appus, to get the better background blur your subject has to be as far as possible from the background and you are at maximum focal length. Better blur you get as the subject is closer to the lens. I am able to get that using my 18~105 lens.
The DSLR Information Thread
- Thread Starter P3T3R
- Start date
Exactly. That is what I was trying to say
![[embarass]](https://www.theautomotiveindia.com/forums/images/smilies/Embarass.gif "Embarass [embarass]")
. What i meant is , In 50mm, you can blur even part of subject itself. I got the best output in 70-300 (when outdoor) and 50mm indoor
Got this from desktop. One of her photo taken with 50mm few months back (Not the best one).
appus, your 'Princes' looks beautiful!
appus, the next picture you take, make sure the eyes are in sharp focus. You should be able to count the eyelashes. Try taking the photo when she is in a relaxed state and set your camera to high speed continuous shooting mode. (if possible, use a tripod)
appus, the next picture you take, make sure the eyes are in sharp focus. You should be able to count the eyelashes. Try taking the photo when she is in a relaxed state and set your camera to high speed continuous shooting mode. (if possible, use a tripod)
Thanks HR. She has become more naughty & she will jump on to my hands the moment she sees me.
The above one was not sharp as her Grandma was rocking her up & down. I took it when in motion.
I will try as per your suggestion. Thanks again.
The above one was not sharp as her Grandma was rocking her up & down. I took it when in motion.
I will try as per your suggestion. Thanks again.
@edios. Hope you have taken my post in the right spirit. What have you finally decided on?
BTW,was behind this fellow for quite some time today with my D3100.
Heavily cropped, doesn’t lose out much on the “crispness” yet. Having said, that shooting BIF will be “more fun” with say a D7100, definitely. For me, D7100 is the only body which I think worth an upgrade from my humble D3100 in the DX category.
EDIT
Check out another picture of mine here shot with D3100
BTW,was behind this fellow for quite some time today with my D3100.
Heavily cropped, doesn’t lose out much on the “crispness” yet. Having said, that shooting BIF will be “more fun” with say a D7100, definitely. For me, D7100 is the only body which I think worth an upgrade from my humble D3100 in the DX category.
EDIT
Check out another picture of mine here shot with D3100
Last edited:
Bro, I decided to get the D5200 body only. Don't know what lens to get. Will think after getting it.
Today again, I was really upset on 1100D. Recently, I took a couple of pics while I was on a tour. Those looked good on that tiny screen. But looks awful on big screens. Landscapes are okay.
Today again, I was really upset on 1100D. Recently, I took a couple of pics while I was on a tour. Those looked good on that tiny screen. But looks awful on big screens. Landscapes are okay.
edios. If you have sufficient budget, I would advice the tamron 17-50 its a fast and sharp lens. Around 40k or else go with the 18-55m for normal shots and get a prime lens either 35mm and 50mm.
Bokeh/Background blur also has to do with the aperture wide open gives u a shallow depth with the most background blur. Lenses with 1.4 or 1.8 apertures give the most bokeh.
Bokeh/Background blur also has to do with the aperture wide open gives u a shallow depth with the most background blur. Lenses with 1.4 or 1.8 apertures give the most bokeh.
Thank you for the advice/suggestion.
I don't have the budget to get the 17-50 lens you suggested. And not the 18-55 either. Prime lens, I guess I must go for one, since it is cheap. Could you please tell me which one to go for? 35mm or 50mm? G or D?
Portraits are really poor with the 1100D. Sometimes, when the light condition are perfect, I can get a pretty good one. At times, I feel the cheaper P&Ss are better for portraits than my 1100D.
I'll get the body only after 2-3 weeks, so have enough time to decide with the accessories.
Hoping to get your reply.
@Manojodungat and Appus,
Thank you so much for your help! I never knew lenses were of that great significance. I always thought better bodies = better images. Yes, it is true to an extent. I got to know that D7100 and D600/610 produces almost the same images. More cost of the FX format only.
I don't have the budget to get the 17-50 lens you suggested. And not the 18-55 either. Prime lens, I guess I must go for one, since it is cheap. Could you please tell me which one to go for? 35mm or 50mm? G or D?
Portraits are really poor with the 1100D. Sometimes, when the light condition are perfect, I can get a pretty good one. At times, I feel the cheaper P&Ss are better for portraits than my 1100D.
I'll get the body only after 2-3 weeks, so have enough time to decide with the accessories.
