Dillon: The Sunny 16 rule states that on a sunny day (EV15) the correct exposure should be achieved at f/16 with shutter speed set at the reciprocol of the value closest to your film speed, or ISO, so basically your shutter speed to 1/whatever your film's ISO is, say 1/250 if you're using ISO 200.
The handy thing to remember too, is that if you change one value by one step or stop, you double or half the amount of light, more or less. So changing shutter speed from 1/250 to 1/500 halves the amount of light. But going from f/16 to f/11 (for instance) doubles it. So 1/250 with f/16 should give the same exposure as 1/500 with f/11. Each of the EV values represent twice as much light as the value before it, too. So it all works out.
So how is this useful? You know that EV15 is a sunny day and that in these conditions f/16 and 1/ISO would work for your exposure. But you're looking at a heavily overcast day, you could guess that that's probably one or two stops below EV15, so you could keep your shutter speed where it is and change your aperture to f/11 or f/8, or change your shutter speed to 1/125 or 1/60 (in reality, you'd probably take a few insurance shots a few stops either side (called bracketing), especially if it's a lighting condition you know you aren't used to judging).
So with that in mind, if you know the EV value of a scene, or if you can guess it, then you can sort of climb down to that EV value by moving enough stops with the shutter speed and aperture setting, depending on circumstances. This is where a table like the one in the iExposure map comes in handy. Or you can see the same thing on the link that Mages posted where it says Exposure Value Chart.
The table you posted earlier is basically just writing out long hand what I wrote above, that numbers will either half or double depending on which direction you head.
shortscale photography thread.
Moderated By: mods
-
riotshield
- .
- Posts: 1530
- Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:51 pm
- Location: Athens
Recently got myself an Canon 650D mainly to experiment with video but influenced by a friend who is into night photography I thought I should give it a try and this is my first attempt at capturing star trails
90 photos of 10" exposures combined. really looking forward to another starry night to experiment more
anyone else into starz?
90 photos of 10" exposures combined. really looking forward to another starry night to experiment more
anyone else into starz?
Nice photo. Really good for a first attempt too.
I like starry photos but prefer them without the trails. Where I live there is loads of light pollution so I haven't had the chance to take any really great shots. It takes a lot of post editing to get the stars to really show up and the end results get quite grainy. The stars just aren't bright enough and if I do longer exposures in-camera I start getting the trails...
This is probably my best one. I have no idea how they came out so well, it must of been a pretty rare clear night. I haven't got anything like this since. The orange bit is a thin layer of cloud I think, made orange by the light pollution. There is also a plain trail in there:
It's a pretty boring image though. When it starts getting a bit warmer I'm hoping to go out into the countryside and spend a night taking some with a more interesting foreground.
I like starry photos but prefer them without the trails. Where I live there is loads of light pollution so I haven't had the chance to take any really great shots. It takes a lot of post editing to get the stars to really show up and the end results get quite grainy. The stars just aren't bright enough and if I do longer exposures in-camera I start getting the trails...
This is probably my best one. I have no idea how they came out so well, it must of been a pretty rare clear night. I haven't got anything like this since. The orange bit is a thin layer of cloud I think, made orange by the light pollution. There is also a plain trail in there:
It's a pretty boring image though. When it starts getting a bit warmer I'm hoping to go out into the countryside and spend a night taking some with a more interesting foreground.
-
riotshield
- .
- Posts: 1530
- Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:51 pm
- Location: Athens
I think its almost impossible to take a good photo of stars capturing the milky way and other interesting elements in light polluted areas like most of us live. I am too really looking forward to the summer when we go free camping to remote beaches with no lights where the milky way is visible with naked eye - I believe the outcome with the necessary post editing will be impressive (hopefully).
I'm lucky to live ~15 minutes from sparsely populated mountain areas so I might have to try that out. Any tips on starlight photography? Is it just long exposure on a tripod or what?
I've been considering a mirrorless camera more and more lately. Basically I want something that looks and handles like an old film camera, but is, of course, digital. The Olympus OM-D comes to mind, especially since I've got quite the range of Canon FD lenses now, and adapters are cheap. The Fuji X-100 is also becoming affordable on the used market, but I'm not sure how I feel about a fixed lens.
The one thing I'm not sure about is electronic viewfinders. I had a Panasonic "mega zoom" camera when I first started getting into photography, and I really didn't care for that camera's EVF. Does anyone here use one regularly? Thoughts / tips on what to get or what to avoid?
