What does 2.8-4.3 mean ??

"Kamal R. Prasad" wrote in
oups.com:

blurriness cannot.

can you explain this statement in greater detail? If my aperture is
constant, and am shooting indoors (portrait) -(preferably in constant
aperture mode), how does a faster ISO help? I know it helps for action
pics where the subject is fast moving -but not sure of this.


If you use a shutter speed slower than 1/100s handheld you are likely to
get a blurred picture due to camera movement.

If you cannot correctly expose a picture in the given light at your widest
aperture without resorting to show shutter speeds then you have two
options:-

1. increase the light.
2. increase the sensitivity of the medium - use a faster film or set a
higher ISO rating for your sensor.

The downside of 2 is that invariably you will get either more grain or
noise (depending on whether it is film or digital).

--
invalid = com

Richard Polhill wrote:
"Kamal R. Prasad" wrote in
oups.com:

blurriness cannot.

can you explain this statement in greater detail? If my aperture is
constant, and am shooting indoors (portrait) -(preferably in constant
aperture mode), how does a faster ISO help? I know it helps for action
pics where the subject is fast moving -but not sure of this.


If you use a shutter speed slower than 1/100s handheld you are likely to
get a blurred picture due to camera movement.

looks like VR provides something to help out with that. Or maybe one
needs a tripod for min shutter speed.

If you cannot correctly expose a picture in the given light at your widest
aperture without resorting to show shutter speeds then you have two
options:-

1. increase the light.
2. increase the sensitivity of the medium - use a faster film or set a
higher ISO rating for your sensor.

The downside of 2 is that invariably you will get either more grain or
noise (depending on whether it is film or digital).

So, does a faster film help in low light? I know about graininess -btw
and I use film.

thanks
-kamal


--
invalid = com

"Kamal R. Prasad" wrote in
oups.com:


looks like VR provides something to help out with that. Or maybe one
needs a tripod for min shutter speed.

To a certain extent, yes. If you're trying to capture a moving object,
however, no amount of VR or IS will help.

So, does a faster film help in low light? I know about graininess -btw
and I use film.


Well yes. That is what film speed means = speed of reaction to light.
Manufacturers go to great lengths to ensure that the characteristic
curve of a film is flat for a given exposure range that conforms to a
known rating - ISO rating. That way you can think of one stop of ISO
change as having the same affect as one stop of shutter speed or
aperture.

1 stop wider aperture = twice the light entering camera.
Meaning that half the exposure time or half as sensitive film is
required for correct exposure.
1 stop longer shutter speed = twice the exposure to the incoming light
Meaning that a half the incoming light or half as sensitive film
is required for correct exposure.
1 stop faster film = twice the sensitivity to the incoming light
Meaning half as much incoming light or half the exposure time is
required for correct exposure.

This reciprocity means that:-

To get a 1-stop faster shutter speed either open aperture 1 stop or use
a 1 stop faster film (100 - 200 ASA for instance).

To get a 1-stop smaller aperture (for greater depth of field) either use
a 1-stop slower shutter speed or 1 stop faster film.

To get less grain, use a 1-stop slower film (100 - 50 ASA for instance)
and either 1 stop wider aperture or 1 stop slower shutter speed.

This continues through to the development as well. As long as your
exposure range falls within the flat part of the characteristic curve of
the chosen film, you can also get a stop or two's adjustment by over- or
under-developing the exposed film. Known as push (or pull) processing,
this usually results in harsher, more contrasty negatives when
overdeveloping, or smoother, more pastel images when underdeveloping
(you can switch these for reversal - slide - film.)

I rather like the pictorial effect of the increased grain and contrast
resulting from 400ISO Ilford HP5 underexposed by 2 stops (as a 1600ISO
film) and commensurately overdeveloped by 2 stops, although I am
experimenting with some superfast B&W emulsions.
--
invalid = com

Thanks for the info. Im thinking of switching to digital for nature
photography. Do you think that the technology is good enough? How
expensive a camera wuld give me reasonable images? I have an N75 with
24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 Nikkor and a point and shoot 28-120mm canon film
camera

thanks
-kamal

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kamalpr

Richard Polhill wrote:
"Kamal R. Prasad" wrote in
oups.com:


looks like VR provides something to help out with that. Or maybe one
needs a tripod for min shutter speed.

To a certain extent, yes. If you're trying to capture a moving object,
however, no amount of VR or IS will help.

