sho nuff

DSLR Camera Guys

1,188 posts in this topic

Got my Tamrac bag today.Holy crap is this thing huge.So much room for anything I have and so many things I don't yet have.Kind of looks funny with just my camera, uv filter, and 2 lenses in there.But will be nice to not have to have another big bag for the kids at disney.Very well padded and a 15.4" laptop fits perfectly in there (though, wow is it heavy with that in there).Very happy with the construction of this bag. Found it as an open box item on Amazon for $100 with next day shipping.

Nice! I may look into picking up one of those.Also, do you have a video camera? Since you have extra room, bring that with you to Disney as well if it's not too heavy. I used mine (a Canon HV20) for a couple of things, including the Jedi Training Academy.Speaking of the Jedi Training Academy, as you probably already know, after the kids go through their training with the Jedi Master, Darth Vader comes out with a couple Storm Troopers. each of the kids then face off against Vader in a (simple and pre-choreographed) light saber duel. Well, after my seven-year-old battled Vader, he was so excited that he ran straight into the two Storm Troopers who then drew their guns on him. The Jedi Master yelled for him to use the force. The little guy threw out his hand to use the force and the Storm Troopers went flying backwards. The audience was rolling. I'm so thankful I got that on film. We crack up every time we watch it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big difference, is that the D90 has video - so that has to be a determining factor!

I've heard that you really don't want to rely on the D90 for quality video.
Really? I haven't tried it on mine yet (at Disney I had my HD video camera with me), but I would think the video quality would be decent since you're shooting through better glass than iPods, compact cameras, and even some video cameras. Of course, it's not designed to serve as a video camera, so it wouldn't, and shouldn't, be your primary video device. But I imagine it's nice to have that capability if you happen to be somewhere with your camera and the need to capture a moment on video arises.Edit: Never mind. Just saw that it doesn't auto focus in video mode, so if something moves, you've got to focus it yourself. That would be a real pain. Edited by bigbottom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got my Tamrac bag today.Holy crap is this thing huge.So much room for anything I have and so many things I don't yet have.Kind of looks funny with just my camera, uv filter, and 2 lenses in there.But will be nice to not have to have another big bag for the kids at disney.Very well padded and a 15.4" laptop fits perfectly in there (though, wow is it heavy with that in there).Very happy with the construction of this bag. Found it as an open box item on Amazon for $100 with next day shipping.

Nice! I may look into picking up one of those.Also, do you have a video camera? Since you have extra room, bring that with you to Disney as well if it's not too heavy. I used mine (a Canon HV20) for a couple of things, including the Jedi Training Academy.Speaking of the Jedi Training Academy, as you probably already know, after the kids go through their training with the Jedi Master, Darth Vader comes out with a couple Storm Troopers. each of the kids then face off against Vader in a (simple and pre-choreographed) light saber duel. Well, after my seven-year-old battled Vader, he was so excited that he ran straight into the two Storm Troopers who then drew their guns on him. The Jedi Master yelled for him to use the force. The little guy threw out his hand to use the force and the Storm Troopers went flying backwards. The audience was rolling. I'm so thankful I got that on film. We crack up every time we watch it.
Oh I do...but its small (fits in my pocket).Sanyo 1080p hi def camera and 10 mp still camera with flash. Works great and small enough for my pocket. But it will be in the bag too.I love all the room to expand as I get more stuff. For not, it will likely be full of zip lock bags with snacks for the kids in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big difference, is that the D90 has video - so that has to be a determining factor!

Interesting. I do not think I need the video factor. Maybe the smarter thing to do is get the cheaper one to start out withCan you put a Nikkor lens on a Cannon camera? The Nikkor has the Vibration reduction. I have only seen Nikkor lenses go with Nikkon cameras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big difference, is that the D90 has video - so that has to be a determining factor!

Interesting. I do not think I need the video factor. Maybe the smarter thing to do is get the cheaper one to start out withCan you put a Nikkor lens on a Cannon camera? The Nikkor has the Vibration reduction. I have only seen Nikkor lenses go with Nikkon cameras
lenses are not compatible, I think Canon has similar features with theirs, just named differently IS maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a photography thread on this board. If anyone has a link that would be great. If there is not, someone should make one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

........but check out Adorama...lots of package deals on there...

