Camera gear / tips and tricks / tutorials [Archive]

View Full Version : Camera gear / tips and tricks / tutorials

rickztahone

04-30-2014, 11:23 PM

What prompted me to start this thread was from the Photo Contest thread. I will quote myself and George here just to show what I am talking about:

For all of those kicking themselves about not having a DSLR camera, I will tell you that right now is one of the best times to buy an entry level camera. You have hundreds of models out there currently that are so underpriced because of the competitiveness that is going on with all the major brand names.

For instance, I shoot with a lot of Sony gear. I have an Nex6, a55, a77, and a99. When I purchased the a77 and a lens I bought it for $1700. At that time, this was a steal! That camera is not that old, it was released in 2011. Now, you can pick up that camera for roughly $400-$600! That is a significant mark down.

So, if you are currently in the market for gear, just do your research and you can definitely pick something up for cheap that isn't such a "cheap" camera. Last years bells and whistles cameras are selling for less than half of the cost this year.

Additionally, the top 3 brands are Canon, Nikon, and Sony, however, Pentax, Olympus Fuji and Panasonic also have great cameras. I have shot with almost all brands and I will tell you that they all have pros and cons. For an entry level person, every single camera on the market will have what they need and more. If you start getting to the hobbyist, or semi-pro, or even pro level, you start noticing some companies flaws and strenghths.

If anyone has questions please feel free to contact me, or we can start a thread here on SD.

This is great info you have made available to the rest of the members !! Something I wouldn't have thought of to express, but I couldn't agree more. I'm still on the learning side of the amateur level of the photography hobby, but I chose a higher end entry level piece as my first investment. And as stated, the more involved one becomes, the more you learn off all the +/- things that make each one different.

I've always been a Nikon fan, and my choice when they were new was the d5100. After all the gadgets etc, I was right around the $1800 area as well. Now you can get that same model around $800-$900. I couldn't tell anyone about fstop or shutter speed but I know why the flash doesn't work in certain modes.

All the entry level "point, click, and shoot" cameras still take awesome photos. No doubt about that. And most of them have quite a bit of the same functions and editing software available as the pricier units do so don't be discourage about giving it your best "shot". Thanks again for sharing.

In this thread we will discuss mainly "gear", or rather, cameras/lenses/photography related topics and basics. In this manner, we can have an open dialog on anything from, "what camera to buy?", to "what lens can achieve this look?".

So, let me start off with the quote from George above. Not to pick on you George but I know a lot of people that have a higher end camera and do not grasp the basic function of these cameras. Every single camera in the market today deals with these 3 basic things, without them, a camera does not work, and those 3 things are:
-Shutters Speed
-Aperture
-ISO

These are all relavent to an exposure, or a picture.

So, in basic terms, and I really do mean basic terms here:
-the Shutter speed decides how long (time-wise) the aperture stays open.
-the Aperture is the physical opening of a lens diaphram
-the iso simply measures the sensitivity of an image sensor

These 3 all work in unison to make a proper exposure.

Now, to apply this to a real world situation we must make up scenarios. The easiest shooting scenario is bright daylight. You can basically get away with using whatever settings you want.
In a night time setting, you are more limited in the type of settings you CAN use in that particular scene.
ISO is more important in darker situations but can be relied upon in daylight as well.

With this information in mind, consider that all lenses have apertures. Again, all this means is that the lens OPENS and CLOSES to its designated values. Typically, when someone refers to a lens as "wide open", it means that the lens is being used at its most open designation, so the physical 'hole' is large. If, someone refers to a lens as "stopped down all the way", it means that the lens is being used at its most closed designation. Why does this matter? It matters because the aperture controls something called Depth Of Field (DOF). When a lens is "wide open" the DOF is much smaller than when the lens is "stopped down".

These next shots are an example of DOF controlled by the aperture:
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7314/10321617674_80b4229337_z.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/10321617674/)
DeLeon Tequila Silver Top (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/10321617674/) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/rickztahone/), on Flickr
In this shot, the bottle cap was my main subject. I wanted to isolate it and make the DOF as small as possible. In this case I used aperture f/3.2. My lens could have opened up even further, in my case f/1.4, but when you are dealing with a subject in close quarters, the distance to the subject also comes in to play. This is an issue with many aquarium photographers, because most of the time they want to be pressed up against the glass to take photos. In reality, you are narrowing down your DOF which makes it more difficult to keep things in focus.

Think of DOF as a slice of pie. The wider the aperture, example f/1.2 (very wide) f/1.4, f/2, the THINNER your slice of pie is. The narrower the aperture, example f/5.6, f/8, f/11, the THICKER the slice of pie is.

https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2894/10321653736_02e5270c40_z.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/10321653736/)
DeLeon Tequila (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/10321653736/) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/rickztahone/), on Flickr
Moving on to this next shot. In this shot, I wanted to get more of the bottle in focus, not just the cap. In that case, I "stopped down", or simply narrowed the opening of my aperture (f/5). This allows a greater DOF. In this case, it allowed me to get the bottle in focus, as well as the cap, but the background still remains slightly out of focus. Had I stopped down even further, say f/11 for example, the background would have been more defined and sharp, or following our metaphor above, you would have gotten a larger slice of pie.

I may be getting to technical here, so I will let these points simmer and make themselves to your long term memory, lol. I will be back to explain shutter speed and ISO and how they rely on one another.

P.S. this is an open dialog thread and I will answer any type of photography questions. So, if it isn't related directly to what I said above because you know the basics, then please go ahead and ask a more advanced questions and I will try to answer to the best of my ability.

rickztahone

05-01-2014, 12:13 AM

Moving on. So, we have gone over aperture and how the opening of the aperture influnces DOF. Keep in mind that the aperture simply restricts or allows more light to the camera sensor. You can't get any more basic than that.

Now, the Shutters speed controls how long the exposure will last. Why does this matter? Lets say, for example that I am trying to take a photo of a football game, specifically, the players. In order to get players in focus I need to increase my shutters speed. Shutters speeds range from 30 seconds (can extend more than this however) to roughly 1/8000 depending on the camera. Your goal, in this particular situation would be to choose a higher shutter speed, say, 1/1250 second, so that the subject you are trying to capture is sharp when you take the photo. Of course you have to rely on your Auto Focus being accurate as well, but that is something for another day. So, in this situation, the shutter speed is very important because you want to slow down your subject as much as possible by having a very brief exposure.

Now, you can slow down your shutter speed for certain situations as well. One of the most common ones would be to do night time long exposures. These type of shots are typically accomplished by setting your camera on a tripod and lower your shutter speed as much as possible. Why? Because many times when you do night time photography you want only the elements that are not moving to stay in focus. If you have your exposure in a long setting, say 30 seconds, any people that fly by your camera will either be blurs in the photo or not present at all!

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8020/7475982874_1df392889e_z.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/7475982874/)
Los Angeles Dodgers - Dee Gordon (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/7475982874/) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/rickztahone/), on Flickr
Here is an example of a high shutter speed (1/2000) to stop motion.

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8216/8373028979_accedf34eb_z.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/8373028979/)
Merry-Go-Round (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/8373028979/) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/rickztahone/), on Flickr
Here is an example of a slower shutter speed, in this case I believe I did a hand held 1/10 of a second. My goal was to get the gentleman on the right in focus, yet show motion in the carousel. This could be considered long exposure, but typically you want to do long exposure on a tripod.

rickztahone

05-01-2014, 12:27 AM

Moving on to ISO

ISO is a necessary evil, lol.
When you start adjusting aperture and Shutter speeds, you will soon realize that sometimes you just can not achieve the settings you want because you do not have enough light. A solution to this is to either get a "faster lens", this means that the lens physically has a larger opening, expample f/1.4, or, you can increase your ISO. You may be wondering, why not just increase ISO all the time so that you have the advantage of using any settings you want? The simple answer is that, the higher you go with ISO, the more "noise" you will see in a photo. Oddly enough, the baseball shot above can work double time here because it also was shot with really high ISO.That shot shows the relationship between the two as well. Had I not bumped up my ISO, I would not have been able to achieve the Shutter speed needed in order to get the shot I did. Here's the shot again:
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8020/7475982874_1df392889e_z.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/7475982874/)
Los Angeles Dodgers - Dee Gordon (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/7475982874/) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/rickztahone/), on Flickr
That was shot at iso 6400. If you were to zoom in on this shot you will notice a lot of digital noise. In the photography world we tend to avoid noise as much as possible. There are situations where you want noise, but more times than not, you want to keep the ISO as low as possible and only increase as a last resort.

There are cameras that handle ISO better than others. For example, the camera that I used to shoot the baseball game is not particularly known for good ISO management. However, you can always get editing programs that help you get rid of some of the noise to a degree. Editing is a whole other story that we can cover later as well.

So, in conclusion, ISO is the sensitivity of the sensor to light. The more you increase the ISO, the more visible the noise becomes. You want to stick to lower ISO as possible.

