I still have my Porter's Camera leather beanbag. Sent from my iPad
Jeffery L. Smith New Orleans, Louisiana USA On May 30, 2012, at 19:31, Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com> wrote: > Thanks everyone. > > Interestingly the responses seem to come in various categories of things that > I already know intellectually. > > 1) Noise is better than blur. It's better to push the ISO and get the > shutter speed and aperture you need. > > Note that I was primarily thinking in terms of lighting where I don't need to > push the ISO quite so hard. Photographing something other than people moving > in a dimly lit room. > > 2) Stabilize the camera. > > I'm amused by the suggestions to use a monopod, because I went through this > last Thursday with my friend Marco at a dance. I kept telling him that he > didn't need such a fast shutter speed (especially since is u4/3 camera is > seriously ISO limited), he needed to use a monopod. I twisted his arm until > he tried mine out for part of the night, and at the end he sheepishly > admitted that I was right, the monopod made a huge difference. > > Many people operate in the default of hand holding the camera unless they > need a tripod, others operate in the default of a tripod unless they have to > hand hold it. > > Rather than having a default, I expect that the correct solution is to know > when which platform is the best. What guidelines do you use? > > I currently have three heads with the "ubiquitous manfrotto mount". > > A 486RC2 ball head > A 352RC ball head > A 804RC2 three axis head > > I'm using a Manfrotto 3443 Carbon one 441 base > > The above setup seems to work pretty well, until I throw the bigma or > suchlike on, in which case, using the metric of "does it change position when > you let go?" at least the three axis head sags. > > What would it take to substantially improve what I have for a tripod head? > Would I be able to do so and stay with the same ubiquitous mount that already > works with the several heads I now have? > > Just as I was finishing up the above, I got a couple more excellent replies > from Bruce and Collin.... > > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Bruce Walker <bruce.wal...@gmail.com> >> Date: May 30, 2012 4:42:59 PM PDT >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >> Subject: Re: Improving the technical quality of my photography >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >> >> Sharpness: easy one. When it matters: >> - use low ISO (no higher than 200) > > Good to know. I try to go for 80 when I can (it seems to give more DR than > 100 based on DxO), but often push it as far as 640. > >> - light your subject well (exposure!) >> - use the center focus point on something lit and detailed > > The topic of how to focus is another interesting one. In my experience, if > the autofocus focuses on the right thing, it will do better than manual. > For manual focus, it seems as if I get the best results using Live View. > > >> - focus on eyes in portraits (use manual focus-point setting) >> - use higher shutter speeds (125th and up) > > I suspect this also depends a bit on the focal length. > > What about using strobes? Either studio or speedlight? Are they fast enough > that a tripod doesn't give much/any advantage? > >> - use tripod, monopod, or lean against something solid > > In what cases do image stabilization help or hurt? I've read lots of > discussion one way or another about using it on a tripod. I suspect that it > mostly matters how well damped the tripod is. > > >> - don't breath while pressing shutter >> - use pro glass (eg DA*) > > My three most common lenses to use are DA* 16-50, FA31 and FA77 > followed by DA40ltd and DA50/2.8 macro or Tamron 90/2.8 macro (thanks Sasha, > I dread the day you ask for it back), Sigma 20/1.8 and 18-250. Obviously my > 18-250 isn't the sharpest lens in my bag. > >> - keep your glass clean > > How to clean it? Lens pen? > >> - avoid using filters (like UV); *especially* cheap ones > > I have been avoiding them, though there now seems to be a slight scratch at > the edge of the front element of my 16-50. > >> - set aperture in sweet range for lens (eg not wide open) > > Two stops? Set program for MTF priority and see what it says? Research it > for each lens and note it's sweet spot? > >> - use mirror lockup when you can >> - use timed shutter or remote release when you can >> - use input and output sharpening passes in post-processing > > I'm not familiar with these details. > >> - avoid too much noise-reduction >> - shoot RAW > > I always do. > >> >> Do *all* of the above together for max sharpness. >> >> On exposure: not sure what to say to you here. You need to be mindful >> of how well your matrix metering works so you know when you need to >> compensate; when you need to switch to spot metering; when you should >> use a light meter. You've been doing the difficult boundary cases so >> long this should be like shooting fish in a barrel for you by now. > > It should be. I always check the histogram and blinkies. > >> >> What other "poor technical quality" did you have in mind? Eg: poor >> contrast / too much contrast? Over / under saturated? > > Nothing in particular. I'm as much trying to learn what I need to learn. > >> >> For most stuff like that, I recommend looking at a lot of images, then >> keeping what you have seen in mind when post-processing. I spend more >> time looking at other people's work than I do at my own. I seek out >> work that's like what I want to do and spend quality time *really* >> appreciating it. >> >> >> I think that what did the most for the technical quality of my own >> work was to get the gear to the point where it was all evenly matched >> -- ie no weak links -- then forgetting about technical quality and >> concentrating on subject matter, composition, light, intent, vision, >> ... > > I can always find gear to spend money on. With the possible exception of > spending $1,000 on a tripod and a head, I probably can't improve my gear much > and still be shooting with Pentax. > > > >> From: "Collin Brendemuehl" <coll...@brendemuehl.net> >> Date: May 30, 2012 5:04:50 PM PDT >> To: <pdml@pdml.net> >> Subject: Re: Improving the technical quality of my photography >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >> >> By "technical quality" it seems that you mean "resolution" and that seems >> unfortunate. > > Nope. I mean everything that goes into a good photograph except artistic > merit. The things that could, at least in theory, be measured. > > >> At this point I am going to attack one of digital's best and worst >> characteristics: Speed. >> >> Here are my suggestions for making better images: >> 1. Get rid of any mediocre lenses you have and only get good ones. A few >> good is better than a lot of junk. >> 1.1 It's hard to do a good job with poor tools. > > Every one of my lenses has a specific purpose, and specific use cases. There > is probably a better equivalent to the 20/1.8, and the bigma, but not within > my budget. > >> >> 2. Never shoot a pic in less than 15 seconds -- unless it is a potential >> Pulitzer winner that cannot be passed up. > > Good point. > >> 2.1 Compose, compose, compose. > > >> 2.2 Control light. Add fill flash. Subtract light with black panels. >> Fill shadows with reflectors. > > Good point. I do a lot of my photography with the light that is there. > >> 2.3 You determine picture quality. Not the camera. Not the lens. >> >> When you were shooting film you worried about bad frames and their >> associated expense. >> You took your time and tried to get the right shot. Stick with that >> principle. >> Remember that today's speed of digital is a tool, not a solution. >> Improper use of even the best tool will drop quality. >> >> Get a medium format to serve as a learning discipline reinforcer. >> RB67 outfits can be had today for <$200. > >> There was just listed an ETRS on APUG for $160 shipped. > > ETRS? > >> Something like these will give you the necessary slow-down for improve >> composition. > > Heh! I've got plenty of film bodies, in Pentax, Minolta and Nikon mounts, > not to mention my argus or my Rollei, which doesn't seem all that sharp, but > almost certainly needs a CLA. > > Oh, and Frank, I do tend to bracket shots with tricky exposure. If for no > other reason than that I may want to HDR it later on at some point. > > > -- > Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est > > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
