot wonderfully. Easily. Even at it's
smallest aperture (f8). Instead, I have a person standing still a
little soft because I couldn't hold the camera still.

Sorry for the large photo, but you have to view it large to see
what I mean...



--
Jim Fuglestad
Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase.
-Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries

--
http://bradm.instantlogic.com ,
http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=13628

--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries

 

[Mark J]

I'd love to watch you get eaten alive by some of the friendly neighbors in CTF, some of whom are a bit stubborn about coming to terms with something such as you have brought out.

And, you are right at 6:00 pm on a bright sunny day (albeit in the shade) at ISo 100 you should NOT have to worry about this type of shot.

Mark J

Basically, you just lost the benefit of cleaner ISO's....

Or an IS enabled sensor like the A1?

I mean, something that assists you in the handheld shooting arena?

Mark J

Shutter. wrote:

--
Jim Fuglestad
Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase.
-Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries

 

[Mark J]

Jim,

are you suggesting that your photographs are anything less than sharp, handheld? Are you suggesting that it's ok to have photographs that are not perfectly sharp, in the name of "getting the shot" ?

Because I don't consider the images I've seen of yours, images that LOOK like they were handheld

Mark J

Shutter. wrote:
Hi Brad,
If you want super clean images then you had

better get used to using a tripod. But fortunately clean images
are secondary to getting the shot>

 

[Shutter.]

Bring them on. They are one group that I've quickly learned can't back up much. BRING EM' ON!!!! lol!

But like I've said... remarkable images under many circumstances, and Im' not saying the 7x7 or 828 is better, only different. More to come in some future post if I find the time.

And, you are right at 6:00 pm on a bright sunny day (albeit in the
shade) at ISo 100 you should NOT have to worry about this type of
shot.

Mark J

Basically, you just lost the benefit of cleaner ISO's....

Or an IS enabled sensor like the A1?

I mean, something that assists you in the handheld shooting arena?

Mark J

Shutter. wrote:

--
Jim Fuglestad
Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase.
-Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries

--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries

 

[butachan]

Good question, but I think the answer is no. Keep in mind that
this is 6:00 in the afternoon on a bright sunshiny day! Now, I'm
in the shade of the sun from the houses, but still... should I need
IS to handhold a shot at ISO 100 at 6:00 in the afternoon on a
bright sun-shiny day in August?

Question: Which lens are you using?

You have a 70-300mm lens fully extended ( 14X zoom!!!) shooting at ISO 100 with a relatively slow shutter speed and you don't think IS will help? Are you serious??? Have you ever used a IS lens?

--
'There is no conversation more boring than the one where everybody agrees.'

 

[Shutter.]

You are completely missing my point. I know how to use a camera, I'm just saying that compared to an 828 (a non IS lens of excellent quality) you'll get better photos under this conidtion with the 828.

And yes, I have an IS lens.

This is just one example. I could share hundreds of examples where I would FAR preferred the deep dof of a Sony lens to the shallow dof of a dslr. And sometimes it's the reverse.

I also think IS is a great marketing campaign. Which is easy with the Canon zealots because they'll buy anything. ;-)

Jim

Good question, but I think the answer is no. Keep in mind that
this is 6:00 in the afternoon on a bright sunshiny day! Now, I'm
in the shade of the sun from the houses, but still... should I need
IS to handhold a shot at ISO 100 at 6:00 in the afternoon on a
bright sun-shiny day in August?

Question: Which lens are you using?
You have a 70-300mm lens fully extended ( 14X zoom!!!) shooting at
ISO 100 with a relatively slow shutter speed and you don't think IS
will help? Are you serious??? Have you ever used a IS lens?

--
'There is no conversation more boring than the one where everybody
agrees.'

--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries

 

[butachan]

I leave all my cameras at ISO 100, because, well,
duh. No, not so. With a DSLR you're better off leaving it at ISO
400 to make sure you can get a shot with decent light without a
ridiculous dof. So, because of this, and set in aperture priority
at 5.6 on a dslr, I didn't have enough light to get this shot at
6:00 in the afternoon on a bright day without motion blur. My 707
would have captured this shot wonderfully. Easily. Even at it's
smallest aperture (f8). Instead, I have a person standing still a
little soft because I couldn't hold the camera still.