Here are a few shots that depict higher ISO:
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3696/11723673766_51c146a9c6_c.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/11723673766/)
Fred Portrait (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/11723673766/) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/rickztahone/), on Flickr
This was also shot at 6400 but the ISO management in this camera is a lot better than the a77. The a99, used here is a full frame sensor, and a full frame sensor will always have better ISO management than a cropped sensor camera.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3731/11549363255_2902a48d32_z.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/11549363255/)
6400 unedited (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/11549363255/) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/rickztahone/), on Flickr
another 6400. This one was to show the recoverability of this camera at a higher ISO. This shot is the unedited version, the following one is with noise reduction in place.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7413/11549370085_f9d75d1c25_z.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/11549370085/)
6400 NR and Sharpening (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/11549370085/) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/rickztahone/), on Flickr
It may be difficult to see the subtle differences but they are there.

That is ISO in a nutshell. I'm sure I'm missing some things because I am not going back to edit. But, as questions come in I will try to explain things better. These are basic principals in photography and once you use your camera more often, they will become second nature to you.

rickztahone

05-01-2014, 12:42 AM

That's all I have for tonight, but a good practice when starting with photography is to look at photos that you like, and view what we call EXIF data.

You can CLICK on my Photostream here (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/) and if you see any photos you like, simply go to photo, and find the button that says "view Exif info". That information will tell you the shutter speed, aperture, ISO amongst a slew of other things. This excersize helps a lot to visually see settings being executed in a real life scenario.

thanks for viewing. I will have more tomorrow :)

treemanone2003

05-01-2014, 07:46 AM

Discus-n00b

05-01-2014, 08:44 AM

Argentum

05-01-2014, 10:13 AM

Thank you :)... this will be a great help to improve the quality of pictures for the contest

I have a Super zoom SONY cybershot HX200V and to be honest I am disappointed by its macro mode and it's auto photo rendering.

I will see if I can take better pictures with the manual mode

rickztahone

05-01-2014, 10:23 AM

Thanks again for setting up this thread and sharing your knowledge here. I was headed to bed when you started this last night and my first question would have been (how do I know what parameters I took a photo with) but you covered in the second paragraph of post four. Thumbs up !!! So now I will go look thru my photos to help understand what you've laid out here.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but it is my understanding that the (only ?) difference between DSLR and SLR, is the DSLR stores the photo electronically as opposed to the SLR storing the photo on actual film.
Good question George.
Traditionally, a SLR, or Single Lens Reflex, have a mirror right behind the lens that lets you see through the viewfinder to allow to compose and record an exposure to the film by pressing the shutter button, allowing the mirror to quickly move out of the way and get a shot.

a (D) SLR has exactly the same principle, but rather than recording to 35mm film, it records to a memory card or some sort of saving mechanism.

Furthermore, you have other technology, such as SLT, which I personally use, and this allows for the mirror to remain fixed behind the lens. The mirror is translucent and does not need to move away for an exposure. One of the reasons this is beneficial is due to the fact that the electric viewfinder allows you to see a shot exactly how it will record the exposure. This means for example, that if you adjust white balance, exp compensation, shutter speeds, special picture effects, and settings of that nature, you can see the change happen right from the EVF. Traditionally, most cameras have used an OVF which let you see exactly what you would see with the naked eye. No adjustments were possible.

I will not get in to a debate as to which is better because I feel all cameras have their pros and cons. It is up to the person to decide which style or technology best suits their needs.

Lastly, there is also mirrorless technology, I also have one of these cameras and just like everything else, it has its pros and cons.

rickztahone

05-01-2014, 10:36 AM

Great thread. Just a point of note to those that are shopping for a new camera, don't get caught in the megapixels. They advertise it huge on the packaging and literature to try and trap people.....this camera has 16 megapixels it MUST be better than this 12 megapixel camera! False. For most people's application of the photos here (posting on forums), mega pixels won't really matter that much. Start to worry how many you have if you start printing your photos for framing or are doing a lot of cropping. Most cameras these days come with PLENTY, just don't get caught up in them when shopping around, check the other features. While megapixels are nice and allow you to crop without losing quality and such, it shouldn't be the main measure of a camera like manufactures have made it today IMO.

Even I still look up EXIF data on photos, sometimes even my own. It can at least give you a good starting point then you can tweak it depending on your specific situation.
Matt raises a very valuable point here. Many get caught up solely on megapixels amd buy accordingly. You would be doing yourself a great disservice if you rely on MPs alone. As Matt suggested, MPs come in to play more when someone is trying to print large. I have printed up to 72" in length on one side and in this setting the MPs DO matter. However, the average hobbyist only uploads photos online and rarely prints. A 8mp camera can handle this with no problems what-so-ever. Personally, I believe the sensor of choice for me is 16mp, even though I own 24mp cameras as well.

we can definitely get in to discussions concerning sensor sizes and their importance if any here would like.

Thank you :)... this will be a great help to improve the quality of pictures for the contest

I have a Super zoom SONY cybershot HX200V and to be honest I am disappointed by its macro mode and it's auto photo rendering.

I will see if I can take better pictures with the manual mode

I will tell you something that I have learned over the years, and that is, if YOU control everything on a camera, the camera will work much better for you. When you set a camera to auto mode you are allowing the camera to make all the decisions. If you override those decisions, you can compose and capture shots as you deem fit. This allows a photographic freedom that puts you at the helm, rather than in the passanger seat.

you can take great shots with the camera you currently own. You just need to learn the principles behind photography. I will try to make these things as simplistic as possible in this thread but can get more technical for those willing to.

rickztahone

05-01-2014, 12:54 PM

Ok, moving on.

Now that we have summed up the basics, I will go over some of the actual steps you should take in order to take better discus/aquarium pictures.

-The first and most important thing will have to be, WIPING DOWN THE TANK, lol. Many people forget to do this very basic step. You want that glass to be as spotless as possible.
-Secondly, try to make the room as dark as possible. Glare is a huge deterrent when taking aquarium photos. Watch those reflections!
-On to the gear. You can use a DSLR, SLT, Point and shoot, even a cell phone.
-A tripod or monopod is not necessary, but it certainly helps achieve better shots.
-A cable release remote, or timer function is also very helpful.
-You must determine the lens, or focal length you would like to shoot at
-You must decide what type of shot you are going for
-Lastly, you must get the settings right

Here is how I would approach a shot on a fish tank.
-I would get my camera and attach a lens with a focal range anywhere from 50mm to 200mm.
-If you are not on a tripod or monopod, I suggest using a fast lens (e.g. f/2.8 and above)
-Mount the camera and lens to the tripod, in this case, I will say that I will use the 70-200 2.8 lens
-Put your camera in M mode
-I would start by adjusting my white balance. If you shoot RAW files, then WB isn't as important because you can set it later on the computer. But, if you shoot in jpeg mode, like many on auto do, I suggest setting your white balance appropriately.
-At this point I will have to determine if the light fixture of the tank illuminates enough light that I could get away with faster shutter speeds. Off the top of my head I would guess that a shutter speed anywhere from 1/125 - 1/1000 would work well. I'm sure you can go lower than that but that is when you start introducing the possibility of blurry pictures. 90% of the blurry shots you see on this forum is due to too slow a shutter speed. Again, if you let the camera decide what your shutter speed will be, then you risk the camera giving you a setting that isn't suitable for your current shooting situation.
-Once you got your shutter speed dialed in, you can adjust your aperture. If, for instance, you are looking for a shallow depth of field shot, say, you want to blur out the background, or some driftwood right behind the subject, you would want to have a wider aperture, say 2.8. Again, I will repeat here, if you go with a wider aperture, you risk missing your focus because your DOF is very thing at that point. The distance from you to the subject also plays in to the DOF. This is why I said I would choose the 70-200 lens, because at the longer focal length, my DOF increases a little bit. Of course this means I would have to be physically further back from the tank, but if you have the space, that is fine.
-Lastly, if I have both of the above settings in place, and I take a preview shot, and it happens to be too dark, this means you must either, lower your shutter speed, open up your aperture (make it wider), or lastly, raise your ISO. You can keep increasing your ISO until you start getting proper exposure shots. On my camera, and I suspect on almost any camera on the market today, you have an exposure meter somewhere on your camera. It will generally look like this -2~~-1~~0~~1~~1. What this meter indicates is how close you are to a perfect exposure. It is a guide, but one that can be broken depending on your photographic goals. So, you want to get your exposure as close to 0 as possible. Again, you do this by compensating with your settings. The last resort setting being ISO.
-Once you have all of your settings in place, you can disable something called Image stabilization if you are shooting on a tripod. My camera has IS built in to the body rather than on the lens, so I turn it off from the camera. Most times you can turn it off from the lens itself if you shoot with Canon or Nikon.
-If you also have a cable release (remote), you can shoot from a good distance away so that your hands and fingers aren't accidentally moving the camera when you are capturing a photo.
-Of course these last 2 steps are more in depth and more technical, but if you have the resources available, use them.