So, does a faster film help in low light? I know about graininess -btw
and I use film.


Well yes. That is what film speed means = speed of reaction to light.
Manufacturers go to great lengths to ensure that the characteristic
curve of a film is flat for a given exposure range that conforms to a
known rating - ISO rating. That way you can think of one stop of ISO
change as having the same affect as one stop of shutter speed or
aperture.

1 stop wider aperture = twice the light entering camera.
Meaning that half the exposure time or half as sensitive film is
required for correct exposure.
1 stop longer shutter speed = twice the exposure to the incoming light
Meaning that a half the incoming light or half as sensitive film
is required for correct exposure.
1 stop faster film = twice the sensitivity to the incoming light
Meaning half as much incoming light or half the exposure time is
required for correct exposure.

This reciprocity means that:-

To get a 1-stop faster shutter speed either open aperture 1 stop or use
a 1 stop faster film (100 - 200 ASA for instance).

To get a 1-stop smaller aperture (for greater depth of field) either use
a 1-stop slower shutter speed or 1 stop faster film.

To get less grain, use a 1-stop slower film (100 - 50 ASA for instance)
and either 1 stop wider aperture or 1 stop slower shutter speed.

This continues through to the development as well. As long as your
exposure range falls within the flat part of the characteristic curve of
the chosen film, you can also get a stop or two's adjustment by over- or
under-developing the exposed film. Known as push (or pull) processing,
this usually results in harsher, more contrasty negatives when
overdeveloping, or smoother, more pastel images when underdeveloping
(you can switch these for reversal - slide - film.)

I rather like the pictorial effect of the increased grain and contrast
resulting from 400ISO Ilford HP5 underexposed by 2 stops (as a 1600ISO
film) and commensurately overdeveloped by 2 stops, although I am
experimenting with some superfast B&W emulsions.
--
invalid = com

"Kamal R. Prasad" wrote in
ups.com:

Thanks for the info. Im thinking of switching to digital for nature
photography. Do you think that the technology is good enough? How
expensive a camera wuld give me reasonable images? I have an N75 with
24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 Nikkor and a point and shoot 28-120mm canon film
camera

I don't use digital myself but from what I've seen pretty much ANY of the
current crop of digital SLRs will give outstanding results.

I suppose the advantage for nature is the smaller sensor gives a narrower
angle of view for a given focal length, so a 200mm lens will give the same
magnification factor on the frame as a 300mm lens on a 35mm camera.

You could spend about 500 pounds on a body but you'd need to splash out a
bit on a longer fast lens. As you already have Nikon kit, I suspect you'll
be better off sticking with them as your existing lenses should be
compatible, if effectively a bit longer.

--
invalid = com

Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
"steve" wrote

Just trying to understand lenses. What does it mean when a lense gives
two f stops in a range. eg when buying a lense.
Is this the largest and smallest that the lense will go eg from to ?
2.8 to 4.3

It is for zoom lenses: the lens will be f2.8 at it's shortest focal
length and f4.3 at it's longest.


That is the wide open f-stop as well (maximum apeture).

In short, the maximum apeture for the shortest focal length is f2.8 and the
maximum apeture for the longest focal length is f4.3.

Having said that, I haven't seen a f2.8 - f4.3 lens before.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0

Kamal R. Prasad wrote:

Thanks for the info. Im thinking of switching to digital for nature
photography. Do you think that the technology is good enough? How
expensive a camera wuld give me reasonable images?

Sure, unless you are doing very large prints. I get nice results with
6MP at 13x19 inch.

I have an N75 with
24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 Nikkor

Is that the VR lens? If not it may not be all that useful. If so, it
would be handy but you would still probably want a wider lens such as
the kits lenses. A used D70 with the 18-70 lens is your best affordable
option though the D50 is smaller if you like that and a tad better low
light performance but a lesser kit lens. Or look at a D80 for the big
bright viewfinder and then maybe just get the body & wait till you can
afford a 12-24 lens. Some of the 3rd party wide zooms are not bad.

For nature photography (wildlife) you'll want a fast expensive long lens
some day but the digital crop frame will give you a 1.5x advantage on
your old lens to start with.

and a point and shoot 28-120mm canon film
camera

thanks
-kamal

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kamalpr

Richard Polhill wrote:

"Kamal R. Prasad" wrote in
groups.com:



looks like VR provides something to help out with that. Or maybe one
needs a tripod for min shutter speed.