So you can get a wonderful shot on your F707 at f/8 and ISO100 that you cannot get on a DSLR at f/5.6 and ISO400? That's amazing.

--
'There is no conversation more boring than the one where everybody agrees.'

 

[Travis]

Well, this shot would have been impossible with the 50 because I
was fully extended with a 70-300 zoom.

Wow. With the magnification factor, you mean you shot this photo at 480mm? In all fairness (and unless I am mistaken), that's 2.5 times the focal length that your 707 can reach without an extender. And your F5.6 aperture is only 2 stops from the 2.8 your 707 would have given you, so bumping the ISO (which is a very easy/fast process) to ISO 400 (and your 10d at ISO 400 ois still cleaner than ISO 100 on your 707) would have given you the same shutter speed. Won't argue with the DOF preference, except to say that some prefer shallow, some prefer wide.

This is not to detract from your original - and helpful - information. People need to be aware of such things and know what to expect. The prosumer digicams do offer the convenience of a good focal length range and a fast lens with wide DOF (if that's what you prefer). And of course, you could have used a faster (albeit more expensive) lens on your 10d as well - which turns out to be an advantage (flexiblity in lens choice) and disadvantage (you get what you pay for).

There are just so many things to consider when one decides which camera to get. Personally, I really want the 300d AND the 828 that are coming out. Aside from the issue you mentioned, the 828 will have quite a few usable features that I wouldn't have, such as live histogram preview, a great movie mode, fast lens with great range of focal lengths, Nightframing, etc. These are all things that many find important to them. On the other hand, I also yearn for the flexibility of the interchangeable lens system, the fast AF, the low noise at high ISO's (even granting your note about lens speed), the shallow DOF of field (I like taking portraits), etc.

Thanks for your informative post,
Travis

 

[hewy]

Well Jim congratulations you have triggered me to respond to a "canon vs sony" thread allthough I promissed myself not to fall for such foolish behaviour.

I think you have made a very good point here. Not because it seems to be in favor of the "sony lovers" because I think that anybody who is an emotional fan of a brand should really start thinking about what life is all about and try to get a life...

I like your statement because you are the first to make people aware that limited DOF is NOT under any circumstance a desirable thing. I have been shooting with film SLRs for over 15 years and on many many occassions my primary concern was: do I still have enough DOF to have my entire subject in focus. Since I own a digital cam that is no longer my concern and indeed I am more aware on SOME occassions of the fact that my large DOF might bring too much in focus. Overall in general use I see more advantages in having somewhat more DOF. I think this is an important message for people who really stick to this dof issue.

Oh and for the CTF guys: don´t eat me alive now. You are all way above the average human being because you have bought the latest and greatest and your camera will indeed compensate for everything you have never acheived in real life. Oh yes before I forget, yes you are right the more you spend on a cam the more creative you will get and the more you knowledgable you will be about photography. So forgive me my humble statement here.

--
Hewy
F717
http://www.pbase.com/huubverm

 

[butachan]

You are completely missing my point. I know how to use a camera,
I'm just saying that compared to an 828 (a non IS lens of excellent
quality) you'll get better photos under this conidtion with the 828.

And yes, I have an IS lens.

This is just one example. I could share hundreds of examples where
I would FAR preferred the deep dof of a Sony lens to the shallow
dof of a dslr. And sometimes it's the reverse.

I also think IS is a great marketing campaign. Which is easy with
the Canon zealots because they'll buy anything. ;-)

Jim

Sorry, more questions:

Are you really saying that IS has no technical merits? It is just marketing hype?

Does an 828 have a 14X zoom lens? How can you compare? I am sure that you realize that camera shake becomes more visible at longer focal lengths.

And once again, which lens are you using???

--
'There is no conversation more boring than the one where everybody agrees.'

 

[Shutter.]

I don't know who you are, so I'm not going to argue, but what I'm saying is that under circumstances in this example I could have taken out my 707 and captured this shot without motion blur. Without a doubt, absolutely this shot would have been better with the 707. At 2.8 I would have had a faster shutter speed and a great dof than the dslr at 5.6.

You can follow your tagline all you want.

Jim

'There is no conversation more boring than the one where everybody
agrees.'