If you do not have a tripod, or monopod, do not be discouraged. You can still take some excellent photos. One thing you want to do is, hold the camera close to your face, preferably, up against your nose. You want to tuck in your elbows to be as close to your body as possible. If you can get on one knee and still be at good eye level with your tank, Great! Watch your breathing, steady it down, and take a photo when you exhale.

There will be many people who have bright enough tanks that all of these steps are moot, but I am going on the assumption that we are shooting a poorly lit tank here.

If I am forgetting anything I will try to edit and include but from the re-read it seems that everything is there. Here is a shot that I took this past weekend. Notice that there was reflection that I could not get rid of because of the location. Additionally, the scratched glass sometimes fools your cameras auto focus, so try to avoid large scratches.
https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2897/14082886904_2860bab3b2_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/nsstCU)Fish Tank_64 (https://flic.kr/p/nsstCU) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/52571731@N05/), on Flickr
here is some EXIF data, and keep in mind that there was A LOT of light available during this shot:
Aperture f/3.5
Shutter speed 1/125 second
ISO 800
Shot at 200mm.

Let me know if you have any questions

Edit: notice on the picture that the caudal fin is already kind of blurry. Had I stopped down, say to f/5.6 or so, it may have resulted in a sharper looking caudal fin. This would have meant either decreasing my shutter speed, or increasing my ISO in turn however.

SMB2

05-01-2014, 01:16 PM

I will tell you something that I have learned over the years, and that is, if YOU control everything on a camera, the camera will work much better for you.

I was a full manual shooter for years, but as cameras have become more sophisticated, leaving some of the decision making to the camera works quite well. I now shoot primarily Aperture Priority and most cameras have this option. That is, I select the Aperture and the camera chooses the shutter speed. This allows for much less fiddling with dials and more agile shooting. Since Depth of Field is really the "image maker" (other than focus) setting the aperture is the main technical consideration for me. If the shot calls for isolating the subject with a blurred background, start with the larger aperture (smaller numbers:)). If all the subject needs as much in focus as possible then a smaller aperture is called for. Even your baseball action shot can be planned this way. In advance you know you want to freeze action with a fast shutter speed. In that case I would dial the aperture to smaller numbers until the camera registered a shutter speed I was happy with. (If you have the lens wide open, smallest number, and you still need a faster shutter speed then one can bump up the ISO.)
I shoot mainly nature images so I like the agility of Aperture priority. In very controlled situations, I usually revert back to full manual. Also with the immediate feedback that digital cameras supply there is nothing wrong with taking test shots to fine tune exposure. But that may be another subject for your tutorial!

Great job putting all that together. While I know this is a Discus forum, with every post comes the invariable question, "where are the pics"? Maybe this thread can help everybody post more images. BUT we will need a smart phone photography enthusiast!

Discus-n00b

05-01-2014, 03:12 PM

Excellent advice and guidance from Ricardo. Really breaks it down better than I ever have or could.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag0dkFFZVWg

Not the greatest tutorial in the world, was basically flying by the seat of my pants on it but this is basically how I do things without going into as much detail as Ricardo has in this thread. Also this method may not be the right one with the beginner just starting out with no flash units or wireless remotes or any of those goodies. I will say that the bare bone basics boil down to a dark room, lots of light above the tank, and just knowing your fish. The fish are naturally curious being cichlids and most of our discus are EXCELLENT at begging for food....its a winning combo for photography because you shouldn't have to chase them around the tank to get some good shots. You see them every day, you know where they like to hang out in the tank, you know if Fish A swims by Fish B then Fish B will chase it away, just little routines you can pick up on to be ready to capture that perfect moment.

And I know it may not be for the beginners, but I ALWAYS use flash above the tanks for photos. This requires an external flash unit that most people don't want to spend money on, and its not always needed as indicated above, you can get good photos without it. I just like the dramatic light it gives. My goal is to make you, the viewer think its just tank light illuminating the fish but I will guarantee that it never is with my fish photos.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7388/13972620541_6908b2aba7_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/nhHkhH)wild3 (https://flic.kr/p/nhHkhH) by SCMatt (https://www.flickr.com/people/75723051@N02/), on Flickr

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7264/7445899206_fa8894d175_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/ckYbqw)red3 (https://flic.kr/p/ckYbqw) by SCMatt (https://www.flickr.com/people/75723051@N02/), on Flickr

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8168/7445898826_4440c72d66_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/ckYbiY)Stendkertefe1 (https://flic.kr/p/ckYbiY) by SCMatt (https://www.flickr.com/people/75723051@N02/), on Flickr

Test shots are a good point. Thank god for digital images now, fire away and delete what you don't want. I highly encourage to snap away, and don't be discouraged by only using a few pics out of hundreds. I'm sure Ricardo and Stan are the same as me, people on this forum have not or will not ever see 95-98% of my photos. They just don't make the final grade to post.

Kal-El

05-01-2014, 05:09 PM

Thank you so much for this thread... This is what I've been waiting for...

rickztahone

05-01-2014, 06:30 PM

I was a full manual shooter for years, but as cameras have become more sophisticated, leaving some of the decision making to the camera works quite well. I now shoot primarily Aperture Priority and most cameras have this option. That is, I select the Aperture and the camera chooses the shutter speed. This allows for much less fiddling with dials and more agile shooting. Since Depth of Field is really the "image maker" (other than focus) setting the aperture is the main technical consideration for me. If the shot calls for isolating the subject with a blurred background, start with the larger aperture (smaller numbers:)). If all the subject needs as much in focus as possible then a smaller aperture is called for. Even your baseball action shot can be planned this way. In advance you know you want to freeze action with a fast shutter speed. In that case I would dial the aperture to smaller numbers until the camera registered a shutter speed I was happy with. (If you have the lens wide open, smallest number, and you still need a faster shutter speed then one can bump up the ISO.)
I shoot mainly nature images so I like the agility of Aperture priority. In very controlled situations, I usually revert back to full manual. Also with the immediate feedback that digital cameras supply there is nothing wrong with taking test shots to fine tune exposure. But that may be another subject for your tutorial!

Great job putting all that together. While I know this is a Discus forum, with every post comes the invariable question, "where are the pics"? Maybe this thread can help everybody post more images. BUT we will need a smart phone photography enthusiast!

Great points here. I have shot in every mode, and while I appreciate aperture priority mode, I have always preferred Manual mode. This is not to say that it is better in any way, in fact, as you pointed out, a lot of times it takes guess work out of the equation. I do not often chimp (take a photo and replay the photo) because my camera allows me to see what my final exposure will be like (also known as WYSIWYG, what you see is what you get) in the view finder. Additionally, when I do studio work, I am always in M mode to be able to control my flashes and jumping from mode to mode is something I personally do not like doing.

With all this being said and done, I believe everyone should know all 4 modes, which are (A)perture priority mode, (P)rogram mode (S)hutter Speed Mode and (M)anual mode. Your camera may say something different such as Tv or Av, but they are all the same thing. There are situations when you WILL need to know all of these modes to better execute your shot.

Thanks again for bringing this up.

Excellent advice and guidance from Ricardo. Really breaks it down better than I ever have or could.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag0dkFFZVWg

Not the greatest tutorial in the world, was basically flying by the seat of my pants on it but this is basically how I do things without going into as much detail as Ricardo has in this thread. Also this method may not be the right one with the beginner just starting out with no flash units or wireless remotes or any of those goodies. I will say that the bare bone basics boil down to a dark room, lots of light above the tank, and just knowing your fish. The fish are naturally curious being cichlids and most of our discus are EXCELLENT at begging for food....its a winning combo for photography because you shouldn't have to chase them around the tank to get some good shots. You see them every day, you know where they like to hang out in the tank, you know if Fish A swims by Fish B then Fish B will chase it away, just little routines you can pick up on to be ready to capture that perfect moment.

And I know it may not be for the beginners, but I ALWAYS use flash above the tanks for photos. This requires an external flash unit that most people don't want to spend money on, and its not always needed as indicated above, you can get good photos without it. I just like the dramatic light it gives. My goal is to make you, the viewer think its just tank light illuminating the fish but I will guarantee that it never is with my fish photos.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7388/13972620541_6908b2aba7_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/nhHkhH)wild3 (https://flic.kr/p/nhHkhH) by SCMatt (https://www.flickr.com/people/75723051@N02/), on Flickr

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7264/7445899206_fa8894d175_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/ckYbqw)red3 (https://flic.kr/p/ckYbqw) by SCMatt (https://www.flickr.com/people/75723051@N02/), on Flickr

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8168/7445898826_4440c72d66_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/ckYbiY)Stendkertefe1 (https://flic.kr/p/ckYbiY) by SCMatt (https://www.flickr.com/people/75723051@N02/), on Flickr

Test shots are a good point. Thank god for digital images now, fire away and delete what you don't want. I highly encourage to snap away, and don't be discouraged by only using a few pics out of hundreds. I'm sure Ricardo and Stan are the same as me, people on this forum have not or will not ever see 95-98% of my photos. They just don't make the final grade to post.
This is an excellent tutorial for anyone that is a little more advanced and has a speedlight. Even if you do not have a speedlight, there are some very helpful hints and tips in there that will generally improve your aquarium shots.