Hoping to get your reply.
@Manojodungat and Appus,
Thank you so much for your help! I never knew lenses were of that great significance. I always thought better bodies = better images. Yes, it is true to an extent. I got to know that D7100 and D600/610 produces almost the same images. More cost of the FX format only.
Last edited:
You seem to have finalised on D5200.
As said already, D5200 doesn’t have a built in motor = Cheaper “D” lenses wouldn’t autofocus. I am not sure how comfortable you are shooting manually, I would suggest you to go for a “G” either 35mm or 50mm , both of which are excellent.
As said already, D5200 doesn’t have a built in motor = Cheaper “D” lenses wouldn’t autofocus. I am not sure how comfortable you are shooting manually, I would suggest you to go for a “G” either 35mm or 50mm , both of which are excellent.
- What actually you want to shoot?
- What actually is your budget for body+lens ?
Yes, I'm aware that D5200 doesn't have a built-in motor. This was one of the reason why I was considering the D7000. Since 7 months, I shoot manually only, because there is some problem with the autofocus of the lens (I've said this before). And for every close-ups, I never use AF.
One more thing, if I don't get the 70-300mm ED cleaned (I'm worried if the fungus has already eaten the coating), there is a great chance that I'll be getting 50-200mm (my father's decision) because it is an all in one lens (considering that we need a zoom lens).
I capture whatever is in front of my house or whatever that pleases my eyes (I'm a great fan of DSLRs because of this reason, be it anything, the object will look great on the photo).
Need to learn light photography.
Some samples below (not the best photos, just to show what I take).
One more thing, if I don't get the 70-300mm ED cleaned (I'm worried if the fungus has already eaten the coating), there is a great chance that I'll be getting 50-200mm (my father's decision) because it is an all in one lens (considering that we need a zoom lens).
I capture whatever is in front of my house or whatever that pleases my eyes (I'm a great fan of DSLRs because of this reason, be it anything, the object will look great on the photo).
Need to learn light photography.
Some samples below (not the best photos, just to show what I take).
Last edited by a moderator:
Not really and as said earlier, the image quality depends on many factors, most of them are dependent on the person not the DSLR body, behind the lens. In most cases, one is limited by his skill/talent rather than the capability/ potential of a camera at hand, which means the output will be the same, be it from a 600D or a D7100. You don’t have to look elsewhere[outside TAI] to realize what I am talking about.
At the hands of a skilled person who can exploit what a camera is capable of, a D7100 with
Not necessary again. These are the statements that make one get confused about you as a photographer. A DSLR = good photo is NOT correct. Please stop reading and go out and keep shooting.
Are too tiny to be able to make out anything relevant. After seeing these and the pictures posted earlier, I would suggest you to rent a D5200/D7000 or at least test shoot back to back "your kind of pictures" at a Nikon store along with your 1100D to compare and evaluate on the output on a bigger screen.
One more picture with my basic D3100.
P.S: Between D5200 and D7000, I would stretch my budget a bit and get a D7000 any day.
At the hands of a skilled person who can exploit what a camera is capable of, a D7100 with
- No Low pass filter
- Larger Sensor with more mega-pixels
- More AF-points
- Greater shooting speed
- Better ISO range [only to name a few]
Not necessary again. These are the statements that make one get confused about you as a photographer. A DSLR = good photo is NOT correct. Please stop reading and go out and keep shooting.
Are too tiny to be able to make out anything relevant. After seeing these and the pictures posted earlier, I would suggest you to rent a D5200/D7000 or at least test shoot back to back "your kind of pictures" at a Nikon store along with your 1100D to compare and evaluate on the output on a bigger screen.
One more picture with my basic D3100.
P.S: Between D5200 and D7000, I would stretch my budget a bit and get a D7000 any day.
Last edited:
both 50mm and 35mm are good lenses, however i end up using my 35mm more often then i use the 50mm especially when i am indoors i hate going back just to fit the subject in, if i want a tighter frame i use the 1/3 crop option and shoot.
@ edios
I do not recommend D3xxx or D5xxx series, not because of their picture quality. (and I would not write off even the D3100 just by the quality of photographs seen here. Those would have been useable if they were framed and focused properly.)
The issue with these cameras are not their picture quality. They feel more like a toy and do not have the features/controls available in high-end crop sensor cameras. Last month, while visiting Mysore Zoo, a couple asked me to take their picture with their D5200. Frankly I felt funny just holding that camera. Just didn't feel right in my hands.
