• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

FEATURED The Big Photography Thread

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
Those are some amazing animal shots. That 50mm lens is sounding pretty sweet. I want to get more experience under my belt just with the kit lens before expanding, but that makes for a tough choice between the 50mm and that 300mm i linked to earlier. Decisions, decisions....
 
Some good resources:

DPreview - Reviews, buying guides, and sample photos for each piece of equipment
Photography on the Net - Forum for Canon users with all kinds of useful information

Added, thanks!

I like DPreview, it was one of my favorite reviews when researching my camera. Ken Rockwell didn't review the T3 so I had to branch out and that one was solid.
 
Really great shots! I need to figure out what lens I need to get on the Lumix GF3 for smooth shots from 10/15/20+ feet away. I thinking those 300mm ones? Still don't know what those numbers mean. lol
 
mm is the focal length. The larger the number, the farther it will zoom. Go read through some lens reviews to get a feel for what the numbers mean and what separates a good lens from a less good one. :)

Thanks for the link! Will do. :salute:

I kind of figured that what it was but wasn't 100% sure.

I only have a 14-42mm lens that came with the camera. Would love to get a 300mm lens but would it take great close ups like the 14-42 or is it strictly for far shots? I am hoping its a universal lens that goes up too 300mm.

Example here of me catching the possum on our grapevine in the backyard with the 14-42mm fully extended. It was originally in the net where the leaves are right in front so by the time I got back with the camera really quickly it had started it's exit. Really crappy shot cause I just turned it on and took the shot before it left. Caught it's back side with the tail sticking out in the background. lol Obviously I moved last second.

P1060168.JPG
 
"Universal" doesn't seem to be something that exists. The kit lens will probably be best for all-around. You may consider one a little bit longer; my kit lens is 18-55mm and it's sufficient for most things. Once you get into the 250-300mm range, you're in telezoom territory and lose the lower end such that they can't take wide shots (i.e., you'd go from a 14-42mm lens to something like a 70-300mm lens.) Further, telezoom lenses don't have apertures quite as wide as shorter lenses, unless you get the extremely expensive ($1000-10,000+) versions.

The more I read, the more I think three lenses is the right number - one macro lens, one general middle-of-the road lens (my and your kit lenses should suffice here) and one telezoom lens.
 
IMPORTANT TIP FOR PHOTOGRAPHING PRODUCTS!

Don't put your lighting too close to your subject.

I'll have to post photos of this 'problem' later on when I am able to crop/shrink the photos, but I was photographing a water block and thought I'd get make darn sure it was properly lit, putting my light source (100W equivalent, daylight tone CFL) about a foot to two feet away from my subject. Bad. Move. All of the photos turned out dark and ugly.

Here's why - the camera basically thought I was looking into the sun. It adjusted the white balance as though I was pointing at the sky rather than at a water block. Once I moved my lights back to several feet away on both sides, the camera went back to doing what it should and my photos were eye-catching as usual.

In hindsight this seems like a very 'duh' thing, but sometimes you have to fail to learn how to succeed. In this case, I just had to re-shoot that particular product. :)
 
Bounce your light source off of something (photographer's umbrella or even a bright sheet of paper/poster board) before hitting your subject. The diffused light will give much better results than if you have a spotlight shining right on it.
 
IMPORTANT TIP FOR PHOTOGRAPHING PRODUCTS!

Don't put your lighting too close to your subject.

I'll have to post photos of this 'problem' later on when I am able to crop/shrink the photos, but I was photographing a water block and thought I'd get make darn sure it was properly lit, putting my light source (100W equivalent, daylight tone CFL) about a foot to two feet away from my subject. Bad. Move. All of the photos turned out dark and ugly.

Here's why - the camera basically thought I was looking into the sun. It adjusted the white balance as though I was pointing at the sky rather than at a water block. Once I moved my lights back to several feet away on both sides, the camera went back to doing what it should and my photos were eye-catching as usual.