I've been having the most fun with my cell phone camera lately, honestly. It's obviously terrible for any kind of low light photography, but it's good for certain things. And it's pretty amazing the kind of editing you can do just on your phone. A couple recent shots (edited contrast and saturation only), related to a certain new purchase (:)) :
I've been considering a mirrorless camera more and more lately. Basically I want something that looks and handles like an old film camera, but is, of course, digital. The Olympus OM-D comes to mind, especially since I've got quite the range of Canon FD lenses now, and adapters are cheap. The Fuji X-100 is also becoming affordable on the used market, but I'm not sure how I feel about a fixed lens.
The one thing I'm not sure about is electronic viewfinders. I had a Panasonic "mega zoom" camera when I first started getting into photography, and I really didn't care for that camera's EVF. Does anyone here use one regularly? Thoughts / tips on what to get or what to avoid?
I've been having the most fun with my cell phone camera lately, honestly. It's obviously terrible for any kind of low light photography, but it's good for certain things. And it's pretty amazing the kind of editing you can do just on your phone. A couple recent shots (edited contrast and saturation only), related to a certain new purchase (:)) :
► Show Spoiler
Last edited by Dillon on Wed Feb 20, 2013 5:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I have a Fuji X100 and love it. If you're used to film style cameras the analog style controls make it really efficient and fast to used. Also the hybrid viewfinder is genius. All the settings are projected/overlayed in the viewfinder, in both EVF and OVF modes, so you change and view settings without taking your eye from the vf.
The OVF mode is great. It's the best of both worlds. You get a bright clear optical viewfinder with electronic settings projected over the top. A lot of settings. You can customize what is displayed, I keep mine quite minimal, but you can have a live histogram, spirit level line and grid lines etc. Also you can see outside the frame lines (like on a rangefinder) and when you half-press to focus the frame lines move to make up for the parallax problem you get with having a vf offset from the position of the lens. It's cool. But I actually use the EVF mode more. It's nice and bright and you have the benefit of being able to see the focus point, dof, exposure etc. With the OVF it's just like looking through a window so you can't preview any of that, just have to trust the settings etc.
I would highly recommend the X100. Image quality is top class and it's a really fun camera to use. Even though it has a fixed lens I guarantee it will make you take more photos. Also it's small enough to carry around with you all the time.
One thing, don't expect to manual focus with it. It does have a mf wheel on the lens but it takes like 20 turns to go from 0m - infinty. It's really only meant for small adjustments when the camera is on a tripod etc.
The OVF mode is great. It's the best of both worlds. You get a bright clear optical viewfinder with electronic settings projected over the top. A lot of settings. You can customize what is displayed, I keep mine quite minimal, but you can have a live histogram, spirit level line and grid lines etc. Also you can see outside the frame lines (like on a rangefinder) and when you half-press to focus the frame lines move to make up for the parallax problem you get with having a vf offset from the position of the lens. It's cool. But I actually use the EVF mode more. It's nice and bright and you have the benefit of being able to see the focus point, dof, exposure etc. With the OVF it's just like looking through a window so you can't preview any of that, just have to trust the settings etc.
I would highly recommend the X100. Image quality is top class and it's a really fun camera to use. Even though it has a fixed lens I guarantee it will make you take more photos. Also it's small enough to carry around with you all the time.
One thing, don't expect to manual focus with it. It does have a mf wheel on the lens but it takes like 20 turns to go from 0m - infinty. It's really only meant for small adjustments when the camera is on a tripod etc.
In other photo-related news. I just download Photosynth on my iPhone 4. It's a free app for doing panoramas and I'm pretty impressed.
I just took this quick test shot in my studio. Indoors, quite low light. There are obvious stitching errors on the edges but that's at almost 180degrees...
You can export them as images or share them as a interactive panorama.
Rather than just click and pan the camera you take one photo at a time, each one overlaying the previous ones. Building up a kind of collage of images. When you're taking the images you can see the white balance and exposure is different for each of them. Especially when you have a window like that at one end of the room. However the app does a pretty amazing job of matching them all up and sorting out the exposures. It's much better than the usual click and pan method I've used.
I just took this quick test shot in my studio. Indoors, quite low light. There are obvious stitching errors on the edges but that's at almost 180degrees...
You can export them as images or share them as a interactive panorama.
► Show Spoiler
How's the focus speed on the X100? The one thing that would keep me away from it is that I've heard it takes too long to focus, especially in dimly lit areas. Which is where I would be using it most, honestly. But the quality of images I've seen has been very, very impressive. I'm especially impressed at the high ISO capabilities, the skin tones, and how well the flash seems to work for fill.