The one tip in particular that stood out was the tip about the angle of the camera and lens in relation to the front of the fish tank. Typically I can shoot straight on because I have the space behind me and a longer lens as well. The glass or acrylic is generally clearer when shooting straight on due to diffraction. You have probably noticed this when you take a shot of discus in a corner, like the shot a few replies ago by me. It enhances their shape in a more positive way. However, there is no right or wrong way to photography a discus, and depending on your lens selection, you might HAVE to shoot at a particular angle. Just know that you can shoot at any lens focal length with no problems. Most phones have less than an 8mm focal length and it the distortion is corrected via software in the phone. Iphones in particular are really good at taking pictures. However, the downfall of most photos taking on a phone is that they were meant to be seen in a very small context. Once you start blowing them up to larger sizes or editing those shots, you start realizing the limitations to those photo files.

Anyways, as usual, I go off in to another tangent. Lets stick with the flash idea presented above by Matt. The use of a diffuser is a spot on recommendation. Especially a light sphere like he uses. Ironically enough, I just sold my Gary Fong collapsible diffuser because I never used it, lol. In general photography I found that I hardly ever carried it around and I sold it very cheaply online. Had I kept it, I would have had a great diffuser above the tank. Luckily for me, I have many OTHER diffusers, lol. I also have many speedlights and monoblocks, but I will not get in to that aspect of photography just yet.

My recommendation if you do not have a speedlight, or flashgun as it is often referred to as well, then I recommend buying a very cheap one. I own a YN 460 II (http://www.amazon.com/Yongnuo-Flash-Speedlite-Yn-460ii-Pentax/dp/B003IZ9XTI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1398981763&sr=8-1&keywords=YN+460+II) all manual flash, and I believe I bought that for $35 used shipped from ebay. Nice fancy speedlights are nice, trust me, I have 5, but, when you aren't doing portraiture, or outdoor photography, or events, the features they provide aren't that necessary. TTL and HSS aren't important at all as Matt has so dutifully illustrated. He basically puts the flash on top of the tank, and shoots away.

In this manner, you simply buy a cheap flash like I linked to. You also buy yourself some cheap Triggers (http://www.amazon.com/Pixel-TF-361-Wireless-Trigger-Receiver/dp/B00DNWDZ2M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1398982169&sr=8-1&keywords=pixel+pawn+trigger) and you are ready to go in to manual flash photography!

One thing you must keep in mind, and this is absolutely important!, when you deal with flash photography, the settings I talked about above, change. It isn't the same principal when you are talking about flash photography. The shutter speed controls your ambient light. Matt alluded to this principal in his video. Basically, the faster your shutters speed, the more of the ambient light you lose. The slower your shutter speed, the more ambient light you let in. So, this explains how Matt is able to get dark backgrounds in his shots. With flash photography, only the aperture controls the exposure on the subject. You can drag the shutter left and right, but generally, the exposure will stay the same on the subject that is being flashed. You can raise your ISO in flash photography to ease up on the flash, and you can get more juice out of the batteries. At this point I may be throwing out too much photography jargon to follow, but if you have specific questions on this topic, I will be more than happy to help.

Once again, thanks Matt for the great video.

Thank you so much for this thread... This is what I've been waiting for...

I am glad you like it. Subscribe to the thread and look out for updates. I tend to have a lot of down time at my job and that is when I do most of the writing here.

Lastly, I want to stress that this thread is an open one. What I mean by that is that I do not mind going off the rails. I know there are many members who have threads that have a certain structure, and they do not want to deviate from that. This is not that type of thread. I would love for people to put up their test shots here, so we can analyze them, and improve on them. If you have any other photography related subjects, I can help there too. I am a moderator at another photography forum and I usually get swamped with pm's over there as well, so, I don't mind all the questions. Try to keep the questions here though, so that others can benefit from the answer as well.

Keep coming back :)

treemanone2003

05-01-2014, 07:13 PM

Ricardo, I'm out of the house now on my phone following along. I have two favorites I'd like to share. One I know I can find rather quickly as it's right on my computer thing but the other I will have to dig for because I have no clue about where it is. Since they aren't Discus or fish related, would you mind if I shared here or rather a pm ? I don't want to give it away but they both involve speed in general. I'm also sure I can find he parameters in which they were shot as well.
Thank you - George

rickztahone

05-01-2014, 07:26 PM

All is good here George. Please share and ask when you get home :)

treemanone2003

05-01-2014, 09:59 PM

I will have to give it another go tomorrow as my uncooperative desktop is just that. If it doesn't run on gas, diesel, or two-stroke mix, it usually gets tossed out the third floor window. Good thing I checked to see if the neighbor was home. The computer is still inside.

rickztahone

05-02-2014, 12:17 AM

One of the main questions I get asked a lot is, "what camera should I buy?". You must understand that this is a very loaded question.

With this particular topic I may seem more vague than in previous responses. The reason for doing this is that I hate feeling like I am pushing a certain brand. It just so happens that I own Sony gear, as I have previously mentioned, but I am in no way, telling people to go out and buy a Sony because I have one.

All of the current camera manufacturers have great entry level cameras. In all fairness, making an entry level camera isn't that difficult for the major brands. They don't really focus their attention too much in entry level bodies, rather, the amature photographer, the semi-pro, and professional. That is where their bread and butter USE to be. However, recently, I don't mean weeks here though, there has been a large amount of people making the transition to more traditional SLR type bodies. The reason? Cell phone pictures. Many people and one point or the other realize the limitations of their phones and decide to get an entry level camera. For this reason, many manufacturers have been pumping out more entry level stuff at very, very competitive prices.

My advice on the subject? Stay away from the latest entry level cameras. Most of those are sold in a "kit" which means it is sold with a lens, and that lens will make the whole package a lot more expensive. A large amount of the time, that lens is usually not great. There are exceptions, and I actually own one of the best exception kit lens in my mind.

Doing your research will allow you to search for older bodies, usually 1-2 years old, and you can buy them in the used market for very cheap. Stay away from the entry level cameras from that time frame as well though, lol. Try searching for amature level bodies, or even semi-pro bodies. This is obviously a designation I have assigned the bodies, you will not go online and search "amature-level camera", lol. This is where the research on your part comes in to play.

If you do your research well, and check out a lot of reviews, you get a better grasp of which bodies perform better. A great site to do research is over at DPreview (http://www.dpreview.com/camerareviews?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=mainmenu&utm_medium=text&ref=mainmenu). That link actually takes you to their camera review section, very useful. There is also the option to compare cameras side-by-side and go down point by point to see which may better suit your needs.

Typically, you will see the newest released cameras on top. The place you may want to start is going down that list and notice the cameras that have gotten Gold and Silver awards. For example, the Nikon D3300 is the first on that page that pops up as a silver awarded camera. You will see that it was barely released, it is an entry level camera, but it sells for under $600. The next one with an award is the Fuji X-T1 with a gold award. This is a more sophisticated body and the price reflects that. As you can see, the list goes on and on and on.

I have the most experience with Sony, so my recomendations would no be for a specific body, but rather for the feature set for you to have some kind of baseline comparison to what things may be important in this brand or in others. A body that I always recommend to people on our Sony forum is the Sony SLT-a57 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B007ILK234/ref=sr_1_1_olp?ie=UTF8&qid=1399000395&sr=8-1&keywords=sony+slt+a57&condition=used). You can buy a used body right now for $377. This body cost over $1000 when it came out if I remember correctly. It received a gold award on DP and it is very user friendly.

I don't mean to be biased, so I will also recommend some Nikon and Canon bodies. However, please bear in mind that I only have specific hands on experience with more advanced bodies, and in reality, most of the people reading this will probably not start off with these type of bodies. Alas, I will still do the list, starting with the Canon 5D Mark III. This camera is truly a beast of a body and can be used professionally, which I have. Another Canon body which isn't as expensive as that one, is the 6D. There was an offer going on for quite some time for a bundled 6D and a 24-105 Lens (yes, that is the one that Matt shoots with!) for $1,999! This was honestly a steal and I almost jumped on that body in addition to mine. I didn't because my wife would probably have killed me, lol. That body though, is absolutely beautiful. The ISO management is truly on another level. It lacks some things in other departments but the lens alone use to cost close to 2k. They basically threw in the body for free! Let me also mention the body that Matt actually shoots with too. This body is a little bit old, but you can see that it puts out phenomenal images. This just goes to show what I was talking about. You can get a used body from a few years back, and have a better body than one coming out now designed for entry level.
Moving on to Nikon. The d800 is another beast of a camera. We are talking North of 3K here so I wont dwell too much on the body. It is on par with the 5D Mark III and when I used it I did not lack in any department. Another Nikon body I have used in the past was the D7000. This is a few years old now but I remember taking some really great shots with that. Ironically enough, I have a Nex6 mirrorless camera that has that exact same sensor but in a much smaller package. The sensor does not lack at all for me, and I would recommend it in a heart beat. The D600 is another great one. A friend of mine shoots with this one professionally. The only main problem it had was on release there was a problem with oil on the sensor. I believe they fixed that problem though.

