Need suggestions on SLR digital hardware for kids just getting into the game

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by NotMe, Nov 9, 2009.

  1. Hello, slime!
    Shot by a 700D, a 80-400mm and a tripod with Wimberley head,
    around 2:30 in near full sunlight (except for a little shade
    by the trees). Curves adjusted to make the white come out
    better before the trees.

    Image stolen by the slime (who doesn't own a camera at all)
    from a real, good photographer (not me).

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Nov 10, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  2. Even f/1.0 (for Canon DSLRs), but that was a "look, we can build
    such a lens with our (then new) EF-bayonet", not a "this lens will
    make us money" project. Their current fastest 50mm lens is a f/1.2
    --- with film you needed every last bit of light, with digital,
    at least with DSLRs, you can increase the ISO setting without
    getting too much more noise. With film you always had film grain.

    And even a few f/0.95 were/are offered (for rangefinder cameras).

    There even were the 10 special purpose Zeiss f/0.7 'dark side of
    the moon' lenses (build and used for that purpose, and also for
    only-candlelight-lit scenes in "Barry Lyndon").

    The drawback of these ultra-fast lenses is that, wide open
    (i.e. when they are fast):
    - they are difficult to focus properly

    - the "plane" of sharpness (depth of field) is very very thin[1]
    (and gets thinner the closer you focus).
    Even with my f/1.4, wide open (at f/1.4) on a 100% view on the
    screen (that would approximately equal a 20x30 inch print in
    this case!), you can notice the base of an eyelash sharp and
    the tip being slightly soft. (this is not really noticable on
    smaller print sizes).

    I.e. if you or your subject move between focussing and shooting,
    the shot's gonna be somewhat out of focus.

    - vignetting --- the center is brighter than the corners.
    This is not so visible with crop DSLR cameras[2] using full-size
    lenses[3], and can be repaired in post-processing, at the cost
    of slightly higher noise in the corners.


    [1] how thin also depends on the print/display size and the
    viewing distance. From 3 meters away you won't notice a
    4x6 inch print being slightly soft, from 10 cm you'll notice
    everything on a 40x60 inch print.
    [2] DSLR cameras with a sensor substantially smaller than
    the 24x36mm area of 35mm film. Big sensors cost more.
    Common crop cameras have a crop factor of 1.5 (Nikon) or 1.6
    (Canon), and use only the center of the 35mm image --- the
    borders are not recorded. They need much smaller pixels[4]
    than their more expensive full sized bretheren for the same
    number of megapixels.
    Cropping brings with it that the viewing angle is smaller
    (i.e. it looks like a somewhat longer lens was used).
    And if you frame the same shot from the same position,
    the shorter lens needed with a crop camera brings a
    somewhat larger depth of field.
    [3] Lenses that work on a full frame camera, i.e. a common 35mm
    film still camera or a digital one with a 24x36mm sensor.
    [4] smaller pixels spell more noise. This is very visible with
    P&S cameras at higher ISO settings (alternatively, a noise
    supressing algorithm turns everything into a water colour
    painting), but doesn't trouble DSLR cameras except in (very)
    high ISO settings, due to their much larger pixels compared
    to P&S cameras.
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Nov 10, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  3. NotMe

    Ray Fischer Guest

    That works too, but gives you a wide angle. The tube gets you a
    longer, er, "lens".
    Ray Fischer, Nov 10, 2009
  4. What a compliment!

    Imagine that you believing a "lowly" 7 year-old P&S camera can produce
    equivalent images as those taken with so much expensive equipment. A $3,500
    DSLR plus the cost of all the required glass and accessories that you need
    to make that DSLR the least bit functional. All that, equal to the images
    from a P&S camera. You couldn't be a better spokesman for P&S cameras if
    you were hired to do so at great cost. But since you have the angle of the
    light wrong in the image for the time of day, then it means all your other
    assumptions are also all prone to error. But hey, what a nice thing to say
    about a photo coming from a 7 year-old P&S camera! That it can so easily
    compete with some of the best DSLR equipment available today because you
    can't tell the difference between the two. You have to even believe it was
    a stolen DSLR image because you are so astounded.

    Doesn't get better than that!

    Educating the Snapshooters, Nov 10, 2009

  5. Bob Larter's legal name: Lionel Lauer
    Home news-group, an actual group in the "troll-tracker" hierarchy:
    alt.kook.lionel-lauer (established on, or before, 2004)
    Registered Description: "the 'owner of several troll domains' needs a group where he'll stay on topic."


    "Results 1 - 10 of about 2,170 for group:alt.kook.lionel-lauer."
    Bob Larter is Lionel Lauer - Look it up., Nov 12, 2009
  6. NotMe

    Bob Larter Guest

    Indeed. How kind of him. ;^)
    Bob Larter, Nov 12, 2009
  7. NotMe

    Bob Larter Guest

    Bob Larter, Nov 12, 2009
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.