And there's always the X-Pro1 if I want interchangeable lenses, but I'm having a hard time justifying the $1000 body-only price tag. I'm honestly considering selling my Canon 7D to get one, though. I think I'd use the Fuji more often---the only time I really use my 7D is when I want the extra reach of a crop sensor, such as for sports or wildlife. Whereas the Fuji we be something I'd take everywhere.
That Photosynth app seems pretty cool. Too bad there's nothing out there like it for Android. I'm not a fan of Apple products, but even the iPhone 4's camera is lightyears ahead of my Samsung's.
And there's always the X-Pro1 if I want interchangeable lenses, but I'm having a hard time justifying the $1000 body-only price tag. I'm honestly considering selling my Canon 7D to get one, though. I think I'd use the Fuji more often---the only time I really use my 7D is when I want the extra reach of a crop sensor, such as for sports or wildlife. Whereas the Fuji we be something I'd take everywhere.
That Photosynth app seems pretty cool. Too bad there's nothing out there like it for Android. I'm not a fan of Apple products, but even the iPhone 4's camera is lightyears ahead of my Samsung's.
The focusing speed on the X100 has improved a lot since it first came out with firmware updates. I wouldn't use it for fast moving objects but its fine for everything else, even candid street type photography where you want to take shots quickly and in the moment. It works.
The only problem I've had is when the area I want to focus on has little to no contrast. It uses contrast detection to find focus (dslrs mainly use phase-detection) and so if the area is flat without any texture or shadows etc it can struggle to focus. This is the same for all contrast detection cameras though. In only happens rarely and to get around it I would just focus on another area, the same distance away obviously, then re-frame. The same way people use rangefinders to focus and then compose.
A lot of people seem to set it to manual focus mode and then use the zone focusing method. It has a focus and dof scale in the vf so it's quite good for that. If you set it at something like f8 and focus at 5m you get a pretty good DOF range for street photography.
The only problem I've had is when the area I want to focus on has little to no contrast. It uses contrast detection to find focus (dslrs mainly use phase-detection) and so if the area is flat without any texture or shadows etc it can struggle to focus. This is the same for all contrast detection cameras though. In only happens rarely and to get around it I would just focus on another area, the same distance away obviously, then re-frame. The same way people use rangefinders to focus and then compose.
A lot of people seem to set it to manual focus mode and then use the zone focusing method. It has a focus and dof scale in the vf so it's quite good for that. If you set it at something like f8 and focus at 5m you get a pretty good DOF range for street photography.
Was the mold on the front glass? IIRC scratches and stuff don't affect the image if they're just on the front-most (and possibly rear-most) element.
I had the opportunity to try an XE-1 at a photo store over lunch, which is the X-Pro1's successor. Same camera in a smaller body, without the hybrid viewfinder, and a smaller rear LCD. I wasn't thrilled, honestly. It's the EVF that kills it for me: laggy and not detailed enough, despite having a large pixel count. With the X100, do you find yourself using the optical or electronic finder more often? I just don't know if I could get used to an electronic finder, which pretty much rules out all of these mirrorless cameras unfortunately. I wish I had the chance to use an X100 or X-Pro1. Why can't Canon or Nikon make a retro-styled DSLR? No fuss, no complicated electronics, just a couple dials and a big sensor. I'd sell my entire digital setup for something like that.DanHeron wrote:The focusing speed on the X100 has improved a lot since it first came out with firmware updates. I wouldn't use it for fast moving objects but its fine for everything else, even candid street type photography where you want to take shots quickly and in the moment. It works.
To be honest I quite like the EVF and use it quite a bit but I can understand why you wouldn't like it, especially coming from a DSLR.
If you get the chance to try the OVF in an X100 or XPro-1 I would recommend you give it a go. It's quite a unique style of VF and obviously nothing like that of DSLR but most people who have tried it seem to love it. And even though you don't really like the EVF it's really useful to be able to switch instantly to it when you want to take a macro photo or something close up that requires a through-the-lens view with no parallax.
If you get the chance to try the OVF in an X100 or XPro-1 I would recommend you give it a go. It's quite a unique style of VF and obviously nothing like that of DSLR but most people who have tried it seem to love it. And even though you don't really like the EVF it's really useful to be able to switch instantly to it when you want to take a macro photo or something close up that requires a through-the-lens view with no parallax.