....and check out the customer feedback and ratings of any retailer that hasn't been personally recommended to you, at resellerratings.com - before you part with your cc details!
Do you work for adorama
I do - see my sig!
Thanks. Serious question thoughIs the Nikon D90 a superior camera to the Cannon Xsi. What if I saved the money by buying the XSI and buying an 18-200 lensEveryone in this thread has given great advice, but I want to know what someone in the business thinks
Keep in mind when reading this that I am a Canon user.The Nikon D90 is superior to the XSi. The D90 is much closer to the Canon 50D.The D90 has better user controls and better ISO performance.You are comparing 2 very different cameras.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big difference, is that the D90 has video - so that has to be a determining factor!

I've heard that you really don't want to rely on the D90 for quality video.
Really? I haven't tried it on mine yet (at Disney I had my HD video camera with me), but I would think the video quality would be decent since you're shooting through better glass than iPods, compact cameras, and even some video cameras. Of course, it's not designed to serve as a video camera, so it wouldn't, and shouldn't, be your primary video device. But I imagine it's nice to have that capability if you happen to be somewhere with your camera and the need to capture a moment on video arises.Edit: Never mind. Just saw that it doesn't auto focus in video mode, so if something moves, you've got to focus it yourself. That would be a real pain.
Strongly considered the D90 due to the video capability, until I learned it did not auto focus. Seems like it would be impossible to use without auto focus. (Ended up with the Canon D50.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going to pick these two up for my D90:

Nikon 50mm f/1.4D

:drool:

I am dying to get one of these, but have told myself that I need to dedicate some effort to actually learning basic photography before doing so. Please let me know how you like shooting with it and post links to some results if you can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going to pick these two up for my D90:

Nikon 50mm f/1.4D

:drool:

I am dying to get one of these, but have told myself that I need to dedicate some effort to actually learning basic photography before doing so. Please let me know how you like shooting with it and post links to some results if you can.

This is where I get confused a bit.

Why do you need this if you already have an 18-200 lens. Cant you just zoom to 50mm and get the same effect.

This is why we need a photography thread

(BB- Did you get my PM)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going to pick these two up for my D90:

Nikon 50mm f/1.4D

:drool:

I am dying to get one of these, but have told myself that I need to dedicate some effort to actually learning basic photography before doing so. Please let me know how you like shooting with it and post links to some results if you can.

This is where I get confused a bit.

Why do you need this if you already have an 18-200 lens. Cant you just zoom to 50mm and get the same effect.

This is why we need a photography thread

(BB- Did you get my PM)

1) It's a prime lens and is "optimized" for 50mm

2) The 18mm - 200mm has a smaller aperture: f/3.5-5.6 compared to the f/1.4 which is wider and better for low light photography

You will typically find the larger aperture lens on the smaller focal points, the longer the lens the smaller the aperture, pickup the book Understanding Exposure and it will help understand the basic concepts better.

from wiki:

A prime lens of a given focal length is less versatile than a zoom whose range includes that focal length, but is often of superior optical quality, lighter weight, smaller bulk and lower cost. In comparison with a zoom lens, a prime lens has fewer moving parts and optimization for one particular focal length. With a less complicated lens formula they suffer from fewer problems related to chromatic aberration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going to pick these two up for my D90:

Nikon 50mm f/1.4D

:drool:

I am dying to get one of these, but have told myself that I need to dedicate some effort to actually learning basic photography before doing so. Please let me know how you like shooting with it and post links to some results if you can.

This is where I get confused a bit.

Why do you need this if you already have an 18-200 lens. Cant you just zoom to 50mm and get the same effect.

