singlerosa_RIP
Senior Member
The only lens that I don't let autofocus is my macro. So, no I don't manually focus my lenses (usually). I do use my camera's light meter to adjust aperture, shutter speed and ISO to get the look I want.
Subject too dark...
- Thread starter J-see
- Start date
Does that go for focusing too? That's about the most important part of the shot.
There are times when you have to resort to manual focusing. One such situation which I have faced a lot is focusing on a leaf (or part of the flower), and the AF focuses either on leaves behind or on leaves ahead of where I want. That is so because the AF is a rectangular patch and phase detection algorithm chooses the best option. If the AF rectangle is big compared to the spot you want to focus, it may decide to focus some where else.
Another situation is when you are trying to do close up. When I try to focus inside a flower (tubular opening), the AF insists on focusing at the front edge.
In both the above situations, you have to revert to MF.
I'm going for the "screw the meter option" since that works best.
Bracketing wasn't an option for the D3300 I fear but I got a very flashy neck strap instead that too functions as a curling iron.
Though there is no automatic bracketing in the D3300, it is easily circumvented
. Take a normal shot.
. Use +- with the wheel to change the exposure compensation
. Dial in say -3, shoot
. Dial in +3, shoot
I have tried it and it works quite fast. In fact once I shot 11 frame at 1 EV difference, while hand holding the camera. Modern HDR software aligns frames perfectly.
Thanks but I don't really need bracketing and generally avoid exposure compensation because I can easily get the same result by adjusting exposure in post. I've tested it and when I increase exposure comp to the max on the D3300 and then take it 0.60-0.70 down again in post, I get the same image as the one without the compensation. The opposite however is not true, when using less exposure, I increase noise which I can't get rid off by afterwards upping exposure again. In my opinion it is better to leave the compensation alone and apply it afterwards. Unless of course the subject is too dark.
I'm not different. In macro it's always manual because my lens can't else with this cam but also because even if it could, it's close to impossible to get auto-focus right fast in macro. The cam has no clue what I'm trying to do. The rest I use AF whenever my lens supports it. I'd do exactly the same if it were possible in macro. It's not fun neurotically shifting focus all the time.
But that's my point; we use AF because the cam gets it right most of the time even when focus is about the most important part of the shot besides selecting the actual shot itself. Yet, do we know where exactly the cam positions the DOF? All in front of the subject? Behind it? 50-50, 70-30, 10-90? I'd not know and would have to check my images to see what the cam decided.
The irony is that we consider this lack of control as being in full control while doing the exact opposite if we switch the dial to S mode.
rocketman122
Senior Member
Its what ive been saying. metering (flash/camera) needs to be upgraded. archaic old system. put any subject in the center with something 3 stop brighter than the subject and it will underexpose.
as well as af fine tune for multiple focal lengths for zooms. they already took a step with video on the D810 and D750 so I wont nitpick on that. next is radio slaves for flashes. pronto. and screen color calibration would be nice as well. wifi built in every camera is a must. and that it can make espresso wouldnt go unnoticed
as well as af fine tune for multiple focal lengths for zooms. they already took a step with video on the D810 and D750 so I wont nitpick on that. next is radio slaves for flashes. pronto. and screen color calibration would be nice as well. wifi built in every camera is a must. and that it can make espresso wouldnt go unnoticed
What about cam color calibration?
That's something I don't understand. Everyone that works with graphic soft knows how important color calibration is yet a cam that is all about color strangely can't be calibrated. I'm pretty sure if I take two identical shots with two different cams, I get two different images.
It probably won't be easy to calibrate but neither would it be impossible.
That's something I don't understand. Everyone that works with graphic soft knows how important color calibration is yet a cam that is all about color strangely can't be calibrated. I'm pretty sure if I take two identical shots with two different cams, I get two different images.
It probably won't be easy to calibrate but neither would it be impossible.
A Nikon shot looks different to a Canon and to a Fuji etc. Buts thats due to all the variables in the image capture process.
Different manufacturers lenses create a different colour caste, different jpeg processing algorithms in different cameras certainly make a difference. But if you shoot RAW you can have whatever colour you like by simply adjusting in post processing.
If you are printing then different printers produce different results and if viewing on a screen different calibrated monitors produce different results.
And to top it off peoples colour vision varies as well so there is no one right colour.
Don't see what any extra calibration would achieve.
True but I could at least tune some colors so the cam gets them right. I know that to get the coat colors of my dogs right, I have to up the saturation some. That's not purely light or vision since the difference between the shot and the reality is consistent. The main problem is when I up the coat colors, I take the rest over the top.
Variables are still just a matter of code these days; the image is a digital representation constructed out of input received. Having a Nikon shoot colors like a Canon or vice versa should be nothing more than calibration or using a different color scheme. Not too hard me thinks.
But it's not on top of my wishlist.
Variables are still just a matter of code these days; the image is a digital representation constructed out of input received. Having a Nikon shoot colors like a Canon or vice versa should be nothing more than calibration or using a different color scheme. Not too hard me thinks.
But it's not on top of my wishlist.
Getting colour true is the holy grail of all those who work with images, and it is quite difficult to reproduce the colours (and shades) exactly. There are quite a few steps involved in getting the image to a printer
. Lens itself may have a colour cast. Different lenses have different colours and transmission properties. That is why in cinema, a colour & transmission balanced set of lenses are so popular and demand high price. Here each lense in the set will have the same colour and transmit same amount of light at a given f stop.
. Sensor colour response. That varies from design to design and from sensor to sensor. For most consumer products, a basic colour calibration is carried out and embedded in the camera data base. Still each camera manufacturer sees it differently, that is why there is Nikon colour, a Canon colour and Sony colour and all of them differ subtly.
