|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
Better camera & Doubled interval photography.
Aug 17 14 07:29 pm Link Look in to shooting HDR 3 exposer photos. L2 Aug 17 14 07:36 pm Link Larger sensor and higher resolution are not always the same. There are many cameras that could be considered "better" based on your needs. I find the 7D (due for a replacement soon) is a great camera in the ~26mm sensor size, where as the 5DMkIII is amazing in the 35mm sensor size. BTW I would not buy a 7D currently, it's too close to being replaced but perhaps a 70D. It's not as robust a build but a lot more than your current camera. As for lens, well I only ever purchased lens that can workd on all current Canon DSLRs. Mostly the Canon L series or the Sigma Art series lens. Both are top quality and will keep up optically with any current camera. It's really a matter of what works best for you, if you are using the provided kit lens? If so its probably not even keeping up with your current body. Updated that first, just stick to ones that are not "DX Only" and you will have them for many many years. Aug 17 14 07:37 pm Link Nikons have built in intervelometers and hooking two together should be easy either optically or by cable. Aug 18 14 12:41 am Link I thin what you are looking for is a sequencer, that fires one than the others. They are often used with strobes. Aug 18 14 06:16 am Link I'm even more confused. What would be the highest resolution camera that is most similar to what I currently have? I definitely want to upgrade. I mostly photograph nearby or distant landscapes and would like the landscapes to be very sharp and detailed. Aug 19 14 05:50 pm Link There's absolutely no reason you shouldn't be able to get poster-size pictures from the camera you have. Perhaps the problem is the kit lens? Check into getting better lenses so the images will be crisper and pop off the screen or page. I did two museum shows with old Fuji S2 and S3 cameras. They're 12 MP. The 20x30 prints looked great. Today, most entry-level cameras have more MP. Nikon's D3200, for instance, has 24MP. You can get it plus kit lens for under $400 when it's on special. Canon has similar options. Both manufacturers make superb glass to go with the cameras. Or if you want to jump up in the money, you could get one of the Fuji X series cameras with interchangeable lenses. The prime lenses for those are amazing. Aug 19 14 06:08 pm Link Mad Hatter Imagery wrote: Resolution is format size, megapixels, noise, and lens quality. It is your basic balancing act. The big mistake people make is that they focus of just megapixels and format size without considering lenses an noise. Aug 19 14 06:38 pm Link Yes I understand that megapixels isn't everything and in fact megapixels beyond 6 make no major difference until you're multiplying them by factors of 10 at that point. But I guess pixel density is the type of extra detail I am interested in. I do have a second less that cost $100 but honestly never use it. The one the camera came with seems superior and zooms. I just take photos of distant trees and they seem fuzzy. I can see leaves but can imagine far better detail with a better camera. A hobbiest photographer like myself took my picture once and those images were very sharp. He had a larger barrel on his camera and I assume similar medium range studio lens. Aug 19 14 10:42 pm Link Has light sensitivity at 100iso improved much since Digital Rebel came out? I have tried photographing the night sky at 30 second exposures and don't even get blurry dots in the sky. Aug 21 14 10:10 pm Link 100 ISO should be 100 ISO, new or old. If your exposure is too short to register the stars, it will still be too short with a new camera. What has changed is the how much noise you'll see in long exposures. (currently a sad story with the Nikon D810, but let's not distract from the message) A more modern body should show a cleaner image for a long exposure. Do bear in mind, though, that a really long exposure (like, say, an hour) will show star trails, due to the motion of the earth. For that reason, you might want to raise your ISO somewhat. Aug 22 14 09:20 am Link Mad Hatter Imagery wrote: 100 ISO and what aperture? if it is f1.8 make sure the lens cap is off Aug 22 14 01:43 pm Link Really? I had heard all ISOs were being made to be more sensitive to light. What does each number of ISO represent scientifically? Aug 22 14 11:26 pm Link ISO is used to measure sensitivity to light. In digital photography ISO is electrical gain, which manifests as sensitivity to light. ISO is a unit of measure, just like f number is for aperture. Saying that they are making ISO more sensitive to light is the equivalent of saying that they are making the inch longer. What is actually happening is that camera manufacturers have better manufacturing techniques and better processing algorithms, which result in cleaner images at higher ISO. Am I making sense? Aug 23 14 02:33 am Link Its not your camera. But I have this sneaky feeling you already know that. Your pulling our leg aren't you?  Aug 23 14 04:41 am Link |
