50mm pictures with D300

On 22 Jan 2008 09:57:37 GMT, Chris Malcolm <cam.RemoveThis@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote
in <5vlt0hF1nae67U2.RemoveThis@mid.individual.net>:

>In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems John Navas <spamfilter1.RemoveThis@navasgroup.com> wrote:

>> That childish response is actually correct. Moving with your feet is
>> *not* the same thing as zooming (changing focal length) because it
>> changes *perspective*, which zooming does not. It's why a "dolly zoom"
>> is not the same as lens zoom alone.
>
>True, but since we often use zoom not to acquire the specific kind of
>perspective which only a specific focal length can give, but simply to
>catch the object of interest at an image filling size, "zooming with
>the feet" is a perfectly intelligible and useful concept.

Only in a crude snapshot sense -- the perspective difference is all too
often dramatic.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

On 22 Jan 2008 16:43:30 GMT, Chris Malcolm <cam.DeleteThis@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote
in <5vmkpiF1mp9naU1.DeleteThis@mid.individual.net>:

>The impossibility of answering such questions, plus the theory of
>perspective projection in images which began with the painters and
>geometers of the Renaissance, is the reason many of us consider that
>perspective is a property of the entire image, not just "the subject",
>and certainly not "distance to the subject".

>It's impossible to escape confusion if you think perspective has to do
>with "distance to the subject".

With all due respect, but statements are simply incorrect.

See <http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dof2.shtml> for how
dramatic the difference can be.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:17:15 -0000, "Sosumi" <sosumi.DeleteThis@home.nl> wrote in
<P4udne3EGa6TigvanZ2dnUVZ8t2snZ2d.DeleteThis@novis.pt>:

>"Rita Berkowitz" <ritaberk2008.DeleteThis@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:13pa78s4h83fc1a@news.supernews.com...
>> Sosumi wrote:
>>
>>> While I was waiting for my new zoom lens, I only had the 50mm left.
>>> So I thought about something someone said someday: take pictures
>>> without a zoomlens to learn composition.
>>> So for all you boys and girls I hauled my camera around town and
>>> tried to see....
>>> I think there's absolutely some truth in this. You do feel that you
>>> have to "create" instead of zooming.
>>
>> You got it! You did good. I love the old 50 and it is nice to be able to
>> get the results you want by zooming with your feet.

>My feet are not that great, but it's worth it.
>Ansel Adams had quite a few remarkable expressions that can help taking
>better pictures. When wise men talk, I always listen..
>
>"A good photograph is knowing where to stand."

Unfortunately, you have his meaning backwards. Perspective was very
important to AA, a big part of what he was talking about. In other
words, pick where to stand based on composition and perspective, and
then select the lens needed to get that image. Moving in or out to
compensate for the wrong lens is not knowing where to stand.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

"Dudley Hanks" <hanks.dudley.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xyflj.36058$fj2.34964@edtnps82...
> > Depth of field does not change with focal length -- it changes with
> > focal distance. See the links in my prior message.
>
> But, two different telephotos will likely produce differing depth of field
> at the same focal length, right?

Given the same magnification, wrong.

>Besides, find an old telephoto lens, lets
> say a pre 1980's vintage, and look at the depth of field scale on the lens
> as you move the focal length. Then come back and tell me that the depth
of
> field does not change with focal length.

Now try that again but this time changing the focus distance to maintain the
same magnification as you zoom.

> But, this is the crux of the matter. We don't want to keep the subject
> magnification constant.

No point in comparing apples to oranges then.

>We want to play with subject magnification which is
> what the whole idea of this thread is about.

I don't remember the OP saying that? In fact these were his words :
"take pictures without a zoom lens to learn composition".

MrT.


MrT.
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

Dudley Hanks wrote:

[CHOMP]

> Rusty, I thought you had given up?
>
> Here's a question for you:
>
> Let's say you've just been given a shot at covering a major news event for a
> big circulation newspaper.
>
> When you get to the event, your subject is surrounded by an impenetrable
> circle of newshounds, and you can't get past the outer perimeter of the
> group to get a shot.
>
> You've talked your way into the position, and all you have is an auto-focus
> point-and-shoot camera with which to capture your award winning image.