Those are a few I have hands on experience with. The following are cameras that people that I know have also purchased and liked:
-Nikon D5300
-Olympus OM-D E-M1. People rave about this camera to me. It is last years model and realeased close to $1,500 if I remember correctly.
-Sony Cybershot RX100 II. This is a point and shoot sized camera that has a really nice sensor. This is what would be considered a bridge camera to an extent, but I know many people using these with phenomenal photos.
-Canon EOS 100D. I really do not know much about this body but a buddy of mine said he really liked it and I trust his judgement.
-Pentax K-5. Anyone that has ever shot Pentax raves about this body. It is a top tier body at not a high price. You can find some used ones under $500. Steal in my book.

Of course this list can go on and on. One thing that everyone should be aware of is that your first body is very important! Why am I yelling? Because, statistically, the first body brand you choose is the one you will more than likely hail allegiance to for the rest of your photographic journey. So, I stress, before you choose a body, do your research. This is no different than discus in that regard. Find out what some of the pros and cons are to each brand in general and choose accordingly. For instance, the Sony brand is known for their horrible flash support. If you are a studio photographer like I am, it is a pain at times to work in these type of settings. Of course, many of us have learned work-arounds, but Sony has made it very difficult in that regard. Sony is also known for not releasing timely firmware updates for known bugs in a timely manner. Many claim that the lens support is not there, but in reality I have always thought of this as a bad rap claim. I think the lineup is plenty diverse and I have not had problems.

So, in conclusion, the goal is to DO YOUR RESEARCH. Don't be scared to shop in the used market, and join photography forums. More times than not you learn more on those forums than you do from books.

Well that was long-winded and I'm sure I missed key points I wanted to relay when I first started, but that is it in a nutshell for now.

rickztahone

05-02-2014, 12:29 AM

Oh, I can't believe I forgot this. Visit Keh.com (http://www.keh.com/camera?s=1) for some truly ridiculously low cost cameras and lenses. They carry everything usually and their rating system is spot on almost 100% of the time. Their return service and their customer service is spectacular. Browse their stock and you will see that it is generally a lot cheaper than even ebay prices. Enjoy!

Discus-n00b

05-02-2014, 12:41 AM

rickztahone

05-02-2014, 01:42 AM

Agree with the above. I started with a Canon and am biased towards Canon. Have no hate against the others, they make phenomenal cameras but Canon is what I know and love. Another point I will add to choosing a camera is go to the store and hold one. The feeling of it in your hand is just as important as everything else. If you are holding an uncomfortable camera you can easily miss the shot you want because of it. And it won't matter TO much specific models, each brand has a style of body that is usually quite consistent in feel/shape as each model comes out so pick them up and go hands on with it. One of the reasons I have stuck with Canon is I don't like how Nikon's feel in my hand simple as that.

I know Canon has a refurbished store online. Sometimes can find great deals there, the other brands might have the same. They get cameras, lenses, etc back and refurbish them and sell them again. Sometimes these are pristine store display models that have hardly been used but Canon does a full refresh on them and puts them up for sale. Worth checking when shopping.

A great point Matt. You should help me with the verbiage here, you can be my reminder of things forgotten :-).

Ergonomics on a camera is a huge deal. I remember first holding my Nex6 and thinking, "this thing is waay to small to be useful". I eventually got used to it because I ended up packing it in a pocket when I didn't want to lug around the larger body. But, if I would have deemed the body type just too unusual for my preference, I would have probably returned it.

There are just some bodies that are awkwardly built. Go to any camera store and get a feel for what feels good.

pcsb23

05-02-2014, 06:23 PM

brewmaster15

05-02-2014, 07:00 PM

What prompted me to start this thread was from the Photo Contest thread. I will quote myself and George here just to show what I am talking about:

In this thread we will discuss mainly "gear", or rather, cameras/lenses/photography related topics and basics. In this manner, we can have an open dialog on anything from, "what camera to buy?", to "what lens can achieve this look?".

So, let me start off with the quote from George above. Not to pick on you George but I know a lot of people that have a higher end camera and do not grasp the basic function of these cameras. Every single camera in the market today deals with these 3 basic things, without them, a camera does not work, and those 3 things are:
-Shutters Speed
-Aperture
-ISO

These are all relavent to an exposure, or a picture.

So, in basic terms, and I really do mean basic terms here:
-the Shutter speed decides how long (time-wise) the aperture stays open.
-the Aperture is the physical opening of a lens diaphram
-the iso simply measures the sensitivity of an image sensor

These 3 all work in unison to make a proper exposure.

Now, to apply this to a real world situation we must make up scenarios. The easiest shooting scenario is bright daylight. You can basically get away with using whatever settings you want.
In a night time setting, you are more limited in the type of settings you CAN use in that particular scene.
ISO is more important in darker situations but can be relied upon in daylight as well.

With this information in mind, consider that all lenses have apertures. Again, all this means is that the lens OPENS and CLOSES to its designated values. Typically, when someone refers to a lens as "wide open", it means that the lens is being used at its most open designation, so the physical 'hole' is large. If, someone refers to a lens as "stopped down all the way", it means that the lens is being used at its most closed designation. Why does this matter? It matters because the aperture controls something called Depth Of Field (DOF). When a lens is "wide open" the DOF is much smaller than when the lens is "stopped down".

These next shots are an example of DOF controlled by the aperture:
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7314/10321617674_80b4229337_z.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/10321617674/)
DeLeon Tequila Silver Top (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/10321617674/) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/rickztahone/), on Flickr
In this shot, the bottle cap was my main subject. I wanted to isolate it and make the DOF as small as possible. In this case I used aperture f/3.2. My lens could have opened up even further, in my case f/1.4, but when you are dealing with a subject in close quarters, the distance to the subject also comes in to play. This is an issue with many aquarium photographers, because most of the time they want to be pressed up against the glass to take photos. In reality, you are narrowing down your DOF which makes it more difficult to keep things in focus.

Think of DOF as a slice of pie. The wider the aperture, example f/1.2 (very wide) f/1.4, f/2, the THINNER your slice of pie is. The narrower the aperture, example f/5.6, f/8, f/11, the THICKER the slice of pie is.

https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2894/10321653736_02e5270c40_z.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/10321653736/)
DeLeon Tequila (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/10321653736/) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/rickztahone/), on Flickr
Moving on to this next shot. In this shot, I wanted to get more of the bottle in focus, not just the cap. In that case, I "stopped down", or simply narrowed the opening of my aperture (f/5). This allows a greater DOF. In this case, it allowed me to get the bottle in focus, as well as the cap, but the background still remains slightly out of focus. Had I stopped down even further, say f/11 for example, the background would have been more defined and sharp, or following our metaphor above, you would have gotten a larger slice of pie.

I may be getting to technical here, so I will let these points simmer and make themselves to your long term memory, lol. I will be back to explain shutter speed and ISO and how they rely on one another.

P.S. this is an open dialog thread and I will answer any type of photography questions. So, if it isn't related directly to what I said above because you know the basics, then please go ahead and ask a more advanced questions and I will try to answer to the best of my ability.

Ricardo,
This is a great thread you started and the other have been chiming in on.. As a Phototography addict myself... I'm thrilled seeing this topic. I'm a life pentax fan myself... started manual camera 35 mm SLRs, then moved to Pentax dSLR. The way the camera technology goes these days is so fast.. you can always find great deals on earlier models.. and still take awesome pics... I use a K20D pentax for my pictures and these are several model behind and years old... but still take awesome pics. You don't need to spend a fortune on a camera and lens... A good photographer can take great pics with average gear. The gear is only as good as the understanding of the shooter. Practice truly makes you better.

A major downside of camera technology is that Some of the newer gear is so complicated, its overwhelming. New shooters then put the camera on idiot mode...I mean user mode...when they do this they will never be able to really take awesome pics.... its important to experiment and play around. Better to get a decent camera and use it often.

-al

Ps... I have an idea ...why not send me the bottle of tequila and I'll take some shots myself.:)

Discus-n00b

05-02-2014, 07:11 PM

Al brings up a good point about old technology still working well since it moves so fast these days. I saw a quote today actually by Brooks Jensen that I thought was good. "Never forget that all the great photographs in history were made with more primitive camera equipment than you currently own."