To a certain extent, yes. If you're trying to capture a moving object,
however, no amount of VR or IS will help.


So, does a faster film help in low light? I know about graininess -btw
and I use film.


Well yes. That is what film speed means = speed of reaction to light.
Manufacturers go to great lengths to ensure that the characteristic
curve of a film is flat for a given exposure range that conforms to a
known rating - ISO rating. That way you can think of one stop of ISO
change as having the same affect as one stop of shutter speed or
aperture.

1 stop wider aperture = twice the light entering camera.
Meaning that half the exposure time or half as sensitive film is
required for correct exposure.
1 stop longer shutter speed = twice the exposure to the incoming light
Meaning that a half the incoming light or half as sensitive film
is required for correct exposure.
1 stop faster film = twice the sensitivity to the incoming light
Meaning half as much incoming light or half the exposure time is
required for correct exposure.

This reciprocity means that:-

To get a 1-stop faster shutter speed either open aperture 1 stop or use
a 1 stop faster film (100 - 200 ASA for instance).

To get a 1-stop smaller aperture (for greater depth of field) either use
a 1-stop slower shutter speed or 1 stop faster film.

To get less grain, use a 1-stop slower film (100 - 50 ASA for instance)
and either 1 stop wider aperture or 1 stop slower shutter speed.

This continues through to the development as well. As long as your
exposure range falls within the flat part of the characteristic curve of
the chosen film, you can also get a stop or two's adjustment by over- or
under-developing the exposed film. Known as push (or pull) processing,
this usually results in harsher, more contrasty negatives when
overdeveloping, or smoother, more pastel images when underdeveloping
(you can switch these for reversal - slide - film.)

I rather like the pictorial effect of the increased grain and contrast
resulting from 400ISO Ilford HP5 underexposed by 2 stops (as a 1600ISO
film) and commensurately overdeveloped by 2 stops, although I am
experimenting with some superfast B&W emulsions.
--
invalid = com



--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
Bay Natives
http://www.baynatives.com

Paul Furman wrote:

Is that the VR lens? If not it may not be all that useful. If so, it
would be handy but you would still probably want a wider lens such as
the kits lenses. A used D70 with the 18-70 lens is your best affordable
option though the D50 is smaller if you like that and a tad better low
light performance but a lesser kit lens. Or look at a D80 for the big
bright viewfinder and then maybe just get the body & wait till you can
afford a 12-24 lens. Some of the 3rd party wide zooms are not bad.


I think the Tokina 12-24 is supposed to be pretty good. I have been very
impressed with the Tokina 80-200mm and I don't expect that the 12-24 will
disappoint me if I should get hold of it.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0

Paul Furman wrote:
Kamal R. Prasad wrote:

Thanks for the info. Im thinking of switching to digital for nature
photography. Do you think that the technology is good enough? How
expensive a camera wuld give me reasonable images?

Sure, unless you are doing very large prints. I get nice results with
6MP at 13x19 inch.

I have an N75 with
24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 Nikkor

Is that the VR lens? If not it may not be all that useful. If so, it

yes -its a VR lens. Its still not useful in low-light conditions.

would be handy but you would still probably want a wider lens such as
the kits lenses. A used D70 with the 18-70 lens is your best affordable

kit lenses? The ones that are bundled with the dslr body? More often
than not, they are the cheaper ones and don't function well in
low-light. Its a marketing stunt to bundle the cheapest lens with the
body and show them that we are giving you a giant zoom lens which is
all you will ever need.

option though the D50 is smaller if you like that and a tad better low
light performance but a lesser kit lens. Or look at a D80 for the big
bright viewfinder and then maybe just get the body & wait till you can
afford a 12-24 lens. Some of the 3rd party wide zooms are not bad.

For nature photography (wildlife) you'll want a fast expensive long lens
some day but the digital crop frame will give you a 1.5x advantage on
your old lens to start with.

which of the Nikkors would you recommend? I like sunset shots [and
sunrise too -but can't get up on time] and some lit-up architecture.

thanks
-kamal

and a point and shoot 28-120mm canon film
camera

thanks
-kamal

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kamalpr

Richard Polhill wrote:

"Kamal R. Prasad" wrote in
groups.com:



looks like VR provides something to help out with that. Or maybe one
needs a tripod for min shutter speed.