Why was I given a shot at covering a major new event for a big
circulation newspaper, when all I have is a P&S? The news editor
needs his head read! lol

> I'll
> give you this much, it's a Canon "A" series camera, or something similar, so
> you have a good lens, manual control should you want to use it, and fairly
> adequate white balance / ISO range. But, a limited flash.
>
> How can you get a well-framed, properly exposed / focused image that will
> need minimal cropping in order to get your picture on the front page and
> command the big pay cheque?
>

Well seeing that I cant get closer, it depends on the shot...... I
could shoot longer FL to selectively compose minimal elements within
the frame, or I could shoot wider and go for a more overall view of
the scene. Both compositions could well be worthy of media release if
they depict the moment, event, story or editor's "angle" faithfully.

Depending on the light, I could select a higher ISO to help maximise
the use of ambient and flash, and this would also help minimise motion
blur due to camera movement when longer FLs are used. Shooting
shorter FLs may allow for a lower ISO to be used effectively.

In the extreme (and if light is very low) I could also "push" beyond
the camera's correct exposure in order to gain a faster shutter speed,
knowing full well that some post capture processing will be required
to lift exposure and minimise noise... knowing the editor and intended
use of the image would be handy here, as this would allow me to access
just how far things could be pushed.

Then of course there is the final option.... and that is despite all
my best efforts, I still come away empty handed.
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

"Dudley Hanks" <hanks.dudley.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:orclj.35954$fj2.32481@edtnps82...
>
>
> Some people are just too lazy to zoom with their feet. They would rather
> spend money, lots of it, and let technology create their art.

Dudley, my friend, you can move you feet all you want, but your fixed focal
length lens will not change focal length. DO YOU UNDERSTAND? DO YOU?
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:21:19 GMT, "Kinon O'Cann" <fuged RemoveThis @bout.it> wrote
in <Pmrlj.8232$ec.1115@trndny02>:

>"Dudley Hanks" <hanks.dudley RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:orclj.35954$fj2.32481@edtnps82...
>>
>> Some people are just too lazy to zoom with their feet. They would rather
>> spend money, lots of it, and let technology create their art.
>
>Dudley, my friend, you can move you feet all you want, but your fixed focal
>length lens will not change focal length. DO YOU UNDERSTAND? DO YOU?

Apparently not. Or just too stubborn to admit it.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

On Jan 23, 1:18 pm, PixelPix <m....TakeThisOut@pixelpix.com.au> wrote:
> Dudley Hanks wrote:
>
> [CHOMP]
>
> > Rusty, I thought you had given up?
>
> > Here's a question for you:
>
> > Let's say you've just been given a shot at covering a major news event for a
> > big circulation newspaper.
>
> > When you get to the event, your subject is surrounded by an impenetrable
> > circle of newshounds, and you can't get past the outer perimeter of the
> > group to get a shot.
>
> > You've talked your way into the position, and all you have is an auto-focus
> > point-and-shoot camera with which to capture your award winning image.
>
> Why was I given a shot at covering a major new event for a big
> circulation newspaper, when all I have is a P&S?  The news editor
> needs his head read! lol
>
> >  I'll
> > give you this much, it's a Canon "A" series camera, or something similar, so
> > you have a good lens, manual control should you want to use it, and fairly
> > adequate white balance / ISO range.  But, a limited flash.
>
> > How can you get a well-framed, properly exposed / focused image that will
> > need minimal cropping in order to get your picture on the front page and
> > command the big pay cheque?
>
> Well seeing that I cant get closer, it depends on the shot......  I
> could shoot longer FL to selectively compose minimal elements within
> the frame, or I could shoot wider and go for a more overall view of
> the scene. Both compositions could well be worthy of media release if
> they depict the moment, event, story or editor's "angle" faithfully.
>
> Depending on the light, I could select a higher ISO to help maximise
> the use of ambient and flash, and this would also help minimise motion
> blur due to camera movement when longer FLs are used.   Shooting
> shorter FLs may allow for a lower ISO to be used effectively.
>
> In the extreme (and if light is very low) I could also "push" beyond
> the camera's correct exposure in order to gain a faster shutter speed,
> knowing full well that some post capture processing will be required
> to lift exposure and minimise noise... knowing the editor and intended
> use of the image would be handy here, as this would allow me to access
> just how far things could be pushed.
>
> Then of course there is the final option.... and that is despite all
> my best efforts, I still come away empty handed.

Oh I forgot my question.....

