วีดีโอ

In microscopy🔬, we get the best contrast (and deep of field) when the condenser (diaphragm) is closed to the maximum (pin hole). However, to get the best resolution of the objective, we need to open up the condenser a little bit. We loose a bit of contrast and deep of field, but can see more structures. It's all about physic and camera use pretty much the same principles here.

this is actually very cool approach ... good point with that fun lens ... I normally take out only 16-35+70-200 for my landscapes .. I don't have this swiss army lens-knife for my FX .. two lenses instead of three (like if I was taking also 24-70) makes me more focused on composition and photography itself .. this is my trick to trick myself

Or get back to using film and test yourself.

Smith David Brown Melissa Williams William

Wide angle zooms are far too expensive. I use wide angle primes to compliment a standard zoom

Yep. A great shot is a great shot. Pixel peepers are obsessed with primes v zooms. I've used zooms for 40 years. No-one has EVER said "oh, pity you used a zoom." Either they like the shot or they don't. Nothing to do with IQ. So long as it's good, that's all that matters.

Good general advice. I used to be able to hand hold 1/15 sec. Propped up against a wall or something. Those days are gone. IBIS and/or lens IS helps. My canons don't have IBIS but my lenses do. Seem fine. Back in the film days, I used ISO 50! Technology has moved on! The latest cameras seem to be OK to ISO400.

Political commercials infuriate me

Nah, Sony is horrible.

Great input. Different thought process. i think i will implement your input. Thanks a lot.

I freed myself from the burden of Full Frame cameras and lenses a couple of years back. Now use APS-C gear and pleased with the change. I have 2 zoom lenses, 17-70 & 70 to 350 which gives me all of the focal lengths I normally need. Fun lenses are 60mm 2x Macro and 12mm superwide for Astro. Works for me!

I am with you, I walk around with my Nikkor 18-200mm. I also carry with me other lens; if I am going to take pics of birds, I carry my Nikkor 70-300mm, if I am going to do Macro I take my 60mm. I have other lens, but in my bag, I may carry only 2 or 3 lens. I do have a 50mm, 2 other Macro, etc. But I don't carry them all. I pick and chose the 2 or 3 lens I know I am going to use.

Will, I take one lens with me and force myself to get creative. I bought into the Nikon system a few years ago. I love their older prime lenses. My goto setup for the Botanical Gardens is my Nikon D4 and a 105mm Micro f2.8D lens. I find prime lenses are sharper than zooms. For street scenes, I take my 50mm f1.8G lens. I guess it depends on what you enjoy shooting. Thanks for the video!

The only Swiss Army knife of lenses would be the 24 to 600 mm F2.4-F4 (mostly F4 )which is on the Sony RX 10iv. Using digital clear image zoom you could go out to 1200 mm and have a decent photo and if you want to really get wild double it to 2400mm but only if you really need something because it’s quality is far, far less.

📷 Want to start taking photos that leave your friends and family speechless? Download our FREE cheat sheets: 👉 photographyexplained.com/cheatsheets/

I was wondering for the Shutter speed rules if the sensor was an important factor. I have a d500 and a d850. I try to shoot at 2 times the focal length on the d850. Maybe its my technique, the weight or the 45mpx.

One of the reasons why I love my GFX100 camera is that you can just crop four or five for photos out of one scene. It's like having an extra lens or two in your bag. Go owe 100 megapixels this way too much or guess what It gives you extra lenses that's the way I think of it and unless you've used one you won't quite understand it..... You can't do that on a 24 megapixel camera. But you can't retain the same kind of data, but yes, cropping is fantastic

Another method to improve sharpness is to throw away those brushes and stamps you show in the video, unless you have a serious method of cleaning them. Usually photographers have no such method and just spread the grease evenly over all their lenses. A regularly washed cloth or disposable wipes are better.

I'm a hobbyist photographer and I had an old DSLR crop sensor Canon. I noticed this year that I'm slowing down because it was old, and I looked at my different options. I eventually decided to buy the Canon r100 and to stay with a crop sensor instead of going full frame. The r100 is so small that I can travel with it effortlessly. Someday I will get a full frame camera just for the experience but I haven't really run into any disqualifying problems with crop sensors. (I'm also really amazed at the ISO range of the r100, considering I spent $237 on it.) Potentially, I might just jump from a crop sensor to medium format at some point.

very good advice, but~ ANY CAMERA! REALLY? auto ISO ( i use most of the time ) is not on my brownie ;)

What the pros do is shoot at the iso recommended for the cameras picture profile and use ND filters to control exposure.

