This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you.

 Moderated by: chrisbet, Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  5  Next Page Last Page  
11 point focusing   -   Page   3
 Rate Topic 
AuthorPost



Posted: Sun May 24th, 2015 05:09
 
21st Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4572
Status: 
Offline
The wife did find an alternative camera support to the missing tripod...but I refused to bring it with us.

Attachment: support.jpg (Downloaded 59 times)



____________________
Eric
 




Posted: Sun May 24th, 2015 14:49
 
22nd Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6987
Status: 
Offline
Here is the document.
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Learn-And-Explore/Article/ftlzi4po/af-area-modes.html



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Sun May 24th, 2015 14:51
 
23rd Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6987
Status: 
Offline
Eric wrote:
The wife did find an alternative camera support to the missing tripod...but I refused to bring it with us.

Just need a set of wheels and it will be a great portable camera support.
:lol:



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Mon May 25th, 2015 04:21
 
24th Post
Graham Whistler



Joined: Fri Apr 13th, 2012
Location: Fareham, United Kingdom
Posts: 1937
Status: 
Offline
JK thanks for that link a great help.

I shall go down to our local reserve at Titchfield Haven later this week when this fuss has died down.Cutting from yesterdays paper you can not even park there at the moment!

Later in week will go an see how I get on with all this new info.

Attachment: Yellowlegs153.jpg (Downloaded 51 times)



____________________
Graham Whistler
 




Posted: Mon May 25th, 2015 12:32
 
25th Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4572
Status: 
Offline
jk wrote:
Here is the document.
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Learn-And-Explore/Article/ftlzi4po/af-area-modes.html


Thanks JK

I think one of the big issues with these different modes, is being prepared (as in mindful) to use them. I don't or rather haven't been out to specifically shoot birds or horses or motor vehicles much of late. A lot of my photography has been happenstance.....walking around on holiday taking things that interest me. So there is a discipline involved in setting the camera up for the task ahead. I suppose the worst example was me in France last year, when we wandered round a 'static' chateau, then motored on to wildlife park. I didn't even think to switch from AF-S! And as a result some of the more agile critters were less than sharp.

Methinks it's time to get out and use the camera to the full.



____________________
Eric
 




Posted: Mon May 25th, 2015 14:04
 
26th Post
Robert



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: South Lakeland, UK
Posts: 4066
Status: 
Offline
Well, I may seem a bit of a philistine but unless 'photography' is the first consideration and there are no really tough obstacles to creating an acceptable image, I am more than happy to leave the D3100 to it's own devices. I still check the image for sharpness and general exposure of the critical areas but on the whole with the average scene, and often with quite demanding scenes, the fully auto gets the job done very nicely for me.

If I were wanting top quality I would of course be using the D200 with a fast, non zoom, non AF lens... On a tripod!

But no doubt many would consider that approach more akin to that of Fred Flintstone.

:lol::lol::lol:



____________________
Robert.

 




Posted: Mon May 25th, 2015 14:26
 
27th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6987
Status: 
Offline
Robert, you crack me up!
:lol:

I think that the old addage of whatever gets the job done well is the key.
What works for one is sub-optimal for another.

If your images are sharp and correctly exposed then how you got there is immaterial unless you are in a race!



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Mon May 25th, 2015 15:48
 
28th Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4572
Status: 
Offline
Robert wrote:
Well, I may seem a bit of a philistine but unless 'photography' is the first consideration and there are no really tough obstacles to creating an acceptable image, I am more than happy to leave the D3100 to it's own devices. I still check the image for sharpness and general exposure of the critical areas but on the whole with the average scene, and often with quite demanding scenes, the fully auto gets the job done very nicely for me.

If I were wanting top quality I would of course be using the D200 with a fast, non zoom, non AF lens... On a tripod!

But no doubt many would consider that approach more akin to that of Fred Flintstone.

:lol::lol::lol:


Sorry but I wouldn't switch from Aperture to Auto. It's not a case of getting top quality...which we know is only achieved by your formula. But it's about maximising quality for the available equipment. I would always want to have control over the aperture that's best for the image and best for the lens performance.

I acknowledge that the average scene with static subject will be adequately captured by Auto. But looking at the aperture, shutter speed and ISO settings that Jans camera selects on Auto would not be my choice. The algorithm that chooses when to lift/lower ISO as opposed to changing aperture or shutter seems peculiar. But of course that's not a Nikon. Lol



____________________
Eric
 




Posted: Mon May 25th, 2015 16:08
 
29th Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4572
Status: 
Offline
jk wrote:
Robert, you crack me up!
:lol:

I think that the old addage of whatever gets the job done well is the key.
What works for one is sub-optimal for another.

If your images are sharp and correctly exposed then how you got there is immaterial unless you are in a race!


I agree to a degree, but in the interests of continuing the debate...do you not feel it's a slippy slope? There's thin line between 'fit for purpose' and 'good enough'.

I just took some kitchen photos for a customer. ( yes I have retired but it was a series of 6 kitchens that should have been finished and done before April) The customer ( who makes and fits the kitchens) came back with an email saying "STUNNING IMAGES!". They were over the moon with the quality.

I thought they were average ...in fact ....part of me was already saying ” I've retired...so if they are no good, what the heck, they just won't ask me again...good!”

The point is ...taking images to meet an average albeit acceptable standard doesn't do us any favours.



o.O



____________________
Eric
 




Posted: Mon May 25th, 2015 16:09
 
30th Post
Robert



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: South Lakeland, UK
Posts: 4066
Status: 
Offline
Well what convinced me was the first photograph I took with my new, ex-Eric Field D200 IR that I took when I got home from collecting it.

Using the 18-105 UV zoom from my D3100, I took a picture of the boat 'Oakdale' which featured in another thread hand held because I was just interested to see the IR effect in my own surroundings.

In the image when enlarged to 100% on my computer screen I can just make out the legs of some of the cows browsing in a field almost 4 miles away.

I didn't even see the cows when I took the photograph, although to be honest I didn't bother looking... Because I was photographing the boat and the hill behind.

If my camera can resolve that level of detail, I am more than happy.

It may of course be a result of the D200IR no longer having an anti-aliasing filter... I haven't bothered trying a comparative test against a standard D200 mainly because I am happy enough with the definition I get anyway, although perhaps if I am stuck for some amusement one fine day I will give it a go.



____________________
Robert.

 

Reply
1st new
This is topic ID = 1188     Current time is 09:19 Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  5  Next Page Last Page    
Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Lenses > 11 point focusing Top

Users viewing this topic

Post quick reply

Go to top
Go to end
Messages
Home
Recent topics
Unread posts
Last posts
Splash

Current theme is Modern editor



A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you.


Hosted by Octarine Services

UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0717 seconds (68% database + 32% PHP). 85 queries executed.