Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 6, 2009, 10:17 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vvcarpio View Post
No I did not use liveview -- I actually craned my neck. I read somewhere that pros still prefer to use the viewfinder so that’s what I’ve been doing without really understanding why. In retrospect it sounds foolish now that I know that Live View can be useful and isn’t just gimmick to draw point-and-shooters which if it was then I don’t think is necessarily bad.
I've recently found 'Live View' quite useful. I was taking some photos of some lenses for sale on eBay, and was trying to take two shots, one of the front lens element and bezel (showing that there was no damage to the optics and barrel) and another of the diaphragm blades (showing that they were clean.) I used 'Live View' and manual focus to capture some very good images.

Pros use the best tools available to them at the time they need them. Why beat your head against the wall? If 'Live View' can make something easier, use it. If it might make something easier, try it.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.

Last edited by TCav; Oct 6, 2009 at 11:15 AM.
TCav is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2009, 10:40 AM   #32
Senior Member
 
antony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 182
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vvcarpio View Post
No I did not use liveview -- I actually craned my neck. I read somewhere that pros still prefer to use the viewfinder so thatís what Iíve been doing without really understanding why. In retrospect it sounds foolish now that I know that Live View can be useful and isnít just gimmick to draw point-and-shooters which if it was then I donít think is necessarily bad.
DSLRs did not have live views in the beginning. Still now, most DSLRs now in the market do not have live views. Those Pros (or DSLR owners), without a choice, have to use the viewfinder. Instead, some of those so-called Pros (DSLR owners) laugh the compact P&S users who use live views.

Also, live views in other brands are not as fast as Sony's.

In the photography classes (DSLRs) I attended, I was the only one using Sony DSLR, and was the only one use live view from time to time. That does not make my photos automatically lower-grade compared to those who do not have such option.
__________________
AntBlog701 (blog) | SillyDog701 (website)
antony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2009, 1:46 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
vvcarpio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,524
Default

Iím almost positive Iím not misunderstood, but just in case -- I didnít mean to deride pros. The article I read (I canít remember where but it was online) was simply stating that pros still preferred the viewfinder so I mimicked it as a way of finding out (as I mimicked Tullioís left-arm-pressed-to-the-chest-and-exhale when taking handheld shots this morning and found it to be quite effective).

Having said that, I do find holding my DSLR on its four corners only with just my forefinger and thumb on each hand (as if my hands were grimy) and with my right middlefinger reaching for the shutter release button and my arms outstretched as far forward as possible to be somewhat clumsy and un-professional .

(That actually happened when one time I was visiting my mom and there was no one else around to ask to take our picture together other than a mean-looking man standing on the street corner. To my surprise when I asked him his face turned perplexed and held my camera the way I described above. [It wasnít a DSLR but bulky and heavy nonetheless.] He seemed to have never held a camera before and was just mimicking how he saw others do it. I wouldnít be surprised if he didnít know which way was front. I had to walk up to him again and show him how it worked. I ended up with a concerned expression in the photo because I was afraid he might drop it.)
vvcarpio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2009, 2:58 PM   #34
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Remember that Sony has "Super SteadyShot" image stabilization in the camera body, and it works quite well. While good technique is important, camera shake isn't the bane it once was. I think that, perhaps, some have overemphasised the potential impact camera shake may have had on your images.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2009, 4:33 PM   #35
Senior Member
 
vvcarpio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,524
Default

I think you're right -- I may be overemphasizing camera shake and not realizing it. I took several moon shots early on with my SAL-75300 and was not pleased with the results so since then blamed camera shake for all my soft pictures.

In time I will know (I hope) the limits of my camera. The fact that the hair on my glamour shot is very sharp at least tells me that my camera and lens can produce very good results. Thanks, TCav.
vvcarpio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2009, 5:00 PM   #36
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Unfortunately, the Sony 75-300 isn't very sharp at the long end. I tried to do exactly the same thing with a Minolta 75-300 (D) (functionally identical to the current Sony lens) and was also disappointed.

Remember that camera shake is always directional, so the image looks smeared instead of just blurry, and the smear is mostly vertical.

This is an example of motion blur:



Notice how the edges of the shapes in the pattern are sharp on the lower left and upper right, but smeared on the upper left and lower right. That's what motion blur looks like.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2009, 9:11 AM   #37
Senior Member
 
vvcarpio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,524
Default

Ah, I see. For someone like me who likes blurs I should have known. My moon shot isnít smeared, itís more of soft all around.




When I look at the moon through my $15 Galileoscope the cratersí edges are so sharp youíd think youíd hurt your fingers if you touched them. For a lens more than ten times more expensive, I maybe expected to at least capture the same level of detail.

I also remember reading about the cameraís TTL mirror getting out of the way just before the shot is taken and this movement causes camera shake even when mounted on a tripod. And that higher model Sonys have a delay feature to give the camera time to settle down but the feature is not found on my A350. This, plus my moon experience, may have contributed to my blaming camera shake for all my soft shots.

Some blurs I recently took:

Secret service trailing a UN diplomat taken Sep 23 2009 at The Met in NYC with SAL-75300 zoom. The man was walking with his head turned so I just followed his movement and took the shot. I like it because everyone's blurred except him.



42nd Street nighttime traffic taken with SAL-75300. I forgot how long I had the exposure open for.



Sometimes Iíd stand in a corner and take pictures of NYC taxis. This is taken with the kit lens DT 18-70mm.



Anyway, I was amazed when you said ď...perhaps, some have overemphasised the potential impact camera shake may have had on your imagesĒ because I think thatís what it was. Maybe my interest in blurs is my Freudian way of compensating by trying to turn my (perceived) weakness (camera shake) into (hopefully) strength...

Comments on my blurs are welcome -- thanks.
vvcarpio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2009, 1:48 PM   #38
Senior Member
 
antony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 182
Default

Nice panning. I like the last one.
__________________
AntBlog701 (blog) | SillyDog701 (website)
antony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2009, 3:14 PM   #39
Senior Member
 
vvcarpio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,524
Default

Thanks! "Panning" -- I learn something new everyday.
vvcarpio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2009, 9:32 PM   #40
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 18
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vvcarpio View Post
One more sample from our frontyard:

hi all, I'm new here, how come I can't see any image sample here?
eurojams is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:45 PM.