To a certain extent, yes. If you're trying to capture a moving object,
however, no amount of VR or IS will help.


So, does a faster film help in low light? I know about graininess -btw
and I use film.


Well yes. That is what film speed means = speed of reaction to light.
Manufacturers go to great lengths to ensure that the characteristic
curve of a film is flat for a given exposure range that conforms to a
known rating - ISO rating. That way you can think of one stop of ISO
change as having the same affect as one stop of shutter speed or
aperture.

1 stop wider aperture = twice the light entering camera.
Meaning that half the exposure time or half as sensitive film is
required for correct exposure.
1 stop longer shutter speed = twice the exposure to the incoming light
Meaning that a half the incoming light or half as sensitive film
is required for correct exposure.
1 stop faster film = twice the sensitivity to the incoming light
Meaning half as much incoming light or half the exposure time is
required for correct exposure.

This reciprocity means that:-

To get a 1-stop faster shutter speed either open aperture 1 stop or use
a 1 stop faster film (100 - 200 ASA for instance).

To get a 1-stop smaller aperture (for greater depth of field) either use
a 1-stop slower shutter speed or 1 stop faster film.

To get less grain, use a 1-stop slower film (100 - 50 ASA for instance)
and either 1 stop wider aperture or 1 stop slower shutter speed.

This continues through to the development as well. As long as your
exposure range falls within the flat part of the characteristic curve of
the chosen film, you can also get a stop or two's adjustment by over- or
under-developing the exposed film. Known as push (or pull) processing,
this usually results in harsher, more contrasty negatives when
overdeveloping, or smoother, more pastel images when underdeveloping
(you can switch these for reversal - slide - film.)

I rather like the pictorial effect of the increased grain and contrast
resulting from 400ISO Ilford HP5 underexposed by 2 stops (as a 1600ISO
film) and commensurately overdeveloped by 2 stops, although I am
experimenting with some superfast B&W emulsions.
--
invalid = com



--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
Bay Natives
http://www.baynatives.com

Kamal R. Prasad wrote:

Paul Furman wrote:

Kamal R. Prasad wrote:

Thanks for the info. Im thinking of switching to digital for nature
photography. Do you think that the technology is good enough? How
expensive a camera wuld give me reasonable images?

Sure, unless you are doing very large prints. I get nice results with
6MP at 13x19 inch.

I have an N75 with
24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 Nikkor

Is that the VR lens? If not it may not be all that useful. If so, it

yes -its a VR lens. Its still not useful in low-light conditions.

Useful in low light but not for action in low light.

would be handy but you would still probably want a wider lens such as
the kits lenses. A used D70 with the 18-70 lens is your best affordable

kit lenses? The ones that are bundled with the dslr body? More often
than not, they are the cheaper ones and don't function well in
low-light. Its a marketing stunt to bundle the cheapest lens with the
body and show them that we are giving you a giant zoom lens which is
all you will ever need.

The D70 18-70 kit lens gets good reviews and it's not particularly cheap
at around $300. It's not a fast lens, for that get the $1,700 17-35,
24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8's.

option though the D50 is smaller if you like that and a tad better low
light performance but a lesser kit lens. Or look at a D80 for the big
bright viewfinder and then maybe just get the body & wait till you can
afford a 12-24 lens. Some of the 3rd party wide zooms are not bad.

For nature photography (wildlife) you'll want a fast expensive long lens
some day but the digital crop frame will give you a 1.5x advantage on
your old lens to start with.

which of the Nikkors would you recommend? I like sunset shots [and
sunrise too -but can't get up on time] and some lit-up architecture.

See above if you don't have budget constraints. Another option is prime
lenses, that's the only way you'll get faster than f/2.8 anyways. And
any f/2.8 zoom will cost you a mint. I just bought an old manual 28mm
f/2.0 AI-S for $200 or for AF on a budget look at the 35mm f/2 used or a
24 or 28mm f/2.8. A classic 50mm f/1.8 is nice & cheap but too long on
digital for normal field of view landscapes. I have a 12-24 and I just
love that wide andgle for architecture and certain landscape scenes.
It's rarely necessary to have a fast lens that wide. If you aren't
shooting wildlife, you don't need a particularly fast or long telephoto
and your 24-120 should be fine. If you want low light performance get a
fast normal prime.

--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
Bay Natives
http://www.baynatives.com