Great shot. What was the exposure time?

AZAG08 said:

---

Great shot. What was the exposure time?

---

30 secs at f/11 and ISO 100

So photography related and I figure I'll ask here as someone around might be into shooting video: I'm going to shoot some interview style footage for a personal project over the next few days and was wondering if anyone had tips.

I've got a Nikon D5200 but can shoot 4k on my phone (Pixel) so I may try that direction. I've got a Gorillapod and will probably try using natural light as I've got a kitchen/dining area with lots of windows.

Any tips/ideas/things to watch out for? Thanks!

Thanks. And I literally hit the order button on a small mic before coming over to read this post

fig96 said:

---

So photography related and I figure I'll ask here as someone around might be into shooting video: I'm going to shoot some interview style footage for a personal project over the next few days and was wondering if anyone had tips.

I've got a Nikon D5200 but can shoot 4k on my phone (Pixel) so I may try that direction. I've got a Gorillapod and will probably try using natural light as I've got a kitchen/dining area with lots of windows.

Any tips/ideas/things to watch out for? Thanks!

---

Do you have a tripod with fluidhead? Or if stationary, gorillapod should work.

How many frames per second recording will you be using. Typically, if you're going with 30fps, you want your shutter speed at 1/60. If 24 fps, then about 1/50fps. And you'd want the video rendering setting to match your fps etc.

I enjoy videos... it tells a story differently than still photos.

Planning to just shoot locked off on the gorillapod, don't want to up the degree of difficulty too much

Good tip on the shutter speed, I was reading a recommendation earlier for 1/60 for 30fps and 1/48 for 24fps so I might try that (planning to shoot 24fps).

Appreciate the info, will let y'all know how it turns out.

fig96 said:

---

Planning to just shoot locked off on the gorillapod, don't want to up the degree of difficulty too much

Good tip on the shutter speed, I was reading a recommendation earlier for 1/60 for 30fps and 1/48 for 24fps so I might try that (planning to shoot 24fps).

Appreciate the info, will let y'all know how it turns out.

---

Well,

You probably won't find 1/48 sec setting. It will be 1/50.

And for digital media, youtube and vimeo... you'll be better off with 30 fps. And at 1/60 sec, and I don't know what lens you will use nor do I know if you want the background bokeh, aperture setting of f1.8 to f2.8 and at iso 100, it could potentially overexpose.. but I doubt it.

AggieDruggist89 said:

---

fig96 said:

---

Planning to just shoot locked off on the gorillapod, don't want to up the degree of difficulty too much

Good tip on the shutter speed, I was reading a recommendation earlier for 1/60 for 30fps and 1/48 for 24fps so I might try that (planning to shoot 24fps).

Appreciate the info, will let y'all know how it turns out.

---

Well,

You probably won't find 1/48 sec setting. It will be 1/50.

And for digital media, youtube and vimeo... you'll be better off with 30 fps. And at 1/60 sec, and I don't know what lens you will use nor do I know if you want the background bokeh, aperture setting of f1.8 to f2.8 and at iso 100, it could potentially overexpose.. but I doubt it.

---

Have 1/48 on my phone

Good point on shooting for online video though, I'll do a bit of research there. I've shot manually before so I'm familiar with fstops and DOF, planning to set that to get a nice soft background then adjust the ISO from there.

Appreciate the tips!

This is too cool. I want one.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/friidesigns/trilens-change-lenses-in-the-blink-of-an-eye

Rex Racer said:

---

This is too cool. I want one.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/friidesigns/trilens-change-lenses-in-the-blink-of-an-eye

---

+1

Rex Racer said:

---

This is too cool. I want one.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/friidesigns/trilens-change-lenses-in-the-blink-of-an-eye

---

Never. Those things are going to get banged around or won't lock right and fall. Heavier lenses like the 70-200 shouldn't hang from the lens mount like that, which is why the manufacturers put a tripod mount on the lens - so you don't do that

Also plan to never sit down while wearing that

tighten up that belt!

There is no way I'd put a $$$ lens on that...

flintdragon said:

---

tighten up that belt!

There is no way I'd put a $$$ lens on that...

---

Plus the pressure on your sciatic nerve. All police officers how much the love hanging a ton of weight tired to their lower back and hips.

Guitarsoup said:

---

Rex Racer said:

---

This is too cool. I want one.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/friidesigns/trilens-change-lenses-in-the-blink-of-an-eye

---

Never. Those things are going to get banged around or won't lock right and fall. Heavier lenses like the 70-200 shouldn't hang from the lens mount like that, which is why the manufacturers put a tripod mount on the lens - so you don't do that

---

Well, yeah, I would never put my 70-200 on it. Way too darn heavy. But I have a couple of cheaper lenses I wouldn't mind hanging on it.

Guitarsoup said:

---

Also plan to never sit down while wearing that

---

or move faster than a brisk walk

On the subject of gadgets, this is one I have been looking at pretty seriously. Seems to be pretty versatile.

Pluto Remote Trigger
[url=https://plutotrigger.com/products/pluto-trigger][/url]
[url=https://plutotrigger.com/products/pluto-trigger][/url]

Anybody have any experience with Corel PaintShop Pro?

I just built a new computer and will purchase some new photo editing/managing software soon.

My old computer which is on life-support was running LR 2, so it has been awhile since I have upgraded.

I am looking for something in the $50ish rage. Corel PaintShop Pro seems to get pretty good reviews.

I didn't even know they still made Paintshop Pro

Check out Affinity Photo.

Rex Racer said:

---

This is too cool. I want one.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/friidesigns/trilens-change-lenses-in-the-blink-of-an-eye

---

I would never use one but it is cool!