Once this thread develops more and we have more jumping in maybe I'll do things like post my workflow in photoshop of JPEG or RAW images. Its a bit on down the line from buying a camera and taking photos so I'll hold off but it can be a very important step in getting control of the image and ready for display. (No deceiving photoshop business, just general touch up.)

SMB2

05-03-2014, 12:38 AM

Camera body is important, but image quality comes from lenses. Before you buy a camera you have to be honest with yourself and ask what you are going to do with your photography. Taking images of the family is different from birds in flight or studio photography. You may get by with a package lens (one sold as a set with the camera) or you may be better off buying just a body and spending a bit (or a lot) more on a lens. My allegiance to Nikon over several decades is not because I necessarily think they make better cameras, I just have a lot of very nice lenses that I have slowly collected and could never afford to replace if I switched to another company. I have had many camera bodies over the years, but some of my lenses are 10-15 years old and work great with newer digital bodies.
Also, if you are someone who will be outdoors a lot with your camera, body choice may be key. The more expensive bodies have better seals, o rings etc (as do the lenses) to keep out the elements.
Matt's point is a good one. If you are just starting out in photography you no longer are buying just a camera. You have to get a dark room and storage bins, ie, be sure you have a computer system that can process the data, and store the files. What are you going to do with the images you take, how are you going to show them to other people and most importantly, how are you going to find them easily. (Where is that picture of the Red Turq. from 2012 when it was 2.5 inches?) Storing images can fill up a computer hard drive fairly quickly, so external hard drives become a consideration.

Just like keeping Discus there are all levels to photography, but deciding what you want for an end product up front, will save frustration and money down the line. (Again sounds like Discus keeping.)

rickztahone

05-03-2014, 01:32 AM

... Another point I will add to choosing a camera is go to the store and hold one. The feeling of it in your hand is just as important as everything else. ...Actually I sort of disagree with you Matt (but agree really ;)), I would say it is the most important thing, if you don't like using it, you won't use it! If it isn't intuitive or doesn't become intuitive very quickly you will miss shot after shot. The ergonomics are vital imho :)
This is truly a great point to stress to everyone.

Ricardo,
This is a great thread you started and the other have been chiming in on.. As a Phototography addict myself... I'm thrilled seeing this topic. I'm a life pentax fan myself... started manual camera 35 mm SLRs, then moved to Pentax dSLR. The way the camera technology goes these days is so fast.. you can always find great deals on earlier models.. and still take awesome pics... I use a K20D pentax for my pictures and these are several model behind and years old... but still take awesome pics. You don't need to spend a fortune on a camera and lens... A good photographer can take great pics with average gear. The gear is only as good as the understanding of the shooter. Practice truly makes you better.

A major downside of camera technology is that Some of the newer gear is so complicated, its overwhelming. New shooters then put the camera on idiot mode...I mean user mode...when they do this they will never be able to really take awesome pics.... its important to experiment and play around. Better to get a decent camera and use it often.

-al

Ps... I have an idea ...why not send me the bottle of tequila and I'll take some shots myself.:)
Another great point. One of my photography friends actually shoots with a Sony a100 (http://www.dyxum.com/gear/camera/a100/Sony_Alpha_100.asp). This is an 8yr old camera! Believe it or not, he has won several of our photo exhibitions with that combo, and winning exhibitions is not an easy task at all over there. It truly comes down to the photographer, and not the gear. The gear has its own importance, but without a good photographer, it is a terrible waste. What Al calls "user mode" is what I call "auto-dumb". You let your hundred, or some times thousand dollar investment make all the decisions for you, rather than applying your skills. If you practice enough, the camera becomes a part of your hand, and you hardly ever have to actually look at the buttons on your camera, you just know where they are.

Al brings up a good point about old technology still working well since it moves so fast these days. I saw a quote today actually by Brooks Jensen that I thought was good. "Never forget that all the great photographs in history were made with more primitive camera equipment than you currently own."

Once this thread develops more and we have more jumping in maybe I'll do things like post my workflow in photoshop of JPEG or RAW images. Its a bit on down the line from buying a camera and taking photos so I'll hold off but it can be a very important step in getting control of the image and ready for display. (No deceiving photoshop business, just general touch up.)
We would love to see your workflow Matt! Personally I work with Camera RAW and CS6 and some pre-sets from NIK and Topax Labz.

Camera body is important, but image quality comes from lenses. Before you buy a camera you have to be honest with yourself and ask what you are going to do with your photography. Taking images of the family is different from birds in flight or studio photography. You may get by with a package lens (one sold as a set with the camera) or you may be better off buying just a body and spending a bit (or a lot) more on a lens. My allegiance to Nikon over several decades is not because I necessarily think they make better cameras, I just have a lot of very nice lenses that I have slowly collected and could never afford to replace if I switched to another company. I have had many camera bodies over the years, but some of my lenses are 10-15 years old and work great with newer digital bodies.
Also, if you are someone who will be outdoors a lot with your camera, body choice may be key. The more expensive bodies have better seals, o rings etc (as do the lenses) to keep out the elements.
Matt's point is a good one. If you are just starting out in photography you no longer are buying just a camera. You have to get a dark room and storage bins, ie, be sure you have a computer system that can process the data, and store the files. What are you going to do with the images you take, how are you going to show them to other people and most importantly, how are you going to find them easily. (Where is that picture of the Red Turq. from 2012 when it was 2.5 inches?) Storing images can fill up a computer hard drive fairly quickly, so external hard drives become a consideration.

Just like keeping Discus there are all levels to photography, but deciding what you want for an end product up front, will save frustration and money down the line. (Again sounds like Discus keeping.)

A key point that is brought up here that I meant to make when saying that one holds an allegiance to the brand you first purchase is lenses. Once the photography bug hits, and you start collecting lenses, you generally will stick with that brand BECAUSE you have all those lenses from that particular brand. Buying in to another brand, or "switching camps", is usually a financial burden that will set you back a lot of money and time. This is one of the main reasons I encourage everyone to do your research before hand. With all this been said, I understand it is difficult to do research on a subject that you do not know much about! That is where this thread enters, :-).

We will go in to great detail on things you want to do your research on. So stay tuned.

Discus-n00b

05-04-2014, 01:19 PM

Mothers day is upon us. So is Memorial Day. And July 4th not to far away. Just saying, these dates are usually an outstanding time to buy the gear you need because of the sales!! ;)

treemanone2003

05-05-2014, 02:51 PM

Ricardo,

I was able to find on of the two I spoke of involving speed. I couldn't upload from my stupid computer since we have a love hate relationship. I copied the image from my FB page so here goes. http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/06/hazemata.jpg

This is one of my favorites from the race. I have a few more in succession as this played out. All of these are not touched up at all, so critique away. Properties are :
f/5.6 exp time 1/1000 ISO-500 focal length 200mm max aperture 5

Thanks-George

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rickztahone

05-07-2014, 12:18 AM

I believe your settings are spot on for this particular event. I believe the one thing this photo may be struggling a bit in is the crop. See how the car is almost at the edge of the frame on the right? You typically want to leave a subject some space. Additionally, you typically want the main subject, in this case, the car, space in the direction in which it is facing. However, you broke the rule here, and I'm glad you actually did. The action is actually behind the main subject. The subject is nice and sharp, so no problem there. Overall, it is a good capture.

One thing you should keep in mind in race shots is that you don't necessarily need really fast shutter speeds. I have successfully captured "panning" photos of race cars flying by. The slower shutter speed allows the car to be sharp while you follow it during exposure and the background captures the motion. This is a more pleasing photo setting for these type of events.

Thanks for sharing.

Kal-El

05-07-2014, 02:54 PM

Because of this thread i barrow my brother's DSLR and took some discus photos. Love playing around with shutter speed and ISO. I'm going to have to invest in one of my own.

rickztahone

05-07-2014, 05:21 PM

Because of this thread i barrow my brother's DSLR and took some discus photos. Love playing around with shutter speed and ISO. I'm going to have to invest in one of my own.

That is great! Please don't hesitate to share with us here on this thread :)

Kal-El

05-07-2014, 08:14 PM

That is great! Please don't hesitate to share with us here on this thread :)

Low light settings with shutter set at 1/60 and ISO at 1200
http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c145/imageher/Discus/IMG_0639-2_zpsa9e49138.jpg

This one taken under a blue light with setting at 1/60 and ISO at 1000
http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c145/imageher/Discus/BlueMoonLoverContestPhoto_zps4115ebdb.jpg

Not the greatest pic but I'm still learning.

rickztahone

05-07-2014, 08:46 PM

I particularly like the second one. It looks like Infrared photography, and I happen to really like IR, lol.

The first one, as you may have guessed, is just too dark. Even with you pushing the ISO high it does not get you to proper exposure levels. I can't find your aperture because I can't link to the actual pic on PB, but was there any way to shoot a larger aperture?