. RAW processor, has to generate RGB from the Bayer pattern and assign it to each pixel. Depending on the algorithms, different RAW processors result in subtly different colours.
. Then there are monitors and printers. Each has innumerable varieties of setting affecting colour.
So in general, it is futile to expect perfect colour matching between the object and the image displayed on the screen, as there are simply too many parameters to fiddle with. As long as the colours are nearly there and can be tuned in PP, it is fine.
. Lens itself may have a colour cast. Different lenses have different colours and transmission properties. That is why in cinema, a colour & transmission balanced set of lenses are so popular and demand high price. Here each lense in the set will have the same colour and transmit same amount of light at a given f stop.
. Sensor colour response. That varies from design to design and from sensor to sensor. For most consumer products, a basic colour calibration is carried out and embedded in the camera data base. Still each camera manufacturer sees it differently, that is why there is Nikon colour, a Canon colour and Sony colour and all of them differ subtly.
. RAW processor, has to generate RGB from the Bayer pattern and assign it to each pixel. Depending on the algorithms, different RAW processors result in subtly different colours.
. Then there are monitors and printers. Each has innumerable varieties of setting affecting colour.
So in general, it is futile to expect perfect colour matching between the object and the image displayed on the screen, as there are simply too many parameters to fiddle with. As long as the colours are nearly there and can be tuned in PP, it is fine.
Lalam
Senior Member
I am still learning some features of D3300. Following was taken(only resized)
with manual focus today. I put tht focus switch on M, put camera in A mode and tried to focus the mid point on inside of flower. Tried to make the scale in viewfinder to zero while rotating the focus ring. Am I correct in manual focusing procedure? Suggestions please. Thanks.
with manual focus today. I put tht focus switch on M, put camera in A mode and tried to focus the mid point on inside of flower. Tried to make the scale in viewfinder to zero while rotating the focus ring. Am I correct in manual focusing procedure? Suggestions please. Thanks.It is either that or view it in live view at full magnification. At times I do not bother with the range finder, but shoot when the image looks the sharpest (in focus) in the view finder.
The problem with range finder is the same as with the AF, the focus rectangle is too big at times and may be misled if what you are focusing at is in half the image and the other half has objects at a distance. The AF may focus on either what you want or focus on the other half. That is why I normally double check.
I have superimposed the focus rectangle as visible in NX-D. I wanted the focus to be at the flower stem interface, but the AF focused at the top left corner. So to get it right I have to focus manually to check where the sharpest region is. This is especially true when focusing at close range.
It is, but it slows down the process, so I do not use it if I am in a hurry (or the object is).
If you manually focus and get close you can better trust your eyes than rely on the focus indicator inside. You never know exactly which part they beam to indicate it is in focus or not while you perfectly see what is sharp. When close, the inside of a flower can be pretty deep and you don't always manage to get everything in focus. That's when you have to find what works best purely on sight.
Vixen
Senior Member
I'm afraid I then have to live with a cam that doesn't know what "normal" exposure is and just tell it to stuff it when it tries to warn me.
So when the light is low, and the warnings annoy you, why not use that as your reason to shoot in manual?
See......you now have a reason to use that M setting
Last edited:
So when the light is low, and the warnings annoy you, why not use that as your reason to shoot in manual?
See......you now have a reason to use that M setting
The moment I overrule, I am shooting manual. There's little reason to go M unless the cam would not allow me to change something in a different mode.
It's the M of "More work". I prefer shooting "Same thing" or "All alike".
Vixen
Senior Member
The moment I overrule, I am shooting manual. There's little reason to go M unless the cam would not allow me to change something in a different mode.
It's the M of "More work". I prefer shooting "Same thing" or "All alike".
You are just limiting yourself then, and stopping yourself from progressing in your photography.
I use S with my zoom lens and it works well, but if I forget to change the setting and take a landscape for example, even tho I may get a well exposed shot, I can get a far better shot if I switch to M and set my own parameters.
Using S or A allows the camera to take over some of the controls. Like driving an auto car. Far less fun or interesting than driving a manual car
You are just limiting yourself then, and stopping yourself from progressing in your photography.
I use S with my zoom lens and it works well, but if I forget to change the setting and take a landscape for example, even tho I may get a well exposed shot, I can get a far better shot if I switch to M and set my own parameters.
Using S or A allows the camera to take over some of the controls. Like driving an auto car. Far less fun or interesting than driving a manual car
It's fascination how people think about manual mode.
I'm not limiting myself in any way. Let me explain.
Unless you're in a studio having full control, out there the settings of a cam depend mostly upon the light available for a shot. We have to find a compromise between ISO, shutter and aperture. How do we do that? By first setting that which has priority and then adjust the rest accordingly. Some shots require faster shutter, some more or less depth. There's always one that has priority.
If I know I need at least 1/200s shutter, I have to decide what ISO and what aperture. If I do that manually or in A or S is irrelevant since the light available forces me into a certain direction. In S mode, I have a range of aperture available for "ideal" exposure at a certain ISO, if I change ISO, I change the range of A. Guess what I'd be doing in M? Exactly the same thing. I could either pop out the light meter and turn some wheels and then adjust the settings, or I could assume the cam can calculate faster and better than what I do.
Like I said, it makes no difference.
I also look at A or S as a task taken up by the camera, freeing me from constantly worrying about changing light. They are assists not an encumbrance. If I do not agree with the camera's logic, I can always over rule it (with exposure compensation). To be irritated with the assistance the camera is offering you, is in mind a bit churlish, you asked for it and then you do not like what it suggests, after all it is trying to do its job. As others have commented, if you do not like what the camera dishes out to you, ignore it - go fully manual.