The point of this is??
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 11:39:55 -0800 (PST), JimKramer <jimG DeleteThis @jlkramer.net>
wrote in
<c4df15ad-019b-4208-9483-15dc4e998365 DeleteThis @v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>:

>On Jan 22, 12:07 pm, "Dudley Hanks" <hanks.dud... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:

>> It's interesting that, if you talk to 98% of the photographers and camera
>> sales persons, they will think about "zooming" in terms of image
>> magnification and not perspective.  Why else does it say "4x" or "6x" or
>> "10x" on the front of most point and shoot cameras?  Is the manufacturer
>> referring to a six times flattening effect of perspective as you zoom in?  I
>> think not.
>>
>> The remaining 2% of academic photographic purists seem to be confusing the
>> telephoto effect of compressing perspective as the most identifiable
>> characteristic of a "zoom" lens.  True, its one characteristic, but it's
>> neither the only characteristic, nor the most significant.
>>
>> Why is it that the 2% of academic purists must always think they are right
>> and the 98% of practitioners must always be wrong?

>Have you used or heard the term "hot water heater"? Why would you
>need to heat water that is already hot? And yet 98% of water heater
>users refer to the water heater as a "hot water heater."
>
>I hope the power of analogy is not lost on you.

LOL! Like my ex, having said something nonsensical, exclaiming, "You
knew what I meant!" (If I really knew what she meant, I wouldn't have
asked.)

When we use terms improperly, we only serve to confuse the discussion
and hinder understanding, a serious disservice to those that aren't
sufficiently expert to know the difference.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

On Jan 23, 1:57 pm, "Dudley Hanks" <hanks.dud....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> "PixelPix" <m....RemoveThis@pixelpix.com.au> wrote in message
>
> news:998b2644-8e10-4141-a005-19e94a115f89@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Dudley Hanks wrote:
>
> > [CHOMP]
>
> >> Rusty, I thought you had given up?
>
> >> Here's a question for you:
>
> >> Let's say you've just been given a shot at covering a major news event
> >> for a
> >> big circulation newspaper.
>
> >> When you get to the event, your subject is surrounded by an impenetrable
> >> circle of newshounds, and you can't get past the outer perimeter of the
> >> group to get a shot.
>
> >> You've talked your way into the position, and all you have is an
> >> auto-focus
> >> point-and-shoot camera with which to capture your award winning image.
>
> > Why was I given a shot at covering a major new event for a big
> > circulation newspaper, when all I have is a P&S?  The news editor
> > needs his head read! lol
>
> I told you, you talked your way into the assignment.  It's your incredible
> charm that lulled the editor into a sense of confidence in your work.
> Grin...
>
>
>
>
>
> >>  I'll
> >> give you this much, it's a Canon "A" series camera, or something similar,
> >> so
> >> you have a good lens, manual control should you want to use it, and
> >> fairly
> >> adequate white balance / ISO range.  But, a limited flash.
>
> >> How can you get a well-framed, properly exposed / focused image that will
> >> need minimal cropping in order to get your picture on the front page and
> >> command the big pay cheque?
>
> > Well seeing that I cant get closer, it depends on the shot......  I
> > could shoot longer FL to selectively compose minimal elements within
> > the frame, or I could shoot wider and go for a more overall view of
> > the scene. Both compositions could well be worthy of media release if
> > they depict the moment, event, story or editor's "angle" faithfully.
>
> How are you going to frame / focus your shot?  You won't get it pointing
> your camera through the crowd...  And no editor in his right mind (but
> that's already been called into question) will pay for a shot of a group of
> reporters swarming a hunkered down fellow who is undistinguishable from the
> swarming mass...
>
>
>
> > Depending on the light, I could select a higher ISO to help maximise
> > the use of ambient and flash, and this would also help minimise motion
>
> But, it would kill your chances if the picture will be printed large and in
> colour...  Too much noise...  And, as noted, you're about 15 feet from your
> subject so you are just outside the effective Canon range of from 7 to 11 or
> 12 feet...  Possibly just on the fringe at ISO 1600, but that has already
> been ruled out...
>
> > blur due to camera movement when longer FLs are used.   Shooting
> > shorter FLs may allow for a lower ISO to be used effectively.
>
> That's a better idea, you're only about fifteen feet from your subject...
> Just out of flash range...  Who else is there and which of their resources
> can you take advantage of?
>
>
>
> > In the extreme (and if light is very low) I could also "push" beyond
> > the camera's correct exposure in order to gain a faster shutter speed,
> > knowing full well that some post capture processing will be required
> > to lift exposure and minimise noise... knowing the editor
>
> It's a point and shoot for God's sake.  I doubt you'll be able to get rid of
> the noise.  Have you seen test shots of a Canon A570 or A720 when blown up
> big, in colour, and at high ISO?  Ugh, not pretty.  Noise starts creeping in
> at 200, is becoming pronounced by 400, beyond acceptability at 800, and like
> a blizzard at 1600...  Great for shots of Granny and her apples, but you've
> talked yourself into this gig and its all you've got....
>
> and intended
>
> > use of the image would be handy here, as this would allow me to access
> > just how far things could be pushed.
>
> I'm the editor for this one.  I won't accept much noise...  But, I will
> accept a bit of excess room around the edges...  The 7 or 8 meg sensor will
> produce some big images.  Your picture won't cover the whole front page,
> but, if it's good, it could get a fair number of columnar inches, so you've
> got some room for cropping...
>
>
>
> > Then of course there is the final option.... and that is despite all
> > my best efforts, I still come away empty handed.
>
> Your on the right track, you won't have to eat KD.
>
> Good First Shot, can you do anything different and get the cheque?
>
> I'm sure you can,
> Dudley