The only other thing you could have done would be to raise the ISO higher, which would introduce more digital noise, or, slow down the shutter speed. However, when you get in to that lower range of Shutter speed, you introduce the possibility, and likelihood that your shot will be blurry either by your hand, or the discus movement. Thank you very much for sharing these shots. This is exactly what we are looking for :)

Kal-El

05-07-2014, 08:58 PM

Kal-El

05-07-2014, 09:00 PM

rickztahone

05-07-2014, 09:03 PM

You're right I got some blur when shutter were lower . I'm still playing with the camera and trying to figure out what setting works best at low lighting. Trying to capture the image how our eyes sees it.

That is very difficult indeed, but it is the ultimate goal in photography for the most part. Low light is always a tough setting to do photography, especially without a flash.

Do you have a tripod available, or a monopod? Are you shooting these photos in jpeg or in RAW format? Are you editing at all?

Keep in mind, sometimes, the camera LCD can be deceiving. In order to try to get a little more accurate, you can try to find your histogram reviewer on your playback photos and you can see where the histogram has your color channels.

You do not want your histogram to be either too much to the left, or too much to the right.

rickztahone

05-14-2014, 08:14 PM

Ok, now that I actually HAVE some discus to shoot, I have been trying to dial in settings to give a reference to others here. Unfortunately, my light fixture has not come in which is making it very difficult to get good shots of the discus that I am satisfied with. My shutter speed hangs around the 1/40 mark, and that is just too slow and doesn't allow for sharp pics.

So, I had to cheat, and I used flashes. The following photo is of one of the new discus I got, flashed from above with a manual flash, just to show that you do not need super expensive gear to get good shots. I know I paid under $50 for this flash, probably closer to $35 if I remember correctly, so shop around ebay or Amazon for sweet deals :)

First the Exif data:
Body: Sony a99 (Full Frame)
Lens: Sony 70-200 2.8
Flash YN 460 II
Aperture: f/3.2 (could have been stopped down one, to f/4 to get rid of some of the highlight)
Shutter Speed: 1/100 of a second
Focal Length: 200mm
ISO: 100 (you want the lowest ISO for cleaner shots)

At this point I am hoping these values make some kind of sense to all of you. If they do not, please ask. Keep in mind, we are working with flash here, and that is much different than without. I had 2 flashes shooting from above the tank, but only one was technically being used in each side of the tank. Both on manual mode, and both in the lowest settings, 1/32 power. This means faster cycling from the flashes. I didn't use a diffuser, which Matt would tell you, would have helped out tremendously here. I was going to get a piece of regular paper but decided against it in the end.

On to the Pic:
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7378/14163238646_4620230359_b.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/14163238646/)
Fish Tank_87 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/14163238646/) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/rickztahone/), on Flickr
Some adjustments were made, but not many.

Now, take the following pic in to consideration:
https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2898/13993096100_e7cb1d53fa_b.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/13993096100/)
Fish Tank_85 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/13993096100/) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/rickztahone/), on Flickr
Check out the settings:

Body: Sony a99 (Full Frame)
Lens: Tamron 90 2.8
Flash YN 460 II
Aperture: f/8 (this was more of a group shot so we wanted more DOF, which means, stopping down)
Shutter Speed: 1/60 of a second
Focal Length: 90mm
ISO: 320 (you want the lowest ISO for cleaner shots)

You will notice that this was taken from the side, not head on. This makes a big difference to the background, because now there is a whole bunch of space behind our subjects, and the flash is focusing on this side of the glass edge. I intentionally pointed the flash to the side glass pane to flash their closest side to me. An interesting thing you will notice here, that I am still trying to figure out in aquarium photography, is the fact that my Shutter speed is 1/60. In theory, if you do this in a studio set, the lower your shutter speed, the more ambient light you let in to the exposure. In this case, our 1/60 SS is slower than the original photo before this one, which was 1/100. In "theory", this second one should hav been brighter because it had a longer SS. However, there are always other factors that come in to play, the main one here is available space. Had there been the same amount of space in the first shot, the background would also have been darker, and probably just a tad bit darker at that.

Shooting in TTL mode in aquarium photography seems to be futile. Go manual all the way, and you will be fine.

Let me know if you have any questions. I should be getting the light fixture tomorrow, and I will employ some of the tips I mentioned in previous pages to show the end result. Bear in mind, they will probably not look good as these, because in these flash photos we are technically "controlling" the amount of light we want to work with, rather than working with the light we already have in place. Big difference.

Kal-El

05-14-2014, 08:24 PM

Perfect... seeing the adjustment info is what I needed to see... this helps a lot. A wireless trigger/flash is what I need to get the last shot...

rickztahone

05-14-2014, 08:47 PM

Perfect... seeing the adjustment info is what I needed to see... this helps a lot. A wireless trigger/flash is what I need to get the last shot...

Yes, a wireless trigger system. A trigger set as cheap as This one (http://www.amazon.com/Nice-PT-04S1-Wireless-Flash-Trigger-Receiver/dp/B00G3VXLXI/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1400114560&sr=8-4&keywords=pt-04+wireless+flash+trigger) would wor. Keep in mind that the linked ones are for Sony and you would need to find the ones for your camera specific brand. You can get all of this for under $80 if you really look for good deals. Not bad, seeing as you can take this same gear and get some great shots of the family and make memories, such as this one:
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3708/10215027175_5fab0183bc_b.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/10215027175/)
Ricky with Hat (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rickztahone/10215027175/) by rickztahone (https://www.flickr.com/people/rickztahone/), on Flickr
Although I have other flashes capable of HSS/TTL, I still reach for the all manual lenses because they are no frills type of gadgets. You set it to what YOU want and it just does what you want it to, lol. Easy as that.

Let me know if you need any more help.

Kal-El

05-14-2014, 08:57 PM

Amazing pictures... I'll look into the link you provided. Thanks bud for all your help and info you have provided...

Discus-n00b

05-14-2014, 11:13 PM

rickztahone

05-14-2014, 11:24 PM

Hey now, using flash isn't cheating! ;)

Just of note, I will usually dial my flash back to at LEAST 1/2 or 1/4 power sometimes more depending on the tank I'm shooting in. Full power often seems to be overblown.

Very true. Seeing as I was shooting without modifiers I had to take down my flashes to 1/32. It resulted in faster cycle times so I wasn't complaining too much, lol.

brady

05-15-2014, 11:32 AM

Great, great thread. I have a Nikon D80 which has 8mp and it is just fine for the average size picts, say from 4 by 6 up to 81/ by 14. Question, where or how do I get EXIF?
Jay

pcsb23

05-15-2014, 12:28 PM

Great, great thread. I have a Nikon D80 which has 8mp and it is just fine for the average size picts, say from 4 by 6 up to 81/ by 14. Question, where or how do I get EXIF?
JayEXIF is info stored in the image - it records the technical info about how the image was taken as well as other info. Some programs read it better than others, but plain old windows explorer will display some of it - right click and choose properties, then click the details tab. Some programs strip the meta data when storing as does some sites, which is somewhat annoying.

rickztahone

05-15-2014, 04:37 PM

Great, great thread. I have a Nikon D80 which has 8mp and it is just fine for the average size picts, say from 4 by 6 up to 81/ by 14. Question, where or how do I get EXIF?
Jay
That is a nice body. I have shot with one of those in the past.

As Paul mentioned, EXIF data is simply the recording of the settings and gear used to capture a photo. If you are asking specifically where you can view EXIF data for YOUR photos, then it depends what photo hosting website you are currently using. I use flickr, and it gives you the option to see all of your EXIF data there. If you have Flickr I can show you how, step by step.

On the other hand, if you are asking where you can view OTHER people's EXIF data, you can download many EXIF Viewers (http://download.cnet.com/EXIF-Viewer/3000-2193_4-75912951.html) for free. When you see a photo you like, you can simply right click the photo, and if it hasn't had the EXIF data stripped, then you can view it right from there. I hope that helps.

rickztahone

05-16-2014, 03:39 PM

Bear with me, this is going to be a lot of photos. All of the following are done without flash, which is to put in to practice everything we have been discussing in the past few pages.

All of the following will first display the 3 main settings, aperture, shutter speed, iso speed.

