How to make nice shot using my D60 ?


Status
Not open for further replies.
You can convert this photo to black and white, play around with the tone and contrast.. :) That's a way to deal with noisy or underexposed photos.

DSC_42351.jpg


SHUTTER MODE S:1/10 A:F4.2 ISO: HI 1(3200)

yeah!! finally upload the photo. will try to upload more for advice.
 

You can convert this photo to black and white, play around with the tone and contrast.. :) That's a way to deal with noisy or underexposed photos.

OKie , sure bro..:)
 

Read this article.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-lenses.htm

A good example I can think of is digital PnS. The actual focal for a particular model is given as 6.4-32mm, which gives a 135-format equivalent of 28-140mm angle of view. Does it mean that you could handhold to 1/32 at the maximum zoom since the actual focal length is just 32mm? I don't think so unless you have really steady hands or you used vibration reduction.

yes. good point. i stand corrected.
 

there is motion blur to that picture.

look at the lady on the left, her right shoulder back.

and a lot more of a features have motion blur also. very obvious, if u look just a bit closer.

Yeah, now that you pointed to it, I see it. But the sentence in bold is a bit oxymoronic if you will. ;)

But really - when you see the pic, motion blur does not jump out, at me at least. :)
 

its not meant to be oxymoronic, unless you are referring to me too.

i was not able to detect any motion blur initially upon my first glance. its only when i consciously started to hunt for them by sticking my face closer to the monitor, I was then able to detect them. Plenty of them actually. it just happened that the noise hid a LOT of this.
 

Read this article.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-lenses.htm

A good example I can think of is digital PnS. The actual focal for a particular model is given as 6.4-32mm, which gives a 135-format equivalent of 28-140mm angle of view. Does it mean that you could handhold to 1/32 at the maximum zoom since the actual focal length is just 32mm? I don't think so unless you have really steady hands or you used vibration reduction.

Incorrect example! Because the image size is different.

I differ in opinions in some points on this DX consideration; and I always read website info with caution - many are just presenting what they think are right or they maybe actually right but with certain circumstances and assumptions and considerations which were not explicitly stated.

Anyway, this is only a rule of thumb... Use whatever formula that works for you. For me, actually the 1/fl dun work for me; I have shaky hands, esp. after walking with a heavy bag!

Thanks all
 

its not meant to be oxymoronic, unless you are referring to me too.

i was not able to detect any motion blur initially upon my first glance. its only when i consciously started to hunt for them by sticking my face closer to the monitor, I was then able to detect them. Plenty of them actually. it just happened that the noise hid a LOT of this.

Oh. I suppose it makes sence. :bsmilie: You might have a moshn blur fetish? :bigeyes:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.