Hmm, concept of exposing to the right is aimed more at shadows .. my few points 1) I often bracket my shots `even if the scene fits to my histogram' because to have a clean shots especially in shadows it is required to have properly exposed photo in shadows which is massively overexposed photo overall .. if the photo otherwise fits, I am OK with just two shots .. 2) on high DR scene it is NOT enough to take just two shots, moreover with 2 stops between them ... More shots you use to blend your final photograph == cleaner image .. I recommend to use at least three shots .. 3) extreme right part of the histogram are NOT `highlights' but they are called `whites' .. The most of the tonality range and contrast and detail is captured in around highlights part which roughly means 3rd of 4 slices of histogram (if you will divide your histogram to quarters) .. 4) landscape photography cannot be effectively done without bracketing .. This needs to be repeated over and over as a "PRO" tip #1 ..

Thanks for simple but often missed practical tips

You do lose some stops of dynamic range leaving base iso, so use with caution

clean the lens bro

This is a very simplistic view of "noise" and ISO. Incorrect exposure will create "noise", even at low ISO, because noise is more a function of insufficient light than sensor gain. A correctly exposed image at a higher ISO will exhibit less noise than a badly underexposed image at low ISO. The thing is to find out where the limits of your camera are and decide your method once you understand those limits. And, honestly, if you're serious about sports or wildlife photography, a cheap zoom isn't going to cut it in anything less than optimal lighting conditions. Trying to shoot fast movement at f5.6 or 6.3 is going to demand a major compromise to keep the shutter speeds fast enough in anything less than great light.

My D5100 16mp sensor gives about the same picture as a 33mp D810, when both need to be cropped for distant subjects like birds, but on a 150-600mm lens when taking aviation pics, the wide end is more useful on a full frame camera. So it depends on your lens, distance to subject/size and sensor pixel density, which is better.

📷 Want to start taking photos that leave your friends and family speechless? Download our FREE cheat sheets: 👉 photographyexplained.com/cheatsheets/

📷 Want to start taking photos that leave your friends and family speechless? Download our FREE cheat sheets: 👉 photographyexplained.com/cheatsheets/

📷 Want to start taking photos that leave your friends and family speechless? Download our FREE cheat sheets: 👉 photographyexplained.com/cheatsheets/

📷 Want to start taking photos that leave your friends and family speechless? Download our FREE cheat sheets: 👉 photographyexplained.com/cheatsheets/

📷 Want to start taking photos that leave your friends and family speechless? Download our FREE cheat sheets: 👉 photographyexplained.com/cheatsheets/

📷 Want to start taking photos that leave your friends and family speechless? Download our FREE cheat sheets: 👉 photographyexplained.com/cheatsheets/

📷 Want to start taking photos that leave your friends and family speechless? Download our FREE cheat sheets: 👉 photographyexplained.com/cheatsheets/

📷 Want to start taking photos that leave your friends and family speechless? Download our FREE cheat sheets: 👉 photographyexplained.com/cheatsheets/

📷 Want to start taking photos that leave your friends and family speechless? Download our FREE cheat sheets: 👉 photographyexplained.com/cheatsheets/

While I completely understand your explanation here, I'm at a bit of a loss on how to implement it on my gear (Nikon D750) in my field of photography: concerts. HDR or bracketing seems to be impossible, as the subjects tend to be in continuous motion, and my camera has no immediate histogram or zebras, as it's a DSLR, not mirrorless 🤔