This is why we need a photography thread

(BB- Did you get my PM)

1) It's a prime lens and is "optimized" for 50mm

2) The 18mm - 200mm has a smaller aperture: f/3.5-5.6 compared to the f/1.4 which is wider and better for low light photography

You will typically find the larger aperture lens on the smaller focal points, the longer the lens the smaller the aperture, pickup the book Understanding Exposure and it will help understand the basic concepts better.

from wiki:

A prime lens of a given focal length is less versatile than a zoom whose range includes that focal length, but is often of superior optical quality, lighter weight, smaller bulk and lower cost. In comparison with a zoom lens, a prime lens has fewer moving parts and optimization for one particular focal length. With a less complicated lens formula they suffer from fewer problems related to chromatic aberration.

The 1.4 aperture allows for faster shutter speeds than the 3.5 and also provides a blurry background.

That lens will also be sharper than the zoom at the same focal length.

In general, as the zoom ratio increases (200/18=11), the photo quality decreases. That is why people get 2 lenses (17-55 and 70-200 in my case) to cover the same focal range. The inconvenience of switching lenses is made up for in image quality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going to pick these two up for my D90:

Nikon 50mm f/1.4D

:drool:

I am dying to get one of these, but have told myself that I need to dedicate some effort to actually learning basic photography before doing so. Please let me know how you like shooting with it and post links to some results if you can.

This is where I get confused a bit.

Why do you need this if you already have an 18-200 lens. Cant you just zoom to 50mm and get the same effect.

This is why we need a photography thread

(BB- Did you get my PM)

The difference in picture quality is enormous. When you have a camera that has a 10x zoom lens, there is trade-off for convenience and quality. The fixed lens tend to be sharper and faster and contain less distortion. The f/1.4 means it is a lot faster to catch action pictures or images in low light situations. Edited by jon_mx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going to pick these two up for my D90:

Nikon 50mm f/1.4D

:drool:

I am dying to get one of these, but have told myself that I need to dedicate some effort to actually learning basic photography before doing so. Please let me know how you like shooting with it and post links to some results if you can.

This is where I get confused a bit.

Why do you need this if you already have an 18-200 lens. Cant you just zoom to 50mm and get the same effect.

This is why we need a photography thread

(BB- Did you get my PM)

The 50mm 1.4 lens is faster. It's also better in low light. Trust me, once you get a camera (and I recommend the Nikon), you'll be wanting to experiment - if funds allow, you'll add a lens a year.

The 18-200 is a fantastic lens, but it's not the fastest lens out there, nor is it the best in low light. In addition, other lenses do the blurred background better, etc. But, the 18-200 is the lens when it comes to an all-purpose walking around "I'm on vacation and don't want to change lenses all day" lens. I love mine. But I also have a 70-300 for more zoom power, and I just got the 50mm 1.4, which I love.

I have a D80, which the D90 replaced. The D80 has a little LCD screen on top that is astonishingly helpful (displays all kinds of info). I'm pretty sure the D90 does too - that little screen, to me, is worth the few extra hundred.

You'll have this camera for years. Buy the best one you can reasonably afford. If that's the Canon, nothing wrong with that. But if you can afford the D90, get that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is the 50mm the recommended prime lens, for the most part? So far I only have zoom lenses. Would this be the fixed lens I'd want to start with for taking pictures (primarily) of my little boy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think the XSi level camera would be more friendly to a new user and once you mastered that moving up to a more professional level camera like the D90. The downside being, the XSi lenses will not even work with canon's full frame cameras and of course not Nikon's cameras. But the lenses and cameras seem to have good resale value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going to pick these two up for my D90:

Nikon 50mm f/1.4D

:drool:

I am dying to get one of these, but have told myself that I need to dedicate some effort to actually learning basic photography before doing so. Please let me know how you like shooting with it and post links to some results if you can.

From the first night with it. Takes a little getting used to, but I really love how this shot came out. I can't do this soft effect with my 18-200 (etc)

my cat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think the XSi level camera would be more friendly to a new user and once you mastered that moving up to a more professional level camera like the D90. The downside being, the XSi lenses will not even work with canon's full frame cameras and of course not Nikon's cameras. But the lenses and cameras seem to have good resale value.

I don't consider a D90 a professional level camera at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think the XSi level camera would be more friendly to a new user and once you mastered that moving up to a more professional level camera like the D90. The downside being, the XSi lenses will not even work with canon's full frame cameras and of course not Nikon's cameras. But the lenses and cameras seem to have good resale value.