What are the general thoughts on the Sony RX100? Does anyone have a Mark V yet, and is it worth the price increase over the IV?

Need something in a P&S frame on the occasions I don't want to pack my DSLR.

Great stuff, Druggist! Wish I was there!

Heading on a trip to Maine at the end of August. Acadia NP, whale watching, etc. I've got a Nikon D60 with the Tamron 28-70 f2.8 and the Sigma 100-300 f4.5-something. I figure the Tamron will be good enough for landscape shots (though I've long considered the Tokina wide angle), but I'm wondering if it would be worth renting a better, longer lens for the wildlife/whale stuff? Would having a 70-200 f2.8 be worth the rental? I'm not going to buy, I don't take enough photos to justify it, but I might can justify the rental if the potential for better pictures is high enough over the Sigma (and yes, I know it's slow).

Edit: also, if you would rent, what lens do you think would be suitable (aside from the aforementioned 70-200)? Also, I'm planning on having a polarizing filter, would a ND filter help with exposure on open water?

I rented a lens for a special event and felt it was worth the $100 for a week. Do it!

Maximus_Meridius said:

---

Heading on a trip to Maine at the end of August. Acadia NP, whale watching, etc. I've got a Nikon D60 with the Tamron 28-70 f2.8 and the Sigma 100-300 f4.5-something. I figure the Tamron will be good enough for landscape shots (though I've long considered the Tokina wide angle), but I'm wondering if it would be worth renting a better, longer lens for the wildlife/whale stuff? Would having a 70-200 f2.8 be worth the rental? I'm not going to buy, I don't take enough photos to justify it, but I might can justify the rental if the potential for better pictures is high enough over the Sigma (and yes, I know it's slow).

Edit: also, if you would rent, what lens do you think would be suitable (aside from the aforementioned 70-200)? Also, I'm planning on having a polarizing filter, would a ND filter help with exposure on open water?

---

It sounds like you are looking for something that is a bit higher quality and faster focus than the Sigma you have now. Faster focus speed will definitely help for shooting whales when you aren't sure where they will pop up. 300mm is already pretty decent reach for a lot of wildlife.

If you don't think it is too big and heavy at around 5 pounds, I have heard that the Nikon 200-500 is an excellent zoom telephoto. On Rentglass.com it rents for 65 bucks a week, not bad. It's size and weight could be a problem, depending on your travel plans.

Another great option is the Nikon 80-400 zoom. It is lighter and smaller than the 200-500 and therefore easier to handle and maneuver, but still is pretty fast focusing. Not having that extra 100mm may or may not be a problem. It is also easier to zoom from what I hear. It rents for 99 bucks a week. In various versions, it has been around for quite a while.

I think a polarizing filter would be much more useful on the water than a ND filter, unless you are talking about using it for long exposures of waterfalls and such during daytime.

10 years ago July, Mrs and I traveled to Acadia, Bar Harbor, and Montreal, CN with Canon 20D and Tamron 28-75mm f2.8. It was good enough then.

It depends on how close your to wildlife and its size. For birds, I don't think a 300mm is really great. You can sometimes get good shots, but by and large in the wild you're going to have a hard time getting a really great shot with 300mm (IMO, YMMV). For larger animals, you might be OK. For whales poking out of the water a bit, I have no idea, but it might suffice. I definitely don't think 200mm will be enough lens for much wildlife photography.

I would get the 200-500 for long stuff and use the Tamron for wide stuff. I generally wouldn't recommend the polarizer or an ND. Simple is a polarizer helps cut glare and would be used significantly more than an ND. ND would be so you can get a really slow shutter speed during the daytime for water movement, etc. I have both and only use them once in a blue moon.

I guess my concern is having enough range to the point where I don't end up with photos of whales that are all water with a little black dot for a whale. But I'll confess to not really knowing how close we're going to get. The 200-500 looks like it would work and wouldn't break the bank...just not sure it'll fit in my camera bag, haha.

But why not a polarizer, Gsoup? If it cuts down on glare, I'd think that'd be ideal on a boat in the middle of the ocean, with the potential for a lot of sunshine.

Polarizer is a pain to work with. It will cut some glare, but for that 200-500, you will need to get a 95mm one. Be prepared to spend 300+ on that for a lens you don't own. Then while shooting, you have to turn it to get it at the right angle. On a long lens while shooting something that is fast moving like whales, that is easier said than done.

I do think it would help cut reflection off the water and make the sky look a little more vivid. But it wouldn't be my first choice in equipment purchases by a long shot.

If you are going on a whale tour, they are usually experienced enough to get you pretty close to the whales so that you don't need a super telephoto to get decent shots. It can be hit or miss on those. I went on a tour in Alaska a few years ago, and the whales were not cooperative at all that day. No breaching, and just kept their distance coming up for air occasionally. The highlight of the tour for me was an otter that came up really close to the boat. I was glad I had my 500mm for that. Probably my best whale shots of our whole trip was from the front deck of the cruise ship. The whale was at least 100 yards out, and I only had my 70-200 + 1.4x teleconverter, as it was early in the cruise and I was just testing the waters, so to speak. This shot was made at 270mm, and cropped a fair amount. No polarizer, either.



For other wildlife, yeah you might need something in the 500mm range. That's where the zoom part comes in handy. Birds especially almost require as much telephoto as you can handle. Trust me, that's kind of my specialty.

Like Guitarsoup, I can't remember the last time I used a polarizing filter. To me, they are generally not worth the trouble of having to find the right setting to use and keep up with. Plus, it's just another possible source of distortion or loss of resolution/sharpness. On water, it mostly seems to help if the sun is in front of you, which is not the ideal lighting situation for wildlife anyway. Besides, one can often get some of the same effects using post processing.