So my recommendations would be D7100, D7000 or D90 in that order. The advantages I feel in D7100 are, more mp (better for cropping as all my pictures have to be heavily cropped), the number of auto focus points, (most of the times I use auto focus) and the dual memory card option. It also has a better metering system among other things.
Having said that, the biggest disadvantage of D7100 is it speed with respect to continuous shooting. D90 is much faster than D7100 in that department. So, if your type of photography involves high speed continuous shooting, D7000 is a better bet.
Here are some of the photos taken with a D90 and D7100. While comparing the quality of photos, we will have to take into account the conditions under which the photos were taken. A photo taken with a D90 can certainly look better that a photo taken with a full frame D800 in different conditions.
So, the idea is to frame your subject properly and focus at the right spot to get a sharp image every time you shoot with whatever camera you have. And for shooting different types of photography (low light/indoor, portrait, landscapes, Macro, wildlife, etc), you will need to invest on specific lens to get the job done.
Taken with my D90 and kit lens 18-105mm, this is our favorite photo for that particular trip.
The following pictures were taken with my D90 and the 70-300mm combination. That the pictures are sharp and clear are due to favorable conditions.
D7100 and the 70-300mm lens
I do not recommend D3xxx or D5xxx series, not because of their picture quality. (and I would not write off even the D3100 just by the quality of photographs seen here. Those would have been useable if they were framed and focused properly.)
The issue with these cameras are not their picture quality. They feel more like a toy and do not have the features/controls available in high-end crop sensor cameras. Last month, while visiting Mysore Zoo, a couple asked me to take their picture with their D5200. Frankly I felt funny just holding that camera. Just didn't feel right in my hands.
So my recommendations would be D7100, D7000 or D90 in that order. The advantages I feel in D7100 are, more mp (better for cropping as all my pictures have to be heavily cropped), the number of auto focus points, (most of the times I use auto focus) and the dual memory card option. It also has a better metering system among other things.
Having said that, the biggest disadvantage of D7100 is it speed with respect to continuous shooting. D90 is much faster than D7100 in that department. So, if your type of photography involves high speed continuous shooting, D7000 is a better bet.
Here are some of the photos taken with a D90 and D7100. While comparing the quality of photos, we will have to take into account the conditions under which the photos were taken. A photo taken with a D90 can certainly look better that a photo taken with a full frame D800 in different conditions.
So, the idea is to frame your subject properly and focus at the right spot to get a sharp image every time you shoot with whatever camera you have. And for shooting different types of photography (low light/indoor, portrait, landscapes, Macro, wildlife, etc), you will need to invest on specific lens to get the job done.
Taken with my D90 and kit lens 18-105mm, this is our favorite photo for that particular trip.
The following pictures were taken with my D90 and the 70-300mm combination. That the pictures are sharp and clear are due to favorable conditions.
D7100 and the 70-300mm lens
My D3100 has only 11 focus points and are good enough for me as I decide what I want to focus not the camera. Those who leave the camera to focus, sometimes focus points as many as 51[ as in a D7100] won’t be enough, nothing wrong though.
D90 and @Jayadev:
Only to know what photography really is and it’s shame that I can’t get to learn anymore from his masterpieces here, these days. There is nothing wrong in accepting what you are and you will only grow from there.
One way to learn DSLR photography is through keen observation. Some quality pictures posted on the “best photography” thread way back.
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
Off late, I happened to see quite a lot of over-sharpened images posted, hence thought of sharing my experience here. Earlier, even I used to do it until I realized it does more harm than good.
A softness in a picture taken using a decent camera could be due to poor focus/out of focus or camera shake/ movement blur. Getting the right focus = sharp pictures while shooting wildlife is a challenge, especially shooting hand held with long zoom lenses but fun. Birds land and take off in a flash mostly, unless you have hidden yourself away from them cleverly, still being close enough with your camera stabilized on a Tripod. If you are shooting with a slow Body, it certainly takes away the fun part, to some extent.
“RAW” images tend be on a softer side and I always will have to sharpen my images a bit on LR to get whatever details captured. But the biggest mistake one makes is when he over-sharpens his image, for whatever reasons he has, which can do more harm than good.
Over-sharpened images simply ruin an image and can easily be identified. To identify over-sharpening, look for white lines along the edges of objects.