I don't consider a D90 a professional level camera at all.
:thumbup:I think it would be considered top-end of the entry level DSLR's - but still an entry-level DSLR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going to pick these two up for my D90:

Nikon 50mm f/1.4D

:drool:

I am dying to get one of these, but have told myself that I need to dedicate some effort to actually learning basic photography before doing so. Please let me know how you like shooting with it and post links to some results if you can.

From the first night with it. Takes a little getting used to, but I really love how this shot came out. I can't do this soft effect with my 18-200 (etc)

my cat

Nice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think the XSi level camera would be more friendly to a new user and once you mastered that moving up to a more professional level camera like the D90. The downside being, the XSi lenses will not even work with canon's full frame cameras and of course not Nikon's cameras. But the lenses and cameras seem to have good resale value.

Disagree here. The D90 will have all the "automatic" modes, allowing one to just point and shoot like they would any other digital camera. It's fine for a beginner. My opinion is, if you are going to spend $500+ on a camera, just get the best one you can reasonably afford. This isn't a home gym or something where you'll need to see if you'll use it - never met anyone who didn't use their camera. Thus, it makes no sense to buy, say, a $500-$600 "starter" camera, unless that's your absolute drop dead budget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think the XSi level camera would be more friendly to a new user and once you mastered that moving up to a more professional level camera like the D90. The downside being, the XSi lenses will not even work with canon's full frame cameras and of course not Nikon's cameras. But the lenses and cameras seem to have good resale value.

I don't consider a D90 a professional level camera at all.
It's not. But it is "up there" in terms of someone who doesn't shoot pictures for a living.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry that I have so many questions. All answers have been appreciated.

Why do you need software for your pictures. Isnt altering the picture thru software defeating the purpose

My wife green lighted me for the camera. Only thing I am thinking about right now is whether to get a deal on a 70-300 lens (with no interest for 12 months if paid off), or to just get the body and the 18-200 lens. I have PMed a few and they have given good feedback. Just need to decide now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is the 50mm the recommended prime lens, for the most part? So far I only have zoom lenses. Would this be the fixed lens I'd want to start with for taking pictures (primarily) of my little boy?

For my purposes with little kids, I use a 50mm f/1.8 in the winter time when shooting indoors. The benefit is that I can usually get clear pictures without using a flash. For example, with this lens I can get pictures with shutter speeds of 1/60 to 1/100 second. If I tried to do this with a zoom lens, I'd probably only get 1/10 or 1/15 second and the picture would be really blurry.

For outdoor use, I like using the 18-200 as the kids aren't as close to me and there's enough light that I'm always getting good shutter speeds.

I went with this lens as it's the number one selling Canon lens on Amazon. I'm sure the f/1.4 version is better, but it was also $200 more and since I'm new to this, I went with the cheaper more popular one. I'm very happy with the results. Great bang for buck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is the 50mm the recommended prime lens, for the most part? So far I only have zoom lenses. Would this be the fixed lens I'd want to start with for taking pictures (primarily) of my little boy?

For my purposes with little kids, I use a 50mm f/1.8 in the winter time when shooting indoors. The benefit is that I can usually get clear pictures without using a flash. For example, with this lens I can get pictures with shutter speeds of 1/60 to 1/100 second. If I tried to do this with a zoom lens, I'd probably only get 1/10 or 1/15 second and the picture would be really blurry.

For outdoor use, I like using the 18-200 as the kids aren't as close to me and there's enough light that I'm always getting good shutter speeds.

I went with this lens as it's the number one selling Canon lens on Amazon. I'm sure the f/1.4 version is better, but it was also $200 more and since I'm new to this, I went with the cheaper more popular one. I'm very happy with the results. Great bang for buck.

Was just looking at that lense yesterday (after getting the new bag...my first thought was to find stuff to fill it up)

That lense might be my anniversary present this summer...and a flash for Christmas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is the 50mm the recommended prime lens, for the most part? So far I only have zoom lenses. Would this be the fixed lens I'd want to start with for taking pictures (primarily) of my little boy?

