Photography Thread

Pross

masjer said:

Pross said:

Tested the night mode on my phone to the limit last night. Very thick cloud and no ambient light. It defaulted to around a 5 second exposure and no tripod so they're not as crisp as they could be or I would have been really pleased.

5 seconds without a tripod, you could be a surgeon with hands like that.
The weather is a bit on the grey side again. Come on sun, I haven't seen you in days.

I was holding two dogs on their leads at the time as well. I'm usually really shaky at the best of times.

The grey provided a nice contrast to the green shoots coming through on this random tree I saw jogging back from Colby Parkrun

rjsterry

The perspective needs straightening, but quite happy for a 3-second pause on the way to the station on Thursday.

masjer

Well someone had to.

Tashman

A few from Oxford in the past couple of days
e

Pross

Right bunch of punts

Pross

Tonight's issue was the moon was too bright. Was hoping to get some star shots. Think my ISO setting was too high as the pictures are a bit noisy when I lighten them.

pblakeney

Tashman said:

A few from Oxford in the past couple of days...

An explanation please? 🤔

Pross

pblakeney said:

Tashman said:

A few from Oxford in the past couple of days...

An explanation please? 🤔

Obvious isn't it? Seagull dropped as it was flying over.

There are some sad people about to do things like that with their house. I could easily see the one family on my street doing that.

pblakeney

Mad as....
Just my opinion.

masjer

A basking shark enjoying the sunshine, I reckon.

pblakeney

Anyway, taken yesterday with today in mind.

rjsterry

pblakeney said:

Tashman said:

A few from Oxford in the past couple of days...

An explanation please? 🤔

It's the Headington Shark. It has its own Wikipedia page and website.

pblakeney

rjsterry said:

pblakeney said:

Tashman said:

A few from Oxford in the past couple of days...

An explanation please? 🤔

It's the Headington Shark. It has its own Wikipedia page and website.

Thanks! Good to know the mindset behind something appearing ridiculous.

masjer

A bit cr@p weather again, so went to the woods

briantrumpet

Didn't have being knee-deep in snow on my bingo card. But I got away with shorts and a T-shirt all day.

Pross

The rain and cloud cleared giving me my first attempt at some astrophotography. Quite happy as I was trying to do it using my phone with a mini tripod, nothing to really mount it on and a 'viewfinder' that couldn't display what I was pointing at. 30" exposure and ISO of 50 and 100.

masjer

I can see the Plough.
I don't know anything about astrophotography, but wouldn't you be better increasing ISO?

pblakeney

masjer said:

I can see the Plough.
I don't know anything about astrophotography, but wouldn't you be better increasing ISO?

I'd agree, along with exposure compensation. What you really need though is to be in a dark skies area. Milford Sound is a bit too far for a day/night trip. 😉

It doesn't really show well on here though. 🤬
30 secs, f8, 18mm, ISO 6400, -2.3 EV.

Pross

masjer said:

I can see the Plough.
I don't know anything about astrophotography, but wouldn't you be better increasing ISO?

The stuff I read says to have it as low as you can whilst getting the brightness you want as the stars are more clear so with the full moon coming out of the clouds behind me (bottom image) or behind the clouds in front of me (top image) and the long exposure it seemed to give decent results.

My moon shots the previous night were much higher ISO which I think is why they are so fuzzy but this is all new to me so based on some quick internet reading and happy to learn from people who have more experience. I've always been a point and click at something I like the look of (with a bit of thought on trying to frame the subject when possible) before this thread inspired me to look into the technical side a bit.

Pross

Should definitely have used a high ISO to get an image in the viewfinder when setting up though although it was quite old school waiting to see what came out without seeing it first!

masjer

Pross is in Pembrokeshire at present. You do get to see the Milky Way pretty clearly on a clear night. It's the clear night that can be the problem, though.

Pross

pblakeney said:

masjer said:

I can see the Plough.
I don't know anything about astrophotography, but wouldn't you be better increasing ISO?

I'd agree, along with exposure compensation. What you really need though is to be in a dark skies area. Milford Sound is a bit too far for a day/night trip. 😉

It doesn't really show well on here though. 🤬
30 secs, f8, 18mm, ISO 6400, -2.3 EV.

Settings limited with just a phone, especially limited on aperture settings.

pblakeney

Pross said:

Settings limited with just a phone, especially limited on aperture settings.

I appreciate that, only trying to point in the right direction. I do try to keep a dignified silence when people tell me their phone can take pictures as good as my camera.

Pross

pblakeney said:

Pross said:

Settings limited with just a phone, especially limited on aperture settings.

I appreciate that, only trying to point in the right direction. I do try to keep a dignified silence when people tell me their phone can take pictures as good as my camera.

Yep, and it's appreciated as are all the other tips on here. It is something I've really started enjoying lately with this thread being the main inspiration.

Phone probably outperforms my capabilities although depth seems to be the thing it struggles with almond with technical issues like longer exposures in good light where physical filters would come into play on an SLR. Was hoping to bring my wife's DSLR down but couldn't find it. Tempted to ask people to give me money for a DSLR or mirrorless for my 50th.

Anyway, brightened up this afternoon and got some nice beach shots. Self-indulgent post though as I managed to allow my boy off for his first proper off the lead play on the beach as there were acres of empty sand.

Pross

Not sure how this will come out on here but I'd never seen starfish "footprints" in the sand before!

pblakeney

FWIW if on a budget or simply don't want to waste money on a passing fad 2nd hand DSLRs will be really cheap soon, if not already, as everyone moves to mirrorless (like myself). I'd go for a basic camera and a good lens. Tricky bit is deciding which lens.

Pross

pblakeney

Going by these I'd suggest a wide angle zoom and a telephoto zoom or macro as your choice of lenses. FWIW although I have fast primes for specific applications and a mid range zoom my most used lenses are 18-35 and 70-300. YMMV though.

Pross

pblakeney said:

Going by these I'd suggest a wide angle zoom and a telephoto zoom or macro as your choice of lenses. FWIW although I have fast primes for specific applications and a mid range zoom my most used lenses are 18-35 and 70-300. YMMV though.

I'm pretty sure that is the standard lens that came with the wife's Canon I bought her about 15 years ago and then the zoom lens I got her the following Christmas. She was always the photographer out of us but mainly did portraits of the kids and wedding photos for friends who were on a budget. I just need to remember where we put it all when we had building work done!

briantrumpet

pblakeney said:

Going by these I'd suggest a wide angle zoom and a telephoto zoom or macro as your choice of lenses. FWIW although I have fast primes for specific applications and a mid range zoom my most used lenses are 18-35 and 70-300. YMMV though.

I remember the fun I had when I bought a zoom lens for the OM1 - IIRC it was something like a 35-110mm (Olympus's own), and the sense of flexibility it gave was a delight.

The real revolution for me though has been the image stabilisation on the Sony - no need to carry any sort of tripod for most daylight shots on pretty much whatever zoom.