I will dive right in:
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b284/rickztahone/FishTank_95_zpsc44dfe94.jpg (http://s21.photobucket.com/user/rickztahone/media/FishTank_95_zpsc44dfe94.jpg.html)
f/4.5 1/25 iso640
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b284/rickztahone/FishTank_96_zpsa9d6456a.jpg (http://s21.photobucket.com/user/rickztahone/media/FishTank_96_zpsa9d6456a.jpg.html)
f/4.5 1/50 iso1600
From these two photos you will notice that one is using a slower shutter speed. In order to keep the same exposure, I had to increase my ISO. The reason I chose these 2 photos is because, this shows that as you approach really slow shutter speeds, your photos are more difficult to get sharp, even if you have a steady hand, and in my case, even if you have in body image stabilization. It is difficult to see, but if you were to zoom in on both shots, on the eye, the one with 1/50 is actually sharper. Photobucket does a great job reducing the quality of your photos by the way. Hosting sites like Flickr retain higher quality. I would advise to use that type of hosting site. I only used photobucket here because I didn't want to use generic photos on my main Flickr gallery. But you get the point.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b284/rickztahone/FishTank_98_zps63df8b84.jpg (http://s21.photobucket.com/user/rickztahone/media/FishTank_98_zps63df8b84.jpg.html)
f/4.5 1/50 iso800
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b284/rickztahone/FishTank_99_zpse4779636.jpg (http://s21.photobucket.com/user/rickztahone/media/FishTank_99_zpse4779636.jpg.html)
f/8 1/50 iso3200
In these 2 examples, I took a different approach. I changed the aperture instead of the shutter speed. If you notice, the sponge filter in the background is blurrier in one of them, this would be the one with the wider aperture f/4.5 (rather than f/8). The ISO had to also increase in order to stop down and get a larger DOF.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b284/rickztahone/FishTank_101_zps50efde17.jpg (http://s21.photobucket.com/user/rickztahone/media/FishTank_101_zps50efde17.jpg.html)
f/2.8 1/400 iso3200
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b284/rickztahone/FishTank_100_zps875b2411.jpg (http://s21.photobucket.com/user/rickztahone/media/FishTank_100_zps875b2411.jpg.html)
f/8 1/50 iso3200
I will keep using the aperture setting moving back and forth examples until it makes perfect sense. You will notice that as you open the lens up (lower numbers), the DOF will get substantially smaller, which makes it really difficult to nail the focus, which you can see in the f/2.8 shot. Notice that opening up the lens allowed me to keep iso at 3200, but also, to increase my shutter speed, which in turn greatly increases your chances of getting a sharper photo.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b284/rickztahone/FishTank_103_zps9999c485.jpg (http://s21.photobucket.com/user/rickztahone/media/FishTank_103_zps9999c485.jpg.html)
f/8 1/50 iso3200
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b284/rickztahone/FishTank_104_zps1b7a1d03.jpg (http://s21.photobucket.com/user/rickztahone/media/FishTank_104_zps1b7a1d03.jpg.html)
f/2.8 1/400 iso3200
Last one, same thing, check the background fish in the shallow depth of field shots, much blurrier.

Here are a few extra shots putting these settings in to place:
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b284/rickztahone/FishTank_102_zpsd7d25309.jpg (http://s21.photobucket.com/user/rickztahone/media/FishTank_102_zpsd7d25309.jpg.html)
f/2.8 1/400 iso 3200
This is a very narrow depth of field at 2.8. Generally you never really want to shoot wide open in an aquarium setting, unless you are in a really dark environment. Even so, you can still get some nice shots wide open. However, if you have a faster lens, for example, I have Minolta 58 1.2, and if I tried to get something sharp with that lens in this setting, I would probably have to take 50 shots to get one keeper.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b284/rickztahone/FishTank_97_zpsb952d415.jpg (http://s21.photobucket.com/user/rickztahone/media/FishTank_97_zpsb952d415.jpg.html)
f/4.5 1/50 iso800
In this shot, I stopped down a little, and it helped to get the discus in to focus. However, the 1/50 shutter speed is right on the border of shaking to make stuff blurry. In retrospect, I should have increased my iso to 1600 and increased my shutter speed to 1/80 or so.

I hope this makes sense. If there is something lost in translation, please let me know.

rickztahone

05-18-2014, 03:18 PM

Found 2 Exif viewers links for those interested:
Exify (https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/exify/) - simply hover your mouse over the image and basic EXIFs are shown in a translucent layer on top of the image.
Exif Viewer (https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/exif-viewer) - extracts and displays the EXIF and metadata after a right click on the image.

Hope that helps.

beastroy

05-28-2014, 05:16 PM

rickztahone

05-28-2014, 05:43 PM

Will do. Many times I am not able to see pics here at work because we block a lot of the hosting sites, but I will check it out when I get home.

beastroy

05-28-2014, 05:48 PM

Okay.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

rickztahone

05-29-2014, 01:22 AM

Yo rick ....I have been taking so many pic' s with my HTC one phone camera and I want to know what do you think of them pics...check out my new AP's update pics on Kenny's forum that I just posted today ....let me know what you think of them pics and natural born photagraphy skills compare to yours.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

Well, I saw the pics and I will say, those are some stunning discus you have there!

First, you must know that you suffer from a condition called cell-phone-itis. This means, your cell phone can not take fully detailed pics like you would want. With the smaller sensor on cell phones, the resolution just isn't up to par with a dedicated camera.

There is nothing wrong with cell phone photography, believe me, but you must know its limitations. One of the main limitations its inability to get good shots in darker settings which these shots seem to be. The noise (or grain) is too prominent. This of course isn't your fault. All cell phones have this main downfall. The larger you make these pics, the more noise and lack of detail you will show. They are meant to be viewed in a very small format.

With all this being said and done I will say this, it is difficult to take a bad shot of such nice looking discus! Get a dedicated camera when you can, but until that point, keep on clicking :-)

beastroy

05-29-2014, 01:40 AM

Well, I saw the pics and I will say, those are some stunning discus you have there!

First, you must know that you suffer from a condition called cell-phone-itis. This means, your cell phone can not take fully detailed pics like you would want. With the smaller sensor on cell phones, the resolution just isn't up to par with a dedicated camera.

There is nothing wrong with cell phone photography, believe me, but you must know its limitations. One of the main limitations its inability to get good shots in darker settings which these shots seem to be. The noise (or grain) is too prominent. This of course isn't your fault. All cell phones have this main downfall. The larger you make these pics, the more noise and lack of detail you will show. They are meant to be viewed in a very small format.

With all this being said and done I will say this, it is difficult to take a bad shot of such nice looking discus! Get a dedicated camera when you can, but until that point, keep on clicking :-)

Very well said!

DiscusLoverJeff

07-09-2014, 02:04 PM

I was searching for a good tutorial on taking aquarium photos and ran across this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1Sdyqcn8FI

It is not bad. It gives you some basic camera setting and angles.

SteveCA

03-02-2015, 02:45 PM

I just came across this thread and just wanted to say thanks to all the contributors. It is highly informative and would serve well in a photography forum.

I just want to add a point on camera selection and give a plug for buying used. There are so many ridiculous bargains out there for incredible cameras. When buying a camera, it helps to prioritize your needs as some cameras do certain things better than others. For example, if you shoot mainly well lit, slow moving scenes, pretty much any good camera will do. If you shoot sports or fast moving scenes, you need fast and accurate focusing and good higher ISO performance. If you shoot landscapes, particularly sunrise and sunset, you need a camera with high dynamic range but not necessarily fast focus. If you want to shoot night scenes or star photography, you need high ISO performance with low noise. If you want to make big prints you need more megapixels but dont be fooled by miniature cameras with giant megapixels such as cell phone cameras and other gimicky point and shoots boasting huge numbers. Most folks will never print larger than 11 by 14 and for that, any good 8 megapixel camera will do.

I have several cameras that excel at different aspects. My 2009 vintage Nikon D3s is only 12 megapixels but has fast focus, fantastic low light high ISO performance, and very low noise as each pixel is quite large and gathers light well. It will not make wall size prints in fine detail as it is limited in megapixels. My more recent Nikon D800 has 36 megapixels which will make wall size prints in fine detail, has phenominal dynamic range, very good low light high ISO performance, but fairly slow focus. It is great for landscapes and moderate speed scenes but requires a good tripod to squeeze out the full resolution and excellent lenses are a must as the resolution of the sensor exceeds the resolving capability of most older lens. My sony NEX 7 has a 24 megapixel sensor with reasonably good low light, slow sometimes inaccurate focus, ability to print large but not wall size prints, but is very compact and travel friendly. Last but not least, my compact panasonic LX7 is a 10 megapixel gem with a wide 24mm 1.4. It is a great waist pouch camera that goes everywhere without cramping my style. It takes reasonably good photos that can be printed up to 11 by 14 and has very decent low light performance because of the fast 1.4 lens.

My opinion is that no one camera excels at everything and one has to decide what is most important and shop accordingly. I will close by saying that there has never been a better time for photographers in terms of the amazing equipment available at crazy low used prices.

Ardan

03-18-2015, 06:36 PM

Ricardo and Matt,
Very good and intriguing info! I am trying to gather in some of it! LOL
I like those "off camera flash" pictures! WOW

Ardan

rickztahone

03-18-2015, 06:47 PM

Ricardo and Matt,
Very good and intriguing info! I am trying to gather in some of it! LOL
I like those "off camera flash" pictures! WOW

Ardan

I'm glad you are reading up Ardan :). Let me know if you need help with anything or need questions answered my friend.