Read this:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/5014af.htm (if you have a Nikon w/o autofocus motor (i.e. D5000) I think you need to pay extra for the "G" version)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry that I have so many questions. All answers have been appreciated.

Why do you need software for your pictures. Isnt altering the picture thru software defeating the purpose

My wife green lighted me for the camera. Only thing I am thinking about right now is whether to get a deal on a 70-300 lens (with no interest for 12 months if paid off), or to just get the body and the 18-200 lens. I have PMed a few and they have given good feedback. Just need to decide now.

Kind of, but in the end, it's the result that matters. What happens if you have a great family picture but it happened to be on a cloudy day? Tweaking the saturation up will result in a better picture and no one will really care.

I use Picasa for the majority of my light editing - it's free and a great organizer. I recently got Photoshop Elements 8 (OEM version for $40 - can't beat it). I use this for more advanced stuff; for instance if I want to make one part of the picture 'pop' more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry that I have so many questions. All answers have been appreciated. Why do you need software for your pictures. Isnt altering the picture thru software defeating the purposeMy wife green lighted me for the camera. Only thing I am thinking about right now is whether to get a deal on a 70-300 lens (with no interest for 12 months if paid off), or to just get the body and the 18-200 lens. I have PMed a few and they have given good feedback. Just need to decide now.

No, virtually all professional photographers alter their pictures. You can crop them to make them the proper shape or cut out something you don't want in the picture. You can darken them or lighten them to get the right look. You can take out blemishes on faces or remove red-eye. You can combine images into one image. You can sharpen the picture or make it blurry. You can add effects. I just use a old version of paint shop pro because it is simple and I can do most things I want to, but most professionals use adobe photoshop. That is the great thing about digital photography, if something is not right with how you framed the picture or the lighting or something, you can always improve it through software. But the better your original image is, the better your final result. You can't do everything with software. Edited by jon_mx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry that I have so many questions. All answers have been appreciated.

Why do you need software for your pictures. Isnt altering the picture thru software defeating the purpose

My wife green lighted me for the camera. Only thing I am thinking about right now is whether to get a deal on a 70-300 lens (with no interest for 12 months if paid off), or to just get the body and the 18-200 lens. I have PMed a few and they have given good feedback. Just need to decide now.

This is how I feel - I really can't be bothered enhancing pics through software.

I would be all over the body / 18-200. The 70-300 is nice, but it's limiting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is the 50mm the recommended prime lens, for the most part? So far I only have zoom lenses. Would this be the fixed lens I'd want to start with for taking pictures (primarily) of my little boy?

Read this:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/5014af.htm (if you have a Nikon w/o autofocus motor (i.e. D5000) I think you need to pay extra for the "G" version)

Yeah, I have a D50. I wasn't expecting the lens to be quite that expensive. $440 at Amazon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry that I have so many questions. All answers have been appreciated.

Why do you need software for your pictures. Isnt altering the picture thru software defeating the purpose

My wife green lighted me for the camera. Only thing I am thinking about right now is whether to get a deal on a 70-300 lens (with no interest for 12 months if paid off), or to just get the body and the 18-200 lens. I have PMed a few and they have given good feedback. Just need to decide now.

This is how I feel - I really can't be bothered enhancing pics through software.

I would be all over the body / 18-200. The 70-300 is nice, but it's limiting.

Some of us aren't always good enough to get the perfect exposure, etc. I shoot in raw and do what I need to do to enhance the picture after the fact. If some consider that "cheating" so be it. I'm only concerned with the final result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not used any software yet but will find some to do "face swaps" on my kids.

Its hard getting bot of them smiling at the same time...or looking at you...or having eyes open.

Take several shots...get one good of each and hope you can match it all up for one good picture of them together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry that I have so many questions. All answers have been appreciated.

Why do you need software for your pictures. Isnt altering the picture thru software defeating the purpose

My wife green lighted me for the camera. Only thing I am thinking about right now is whether to get a deal on a 70-300 lens (with no interest for 12 months if paid off), or to just get the body and the 18-200 lens. I have PMed a few and they have given good feedback. Just need to decide now.