An over-sharpened image, for illustration.
The whitened edges have become more pronounced and the leaves/trees look ‘unnatural’ and ugly. My point is, get the focus, exposure right so that you don’t to pull the sharpening tool to its limit, be it from a D800 or D7100 or toys like D3100 or D5200.
This is what I do while sharpening my RAW images,
Could capture this fellow in action in a short time recently with my D3100. Just landed for a while, picked something and took off.
D90 and @Jayadev:
Only to know what photography really is and it’s shame that I can’t get to learn anymore from his masterpieces here, these days. There is nothing wrong in accepting what you are and you will only grow from there.
One way to learn DSLR photography is through keen observation. Some quality pictures posted on the “best photography” thread way back.
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
Over-sharpening pictures !- A lesson learned
Off late, I happened to see quite a lot of over-sharpened images posted, hence thought of sharing my experience here. Earlier, even I used to do it until I realized it does more harm than good.
A softness in a picture taken using a decent camera could be due to poor focus/out of focus or camera shake/ movement blur. Getting the right focus = sharp pictures while shooting wildlife is a challenge, especially shooting hand held with long zoom lenses but fun. Birds land and take off in a flash mostly, unless you have hidden yourself away from them cleverly, still being close enough with your camera stabilized on a Tripod. If you are shooting with a slow Body, it certainly takes away the fun part, to some extent.
“RAW” images tend be on a softer side and I always will have to sharpen my images a bit on LR to get whatever details captured. But the biggest mistake one makes is when he over-sharpens his image, for whatever reasons he has, which can do more harm than good.
Over-sharpened images simply ruin an image and can easily be identified. To identify over-sharpening, look for white lines along the edges of objects.
An over-sharpened image, for illustration.
The whitened edges have become more pronounced and the leaves/trees look ‘unnatural’ and ugly. My point is, get the focus, exposure right so that you don’t to pull the sharpening tool to its limit, be it from a D800 or D7100 or toys like D3100 or D5200.
This is what I do while sharpening my RAW images,
- Set the “radius” to minimum in most cases [0.5 on LR]
- Set the “amount” from say 60% and above, even can go beyond 110% with no damage done
- Set the “Detail” to “close to maximum or even 100%” with the above set parameters.
- Adjust “masking” a bit to lower the grains or neautralise any over-sharpened edges.
Could capture this fellow in action in a short time recently with my D3100. Just landed for a while, picked something and took off.
Last edited:
@edios
Nikon D90 DSLR Camera Rs.36933 Price in India - Buy Nikon D90 DSLR Camera Black Online - Nikon: Flipkart.com 36933 for a d90 body !
I am nowhere qualified to comment on above posts. (About sharpening etc).
I too experienced what HR said. When I went to Lepakshi, some guys came and gave their camera d3xxx red color and I felt like so light / plastic kind of feel. I had to change the settings by looking at the big screen (as i was using for first time). They were eyeing on my d7000 all the time. (I am sure they would have taken great photos in that too). They were taking all in Automode :)
EDIT:
I actually wanted to see all pro guys photos as just RAW converted to JPG (before and after editing). No lightroom / no Photoshop etc.
We will get an idea how much enhancing we can achieve from original to the final image. I think Indian had posted one image long back (some sky). Can you put the original photos without processing of these above images (full size without cropping). It will benefit atleast me in understanding the 'necessity' of lightroom/Photoshop/tools
Nikon D90 DSLR Camera Rs.36933 Price in India - Buy Nikon D90 DSLR Camera Black Online - Nikon: Flipkart.com 36933 for a d90 body !
I am nowhere qualified to comment on above posts. (About sharpening etc).
I too experienced what HR said. When I went to Lepakshi, some guys came and gave their camera d3xxx red color and I felt like so light / plastic kind of feel. I had to change the settings by looking at the big screen (as i was using for first time). They were eyeing on my d7000 all the time. (I am sure they would have taken great photos in that too). They were taking all in Automode :)
EDIT:
I actually wanted to see all pro guys photos as just RAW converted to JPG (before and after editing). No lightroom / no Photoshop etc.
We will get an idea how much enhancing we can achieve from original to the final image. I think Indian had posted one image long back (some sky). Can you put the original photos without processing of these above images (full size without cropping). It will benefit atleast me in understanding the 'necessity' of lightroom/Photoshop/tools
Last edited: