RHP Photo Competition: MOVEMENT/MOTION

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
I think you can also use Minolta Lenses on Sony Konica Digital SLRs.

Thanks. That goes to show how much I have been looking into this lately: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0601/06011901konicaminoltaout.asp

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
You guys know your stuff...

I ordered a new camera at the weekend. Strict budget (because you can get carried away and spend unlimited amounts on this stuff). My choice boiled down to a Canon EOS 400D (Rebel Xti in the USA) with 18-55 & 75-300 lenses. Or Nikon D80 with a 18-135 lens. I chose the Nikon.

Did I do right?

A pity the competitions are over. Would have liked to have entered some pics using a decent camera.

You certainly can get carried away! It's very difficult to stop yourself succumbing to lens lust and spending a fortune.

The Nikon D80 was the update to the D70 which was an award winning camera. It has many features not usually found at that price point have such as true spot metering, auto ISO, wireless remote flash control and viewfinder grid lines. However, you will probably always try and avoid ISO's over 800 with the D80. If you do need to go over 800 you'll need to nail the exposure to prevent excessive sensor noise.

Ultimately though it's the lenses that will make the greatest difference. I haven't used the 18-135 lens myself but haven't heard anything particularly bad about it either. You might want to add the 50mm 1.4 (or 1.8 if you're on a budget) as these have by far the best performance/price ratio of any Nikon lens. Maybe the 18-70mm comes close. I still use that occasionally even though I now have some top glass.

You might consider the Nikon 18-200VR lens if you don't want to be a lens swapper. Ragnorak is certainly right to question the quality of long range consumer zooms but the 18-200VR is getting a reputation for being far better than it should be. It is great for those that don't want to change lenses and it has image stabilization too.

I think you will love you D80 🙂

Please post piccies when you get it!

Originally posted by Nordlys
I'll probably buy a digital SLR soon, too, and then get back into aurora photography. Most likely I'll get a Minolta, as I already have a great (and expensive) wideangle lens for Minolta. The only problem is that I don't know anyone who uses a Minolta for aurora photography (or night photography in general). I'll see if I can find any reports or reviews abou ...[text shortened]... ant to run it again, but I would certainly participate if someone else would revive it.

Nordles. Night photography can be a problem with DSLRs unless you get the right one. On long exposures i.e around 15 seconds and above, the sensor starts to heat up and this can start to show as rather unattractive lines across you picture. Many star shooters prefer to take multiple quicker exposures and overlay them in post-processing. I appreciate that isn't really an option with the nordlys though. Most of the more recent cameras have the problem under control and the lastest offerings have live view so I certainly hope that have the problem sorted.

As gatecrasher says, the Sony DSLRs have the Minolta A mount and can probably take your lenses if they are relatively modern but I would check before purchase as I know some of Canon DSLR's can't use earlier Canon lenses and the D70 (and I believe the D80) can only use lenses with on-board CPU's.

Have fun though and, again, post piccies somewhere.

Originally posted by Wheely
Nordles. Night photography can be a problem with DSLRs unless you get the right one. On long exposures i.e around 15 seconds and above, the sensor starts to heat up and this can start to show as rather unattractive lines across you picture.

I know. I have followed several discussions about cameras in a German aurora forum. There are even big differences between individual cameras that are supposedly the same. However, I don't think it's that much of a problem for aurora photography anymore. 15 seconds would be an extremely long exposure time for an aurora picture with a f1.8 lens, most of the times I use something between 4 and 8 seconds.

Originally posted by Nordlys
I know. I have followed several discussions about cameras in a German aurora forum. There are even big differences between individual cameras that are supposedly the same. However, I don't think it's that much of a problem for aurora photography anymore. 15 seconds would be an extremely long exposure time for an aurora picture with a f1.8 lens, most of the times I use something between 4 and 8 seconds.

Do you use an aperture of 1.8 or is it just that you use a 1.8 lens? I'm hoping to get a chance to shoot some aurora shots myself sometime and your shots are great examples.

Originally posted by Wheely
Do you use an aperture of 1.8 or is it just that you use a 1.8 lens? I'm hoping to get a chance to shoot some aurora shots myself sometime and your shots are great examples.

It's a 1.8 lens, and I use an aperture of 1.8. The more light, the better - shorter exposure times give a lot more detail, especially when the aurora is moving fast. And depth of field isn't really important for aurora shots.

Originally posted by Nordlys
Absolutely.

Oh, I think I better repeat my winner announcement post, as it got buried under election talk:

Congratulations, DdV (and a special thanks to Janneke )! It was a close race between DdV and pinkthunder, leaving everybody else far behind. Even though pinkthunder didn't make the first place with "Merry-Go-Round", he gets the title of Photograph ...[text shortened]... Nordlys) 0
23 7. Ballroom (pawnhandler) 0
24 13. Monsoon (pawnhandler) 0
25 25. V (DdV) 0

Congrats DdV and pinkthunder. Very well done indeed!

Originally posted by Wheely
You might consider the Nikon 18-200VR lens if you don't want to be a lens swapper. Ragnorak is certainly right to question the quality of long range consumer zooms but the 18-200VR is getting a reputation for being far better than it should be. It is great for those that don't want to change lenses and it has image stabilization too.

Thanks for the input, Wheely.

I was very tempted to get the 18-200VR, but it would have pushed the price up by 70%. But the 18-135 seems a fairly decent all-purpose lens. At least for starters...

Originally posted by Wheely
That must have been a huge number of shots you took! I managed 670

I took about 1400 over the whole day. My brief was just for the prep, the ceremony and a few posed shots after, so I chilled for the reception. Then, when I (and everybody else) was rat arsed, I whipped out the camera again, and started snapping. It was too dark for autofocus, and I was jumping around like a lunatic, so I knew that I'd have to snap like crazy and hope for the best. I got 4 or 5 half decent shots out of about 500 at that stage of the night.

D

Originally posted by Nordlys
Absolutely.

Oh, I think I better repeat my winner announcement post, as it got buried under election talk:

Congratulations, DdV (and a special thanks to Janneke )! It was a close race between DdV and pinkthunder, leaving everybody else far behind. Even though pinkthunder didn't make the first place with "Merry-Go-Round", he gets the title of Photograph ...[text shortened]... Nordlys) 0
23 7. Ballroom (pawnhandler) 0
24 13. Monsoon (pawnhandler) 0
25 25. V (DdV) 0

Thanks to everybody for the votes and the comments. This picture is dear to me and still brings a smile to my face every time I see it. I'm very glad it has this effect on other people too.

Congratulations to pinkthunder, it's good to see him take the photographer of the round price with three very strong entries.

By the way, it feels funny to finish both first and last in this competition :-)

I'll try to respond to the question about my entries in the next few posts. Due to circumstances, I haven't been able to follow this thread as closely as I would have liked, so don't hesitate to point out I overlooked a question or remark.

David

Originally posted by Wheely

And one more thing, perhaps DdV can tell me what "Shadow" actually is. I really like it.

Thanks Wheely, I was glad when I saw your comments on that picture, because I was starting to think I was the only person on the planet that likes this image. It was shot when the metro train I was riding in arrived at the station. Parts of it are reflections in the train window, and the streaks are parts of the metro station. I'm pretty but not entirely sure the right side of the picture shows a face :-)

Shutter speed was 1/80, shot at iso1600 (which explains the noise).

David

Originally posted by pinkthunder
Congratulations, DDV! Your adorable daughter--and your skill--made for a fantastic photo. I'd like to know, what was making the water streak? Was it coming down on top of her (from a shower head, perhaps), or was she causing the splashes? I just assumed it was coming down from a shower head, then someone pointed out her hands moving. I was focused on her ...[text shortened]... hope someone picks it (the competitions) up when you're done.

Best wishes, everyone. :-)

Thanks for the compliments 🙂 The water streaks are drops coming down from the previous splash Janneke made, there's no shower head above the bath tub. I think shutter speed here was 1/60, and I was lucky the sun was shining through the window behind her, which made the water sparkle nicely.

David

Originally posted by Ragnorak
1st - 10 pts - Bathing - Almost perfect. Love the blurred hand which is calling all the splashing. You should probably clone out the water pipe in the background as it's making the image look sloped a little.

You're right about the water pipe. I tried rotating the picture so the pipe is vertical, but that doesn't work either, so I kept my original composition. I don't think I would be able to clone out the pipe myself, I'm not very good at that kind of processing, but I agree the picture would be better without it.

David

Originally posted by DdV
Thanks for the compliments 🙂 The water streaks are drops coming down from the previous splash Janneke made, there's no shower head above the bath tub.

I never even considered the possibility that the water might come from a shower head until pinkthunder asked. Then I saw that some of the water did look like it could come from a shower head, but I figured you probably wouldn't turn on the shower if half of the water would land outside the tub. 🙂

Originally posted by Ragnorak

The competitions may not be over. A little birdy says that somebody might be stepping up to the plate. I'm sure if we can show that there is still interest, then that somebody may well keep it going. 😀

D

I'll stop my spamming after this message, I hope I didn't miss any questions about my entries, and I would have liked to be able to participate in the discussions about the topic, but I haven't been home much the last two weeks.

I hope the competitions continue too, I would certainly try to participate in them. This was, again, a very good round, with insightful comments on a lot of pictures. I can imagine it's frustrating to put a lot of work into it only to see the thread disappear from the first page after a few posts, but when I look at the thread now, I find it very interesting, even if the number of active participants is limited. Maybe we could think about minor modifications to entice more people to participate or to stimulate discussion?

David