In hindsight this seems like a very 'duh' thing, but sometimes you have to fail to learn how to succeed. In this case, I just had to re-shoot that particular product. :)
I'm not sure entirely sure what happened in your case, but this is how I would troubleshoot:
1) I'm not entirely sure how you're setting white balance, but I think WB is for making sure whites appear white. For example, a incandescent bulb is roughly 2700k (kelvin), and feels 'warm', whereas a sunny day outdoors is roughly 6500k ('cooler'). I am not sure why it would make your objects darker.
2) If your objects are being underexposed, there are several ways to work around:
a) Use manual settings (completely random numbers: I'd try ISO 100, F10, 1/160s). Use MattNo5ss' cheat sheets to get the exposure correct. You might not get it on the first try, but the part I like about digital you can try over and over until you get it right. :)
b) Change your metering mode from 'evaluative metering' to 'spot metering'. (I think those are the proper terms). The 'evaluative metering' tries to make everything in your frame properly exposed (your 100w bulb included), so it will make your object too dark. If you switch to 'spot' metering, it will focus on a small spot in the center of your frame.
c) Leave your camera in the current metering mode, and change the 'exposure compensation' to +2 or higher. This will cause your light to be waaaay overexposed, but maybe brighten up your subject enough.
d) Modify your light, exactly how you did. :thup:


Wanted to throw in my two cents (or more of one...). A cheap way to get into macro photography is using 'extension tubes'. It moves the lens away from the camera body, causing the optic physics thingers to change, and will allow you to focus closer. Best part? These extension tubes can be really cheap. You should be able to find even cheaper versions (I'd guess $7). Since these tubes have no optics, these cheap tubes will still do the same basic function and have the same image quality of higher end ones. Enough words, here's the pictures:

Canon T2i with 40mm 'pancake' lens, closest it will focus:
1 copy.jpg
Same but with all 49mm worth of extension tubes:
3 copy.jpg
I'm pretty sure both photos are not cropped.

For less than $20, maybe even less than $10, I found these extension tubes to be a great start into macro photography (and probably the cheapest item I still use). They are very finicky to use correctly, but if anyone is interested, I can explain more (I feel like I'm breaking a rule by having more words than photos...).
 
It wasn't just white balance, you're right. It was also in large part metering. Both were thrown off by the massive amount of light I was giving the sensor. It's not the camera's fault, it's mine for sure. Once I stopped flooding it with insane amounts of light, all was well.

I do NOT do full manual. Adjusting white balance is very much beyond my skills. I don't know where to put it on that graph and anything I try isn't as good as auto. The other white balance settings throw everything off (in a 'studio' setting), it'e either too warm or too cool.

99.9% of the time I use Av (on Canon, A on Nikon), or Aperture Priority mode, with ISO & white balance on auto.
 
I have a very similar setup to ebug (T2i, but my kit lens was 18-135) and can vouch for the 50mm 1.8 prime lens. I've gotten some very nice shots with it and found that I wasn't as limited as expected by a having fixed lens.. Still got some good spur of the moment/candid shots with it.

Also, it looks like I have the same car as Thiddy (2010 Subaru Legacy, pearl white).

I'll need to dig through my pictures from my trip into the Philippines jungle now that I know this thread exists. Most of my shots didn't allow me to setup and I only had a second to capture, so don't expect amazing compositions, but I think some turned out well.
 
Looking forward to them Burdman. I've read many times over that a good prime lens is great to have.

Another quick product photo tip: When photographing large objects from a slight distance and your two lights aren't enough to properly light everything, you can use your flash to good effect*. Obviously you have to be careful of angles so your flash doesn't reflect back to you, but it can work wonders for the photos.

* This does not necessarily apply to point & shoot cameras, even good ones. I avoided flash like the plague with the S95 because it just didn't do well. Last night, I decided to pop the flash up on the T3 and it did a surprisingly great job. No diffuser or anything.

Example photo:

dimastech-easyxl-43.jpg
 
Great shots guys.

Unfortunately the Flash Diffusers I have aren't for my camera even when it was advertised to be so.

Here are some nice shots of what came in the other day.

picture.php



picture.php
 
Went to a wedding this weekend. The venue was beautiful but it was basically in the woods, so lighting was either really great (rare) or terrible (most of the time). Between the four people with good cameras I bet they get some good photos though. I took over 800 pictures just with my camera. Here are a couple shots from the day. :)

wedding01.jpg

wedding02.jpg

wedding03.jpg

wedding04.jpg

wedding05.jpg
 
Great shots Hockie. Love the random angle shots.

I think I know what aperture means now. lol Its the focused area of the picture where everything else is blurred. Right? lol
 
Last edited:
Great shots Hokie. Love the random angle shots.

I think I know what aperture means now. lol Its the focused area of the picture where everything else is blurred. Right? lol

Bingo. Large aperture (small number) is a shallow depth of field...it focuses on a small portion of the field, with the rest out of focus. Smaller aperture (large number) is a deep depth of field. More of the frame is in focus.

Thanks for the kind words guys. :)
 
Back