My main genres are portrait, macro and street/architecture. I started with a Canon 800D Aps-C, had a Canon RP (Fullformat) for half a year and then switched to a Canon R5 (45 Megapixel resolution Fullformat) because I got it as a present. Every picture before my first Canon was a Olympus Pen and a iPhone. The biggest change in Quality was my first Canon 800D and buying a Tamron 35 mm 1.8 prime. The second biggest change was switching to fullformat. It wasn’t its low light performance, but the colors here off this planet, which is obviously because of more photons hitting the sensor and therefore giving more or better colors. The decision to get a Canon R5 was for its 45 Megapixel Sensor because I often make huge crops, especially when I shoot macro. I only have a 1:1 Sigma 105 mm Macro. And unless I get a better magnifying lens, I’m left with cropping my images. So what I get from this experience of shooting for 4 years, is to get a current fullformat and a prime and you cannot excuse Bad pictures and blame the camera. I’m not a complete beginner though, I’m a graphic designer. I made for years storyboards for our company’s photographer. I know image processing and retouch and did it professionally for years.

The next time you're at a landscape scene with only 3 minutes of light, sweep across the scene at different eye levels and focal lengths. Can you imagine how many shots you can get in those 3 minutes-a few of which you might like and be able to print at 24" x 36" to hang on your living room wall without cropping half the image away to get the composition you wanted or having to use upscaling software to get the print size you want at a suitable resolution? It's ALWAYS better to get what you want in camera rather than relying on post-production later!

Super sharp images actually make my eyes not like it. That’s why I often soften my images to help relax my eyes and enjoy looking at images.

The 'higher amplification = more distortion' line in this video is a complete fallacy. For a start the 'distortion' you're talking about in sound only occurs when the level is turned up so much as to clip the signal - it's akin to clipping the highlights in photography. A well designed variable gain amplifier produces negligible distortion and noise compared to what is inherent in the light - called 'photon shot noise'. The key to mastering exposure is realising that noise/quality is proportional to the amount of light captured, and therefore the exposure - so you aim use the highest exposure that you can, subject to other constraints such as DOF and motion blur that limit your aperture and shutter speed. ISO is an afterthought. Higher ISO in general add less electronic noise into the mix (not more as many people falsely believed, based on the 'amplification fallacy) so you need to be setting the highest ISO that will not result in clipped highlights given the exposure you are setting. So, set exposure first, then set ISO - or let auto ISO do it for you. Apologies if you said this later in the video - but when people start off with fallacies, I tend to give up there.

Pixel peepers and photographers Care about quality and gear. Artists who use photography to express oneself dont and care more about the vision for the image.

Check, understood

Got lots of “almost awesome “ shots.😂

Thanks for posting. Personally, I generally leave the aspect ratio set to maximise the camera's available pixel count and in so doing, allow myself more scope when cropping in post. It's fine to visualise an alternative aspect when taking the shot, but it often restricts you when, in post, you decide you may have wanted more elevation or more foreground for example or maybe a little more side aspect as you describe in the vid for anticipated movement. Think of it more like uncropping. The point is, changing aspect ratio invariably reduces your effective pixel count at the outset and you can't recover those later. Until I deem myself a better photographer, I prefer to keep this as a safety net when shooting in both portrait and landscape modes.

Seems you are using A7R5. Make a video on "Focus point linked metering"

i thought the subscriber count said "6.43 mil", cause that's what the quality of your videos are like, damn. you'll get there one day! =)

I went through this whole investigation years ago and I believe my assessment still stands. Crop sensor cameras are basically as good at everything except portrait photography and its not necessarily the fault of the sensor but the availability of lenses that can get full frame results. There are some lenses for crop sensors that get very close to full frame results but due to the engineering challenges required due to less light capture on a crop sensor and more glass needed they are very expensive and so you might as well have just bought a full frame. I think they have an edge in astrophotography also.

Thanks, showing workshop images which us to understand better sir , Freddy.India.

ha in this day and age, there should be no one doing incorrectly exposed shots because its not photography anymore.. unless you are shooting film. Digital is more about a histogram for exposure.... and depending on your camera its far better to shoot lower isos and underexpose because you can bring up the exposure without any noise at all these days. You protect your highlights at all costs. Raw shooting also has basically given people the chance/reason to shoot incorrectly according to traditional photography because they can just adjust it later. If you understand fstops and depth of field, shutter speeds and their impact, iso isnt as important anymore. The traditional exposure triangle still applies, in how it all relates, but exposure in general doesnt have to be %100 correct anymore. It should be, but if it isnt its not a major. Which is why i still shoot film...cause its true photography :)