You can hypothesize all you want, but it only makes this all the more
meaningless.
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

On Jan 23, 2:01 pm, "Dudley Hanks" <hanks.dud....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> "PixelPix" <m....RemoveThis@pixelpix.com.au> wrote in message
>
> news:a4c60b1c-1e53-40c1-883a-9ecf5c4fc3e4@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 23, 1:18 pm, PixelPix <m....RemoveThis@pixelpix.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dudley Hanks wrote:
>
> > [CHOMP]
>
> > > Rusty, I thought you had given up?
>
> > > Here's a question for you:
>
> > > Let's say you've just been given a shot at covering a major news event
> > > for a
> > > big circulation newspaper.
>
> > > When you get to the event, your subject is surrounded by an impenetrable
> > > circle of newshounds, and you can't get past the outer perimeter of the
> > > group to get a shot.
>
> > > You've talked your way into the position, and all you have is an
> > > auto-focus
> > > point-and-shoot camera with which to capture your award winning image.
>
> > Why was I given a shot at covering a major new event for a big
> > circulation newspaper, when all I have is a P&S? The news editor
> > needs his head read! lol
>
> > > I'll
> > > give you this much, it's a Canon "A" series camera, or something
> > > similar, so
> > > you have a good lens, manual control should you want to use it, and
> > > fairly
> > > adequate white balance / ISO range. But, a limited flash.
>
> > > How can you get a well-framed, properly exposed / focused image that
> > > will
> > > need minimal cropping in order to get your picture on the front page and
> > > command the big pay cheque?
>
> > Well seeing that I cant get closer, it depends on the shot...... I
> > could shoot longer FL to selectively compose minimal elements within
> > the frame, or I could shoot wider and go for a more overall view of
> > the scene. Both compositions could well be worthy of media release if
> > they depict the moment, event, story or editor's "angle" faithfully.
>
> > Depending on the light, I could select a higher ISO to help maximise
> > the use of ambient and flash, and this would also help minimise motion
> > blur due to camera movement when longer FLs are used. Shooting
> > shorter FLs may allow for a lower ISO to be used effectively.
>
> > In the extreme (and if light is very low) I could also "push" beyond
> > the camera's correct exposure in order to gain a faster shutter speed,
> > knowing full well that some post capture processing will be required
> > to lift exposure and minimise noise... knowing the editor and intended
> > use of the image would be handy here, as this would allow me to access
> > just how far things could be pushed.
>
> > Then of course there is the final option.... and that is despite all
> > my best efforts, I still come away empty handed.
>
> Oh I forgot my question.....
>
> The point of this is??
>
> Oh, I don't know, If you pay attention, you might just learn something from
> an old, blind photog who's been around the block a few times.

Just make your point drop the BS.
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300 

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:02:05 -0500, "Rita Berkowitz"
<ritaberk2008.DeleteThis@aol.com> wrote in <13pcj00lcud4l53.DeleteThis@news.supernews.com>:

>> So how exactly would you zoom with your feet in these cases:
>> <http://img139.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p1040091q8fr5.jpg>
>> <http://img408.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p1030792filteredcropge6.jpg>
>> <http://img107.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p1030774filterednt2.jpg>
>> <http://img256.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p1030708filteredmo8.jpg>
>> <http://img229.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p1020078il3.jpg>
>
>You move back or forth. If you get a creative spark you can move side to
>side.

Side to side is not zooming. Oops!
Moving forward gets you and your gear seriously wet. OOPS!
It's a bitch when your ego is pricked, isn't it?

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
 >> Stay informed about: 50mm pictures with D300