Hmm, maybe I would get used to the EVF. I only tried the X-E1 in the shop, so not very much of a real-world test, but the lag when panning did bother me, even though I wouldn't be shooting any moving subjects with a camera like that. At any rate I have my 7D up for sale now. As soon as it sells I'm going to try to find a good deal on a used X-Pro1. If I don't like it, I can always sell it for what I paid. Does it work the same way as a real rangefinder when manual focusing (i.e. split image)? Or do you just have to rely on the image and your eye to tell if something is in focus? The images I've seen of the X-Pro1 using Canon FD lenses are very, very good. The prospect of having a manual focus camera that takes digital photos has got me excited about photography again. Only thing is that auto exposure is limited, just stop down metering 
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=x-pro1%20fd
http://www.flickr.com/search/groups/?w= ... =pool&q=fd
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=x-pro1%20fd
http://www.flickr.com/search/groups/?w= ... =pool&q=fd
There is no split image. I think with an old mf lens like the Canon FD the only option would be the EVF. The XPro-1 won't be able to pick up the lens settings so you won't be able to use the focus distance scale, which is how you usually check whether it's focused on the right area when using the OVF.Dillon wrote:Does it work the same way as a real rangefinder when manual focusing (i.e. split image)? Or do you just have to rely on the image and your eye to tell if something is in focus?
You can see in this video how the guy has it in OVF mode then switches to the EVF (which is zoomed in on the focus point) to focus and then goes back to the OVF to compose. Personally I would just stick with the EVF all the time so you get a through-the-lens view and can focus and compose at the same time. The zoomed in view is only really needed if you're shooting with a small DOF:
[youtube][/youtube]
Yeah, I saw that same video this morning after browsing through flickr groups. Disappointing. I suppose it's rather impossible to have an optical viewfinder communicate any sort of focus information when it's not connected to the lens. Well, maybe I'll get one anyway and learn to deal with the EVF. Or just finally learn how to develop film on my own...guess I'm realizing that nothing beats the experience of an old film camera.
I got a battery for my Nikkormat and I've been testing it to see how well the TTL metering works and how foolproof it is. Some results using some HP5 I got:
Untitled by P Rodgers, on Flickr
St George's Market by P Rodgers, on Flickr
Bulls by P Rodgers, on Flickr
Jewellery Stall by P Rodgers, on Flickr
Bus Stop by P Rodgers, on Flickr
Old Car by P Rodgers, on Flickr
Yellow Stand by P Rodgers, on Flickr
Equal Marriage Now! by P Rodgers, on Flickr
C18 by P Rodgers, on Flickr
Untitled by P Rodgers, on Flickr
St George's Market by P Rodgers, on Flickr
Bulls by P Rodgers, on Flickr
Jewellery Stall by P Rodgers, on Flickr
Bus Stop by P Rodgers, on Flickr
Old Car by P Rodgers, on Flickr
Yellow Stand by P Rodgers, on Flickr
Equal Marriage Now! by P Rodgers, on Flickr
C18 by P Rodgers, on Flickr
I honestly had to look up Nikkormat after seeing those, great detail and contrast! What model is yours?
And does anyone here know much about old Minolta cameras? I have an SRT-202 knocking about that I've been wanting to try, but it doesn't have any lenses, and I have no idea if it works. Minolta MC mount lenses seem to be rather rare and expensive for some reason, so just wondering if it's worth getting a 50mm or something to experiment with. Otherwise I'd sell it...the one I have is an all black model which is very rare apparently. Doesn't make it valuable necessarily, but maybe it could be to the right collector.
Also, Dan, I decided against an X100, because I want something that can give me a nice shallow DOF at medium to long distances, and you just can't get that with the smaller sensor and wide lens in the X100, from what I'm seeing. I'm now leaning toward the X-E1 again (after reading a lot about the X-Pro1 I doubt I'd actually use the OVF much). The one thing I'm not sure about is its size...I think I'd much prefer the larger size of the X-Pro1. I don't really want a compact; I want something I can sling over my shoulder, something with some substantial weight. But the $400 price difference is steep.
And does anyone here know much about old Minolta cameras? I have an SRT-202 knocking about that I've been wanting to try, but it doesn't have any lenses, and I have no idea if it works. Minolta MC mount lenses seem to be rather rare and expensive for some reason, so just wondering if it's worth getting a 50mm or something to experiment with. Otherwise I'd sell it...the one I have is an all black model which is very rare apparently. Doesn't make it valuable necessarily, but maybe it could be to the right collector.
Also, Dan, I decided against an X100, because I want something that can give me a nice shallow DOF at medium to long distances, and you just can't get that with the smaller sensor and wide lens in the X100, from what I'm seeing. I'm now leaning toward the X-E1 again (after reading a lot about the X-Pro1 I doubt I'd actually use the OVF much). The one thing I'm not sure about is its size...I think I'd much prefer the larger size of the X-Pro1. I don't really want a compact; I want something I can sling over my shoulder, something with some substantial weight. But the $400 price difference is steep.