This is how I feel - I really can't be bothered enhancing pics through software.

I would be all over the body / 18-200. The 70-300 is nice, but it's limiting.

Some of us aren't always good enough to get the perfect exposure, etc. I shoot in raw and do what I need to do to enhance the picture after the fact. If some consider that "cheating" so be it. I'm only concerned with the final result.
I agree - it's a personal preference. To be honest, it's more a time thing than anything with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard great things about GIMP for beginner editing. First, it is free!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry that I have so many questions. All answers have been appreciated.

Why do you need software for your pictures. Isnt altering the picture thru software defeating the purpose

My wife green lighted me for the camera. Only thing I am thinking about right now is whether to get a deal on a 70-300 lens (with no interest for 12 months if paid off), or to just get the body and the 18-200 lens. I have PMed a few and they have given good feedback. Just need to decide now.

This is how I feel - I really can't be bothered enhancing pics through software.

I would be all over the body / 18-200. The 70-300 is nice, but it's limiting.

Some of us aren't always good enough to get the perfect exposure, etc. I shoot in raw and do what I need to do to enhance the picture after the fact. If some consider that "cheating" so be it. I'm only concerned with the final result.
This is a great picture. What did you do (if anything) to enhance it.

ETA: This one is great too

Edited by AcerFC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry that I have so many questions. All answers have been appreciated.

Why do you need software for your pictures. Isnt altering the picture thru software defeating the purpose

My wife green lighted me for the camera. Only thing I am thinking about right now is whether to get a deal on a 70-300 lens (with no interest for 12 months if paid off), or to just get the body and the 18-200 lens. I have PMed a few and they have given good feedback. Just need to decide now.

This is how I feel - I really can't be bothered enhancing pics through software.

I would be all over the body / 18-200. The 70-300 is nice, but it's limiting.

Some of us aren't always good enough to get the perfect exposure, etc. I shoot in raw and do what I need to do to enhance the picture after the fact. If some consider that "cheating" so be it. I'm only concerned with the final result.
This is a great picture. What did you do (if anything) to enhance it.

ETA: This one is great too

Thanks.

On the butterfly picture I didn't change a thing.

On the foggy morning picture I tweaked the shadows and the saturation just a bit.

I'm not saying that I make major software alterations to every shot I take, but I certainly like to have that option. On indoor shots I tend to play around with curves on most of my shots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is the 50mm the recommended prime lens, for the most part? So far I only have zoom lenses. Would this be the fixed lens I'd want to start with for taking pictures (primarily) of my little boy?

Read this:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/5014af.htm (if you have a Nikon w/o autofocus motor (i.e. D5000) I think you need to pay extra for the "G" version)

Yeah, I have a D50. I wasn't expecting the lens to be quite that expensive. $440 at Amazon.
Would I notice that big of a difference between the Nikon 50mm 1.4 and the 50mm 1.8?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry that I have so many questions. All answers have been appreciated.

Why do you need software for your pictures. Isnt altering the picture thru software defeating the purpose

My wife green lighted me for the camera. Only thing I am thinking about right now is whether to get a deal on a 70-300 lens (with no interest for 12 months if paid off), or to just get the body and the 18-200 lens. I have PMed a few and they have given good feedback. Just need to decide now.

This is how I feel - I really can't be bothered enhancing pics through software.

I would be all over the body / 18-200. The 70-300 is nice, but it's limiting.

Some of us aren't always good enough to get the perfect exposure, etc. I shoot in raw and do what I need to do to enhance the picture after the fact. If some consider that "cheating" so be it. I'm only concerned with the final result.
This is a great picture. What did you do (if anything) to enhance it.

ETA: This one is great too

Say you needed a tall rectangle image for a book or a picture frame. Or you don't want all the background and you just want a large picture of the butterfly. You can crop out most of the background and zoom in on the butterfly. But fortunately, the colors look dead on and the exposure very good. But what if your camera settings were not ideal and the butterfly flew away? Maybe the white balance was off and you need to adjust it, or the exposure? You could fix it if you had too. Even professionals might choose the wrong settings or did not have time to adjust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.