If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Apaature and shutter speeds
I understand, I think that the lower the F number the better. And it looks
like the average digital camera is an f2.8. So, my question is, where does shutter speed come into play? And what is shutter lag and all that other jargon? What would I want in a digital P&S that is quick to take pictures (of kids and sports) without getting blurry pictures? Also want it ultra compact ... maybe compact. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Apaature and shutter speeds
On 2007-10-25, parkerne u38569@uwe was suckered into using a fake
web-forum to write in the public newsgroup rec.photo.digital.point+shoot: I understand, I think that the lower the F number the better. Better for what? A smaller f-number indicates a larger apperture, meaning that the lens can let more light through; a large apperture also means that there is less "depth of field" so you need more accurate focussing. In practice, compact digital cameras usually have such a small image sensor that there will always be considerable depth of field, meaning that more of the image will be "in focus". Most of the time, your camera will probably be using a smaller apperture than the maximum it has available. If you have a "zoom" lens, the maximum apperture available will get smaller (= higher f-number) as you "zoom in". And it looks like the average digital camera is an f2.8. Fairly typical and reasonable for a compact camera. So, my question is, where does shutter speed come into play? A higher shutter speed (= faster shutter, shorter exposure) will let light through for a shorter amount of time. High shutter speed is good for avoiding "camera shake" (where the camera moves while the shutter is open) and for reducing blur if the subject is moving. A longer exposure is useful for getting a picture if there isn't much light - provided the subject isn't moving and the camera is perfectly still. And what is shutter lag The time you have to wait between pressing the button and the camera actually taking the picture. This is often a significant problem with compact digital cameras, making them difficult or impossible to use for "action" shots. and all that other jargon? There are books full of answers to that question ) What would I want in a digital P&S that is quick to take pictures (of kids and sports) without getting blurry pictures? Also want it ultra compact ... maybe compact. Kids: look for cameras with "image stabilisation" and good flash. Things like "face recognition" and "portrait mode" might be worth having. Sport: image stabilisation is useful here too - and you *must* be able to turn the flash off so as not to disturb the other spectators or the people taking part (you might be thrown out of the event for using flash, in some places). An eye-level optical viewfinder can be a godsend for any outdoor photography, but few compact digital cameras have them these days - and the LCD 'screen' is not always going to be useable in daylight, no matter what the advertising claims. Don't expect any digital compact or ultra-compact to be particularly good for sport photography; but they can be very effective for family-album snapshots. Get to know the camera well before you try using it for anything important. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Apaature and shutter speeds
Smaller F number better for portrait pictures, to make the background
slightly softer and the person more in focus, also reducing the depth of field... correct? And getting a camera with a fast shutter speed will be better so my pictures won't be as much as a blur when my kids are moving around? That and one with IS. 1/2000s decent or are the better in a P&S? What can you or anyone else tell me about the Nikon S510, P50, P5000 or the Canon A720 IS... those are what I have been looking into, but can't seem to figure out which one will be the best for me. Pictures of: Kids, kids playing sports, every day activities. I do want at least an 8 MP, I do on occasion make my pictures bigger than the regular 8x10. Movie mode - I love using it now. They have one that is a S51, but it's a f3.3 which someone told me wasn't good, and that I wanted one that was at least as low as a f2.8 - which is why I asked. But I like that the others have better optical zoom, not much, but still, more, and I know the Canon has a lot more, but just not sure about it. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Apaature and shutter speeds
On 2007-10-25, parkerne u38569@uwe wrote:
Smaller F number better for portrait pictures, to make the background slightly softer and the person more in focus, also reducing the depth of field... correct? You won't get very much of an effect like that with a point-and-shoot compact digital camera; the image sensor is too small. Simple 'auto-focus' and 'auto-exposure' makes it something you can't easily control anyway. But some cameras have a 'special effect' to artificially blur most of the background in 'portrait mode' - and of course, image processing software can do that (takes practice!). And getting a camera with a fast shutter speed will be better so my pictures won't be as much as a blur when my kids are moving around? That and one with IS. 1/2000s decent or are the better in a P&S? You an only use a fast shutter speed if there is enough light. Most digicams let you change the sensitivity of the image detector (higher ISO number = greater sensitivity which makes a higher shutter speed possible) but there is a trade off in image quality with greater sensitivity. What can you or anyone else tell me about the Nikon S510, P50, P5000 or the Canon A720 IS... those are what I have been looking into, but can't seem to figure out which one will be the best for me. Pictures of: Kids, kids playing sports, every day activities. I do want at least an 8 MP, I do on occasion make my pictures bigger than the regular 8x10. Movie mode - I love using it now. They have one that is a S51, but it's a f3.3 which someone told me wasn't good, and that I wanted one that was at least as low as a f2.8 - which is why I asked. But I like that the others have better optical zoom, not much, but still, more, and I know the Canon has a lot more, but just not sure about it. I doubt if you'd notice any difference in practice between point-and-shoot cameras with maximum appertures of f/3.3 and f/2.8. Other factors, such as the image sensor used, the quality of the lens, and the design of the electronics and software inside the camera, are more important. Try looking at http://www.steves-digicams.com/ and http://www.dpreview.com/ for information and reviews of particular cameras. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Apaature and shutter speeds
"parkerne" u38569@uwe wrote in message news:7a3b9644bde06@uwe... Smaller F number better for portrait pictures, to make the background slightly softer and the person more in focus, also reducing the depth of field... correct? Correct with larger cameras, but very small cameras have so much depth of field you usually won't be able to reduce it much. And getting a camera with a fast shutter speed will be better so my pictures won't be as much as a blur when my kids are moving around? That and one with IS. 1/2000s decent or are the better in a P&S? Image stabilization is always good to have. I wouldn't worry too much about shutter speed in a small camera. You would seldom if ever need 1/2000 in such a camera and might not be able to use it anyway unless the light was very bright. Higher shutter speeds = less light passing through the lens, and you need a certain amount of light to get a good picture. What can you or anyone else tell me about the Nikon S510, P50, P5000 or the Canon A720 IS... those are what I have been looking into, but can't seem to figure out which one will be the best for me. The S510 is very flat and pocketable, if that's important to you. It has a nice large LCD monitor but no optical viewfinder, which may or may not be important to you. Personally I find *all* LCD screens hard to read in bright sunlight and for that reason prefer a camera which also has an optical viewfinder. But apparently some people don't mind the absence of a viewfinder. The P50, P5000 and P5100 have optical viewfinders as well as a large LCD monitor. I like them better for that reason, and also the fact that they have more user controls and should be more capable cameras generally. The P50 also has better wide angle capability than the others mentioned, and should be attractively priced. But it doesn't have real optical image stabilization -- it has *electronic* stabilization which is not as effective. The P5000/P5100 are the most advanced Coolpix models available today and priced accordingly. They both have real optical stabilization which is good. If you're a beginner they probably have more features than you need -- you may or may not "grow into" such a camera. Pictures of: Kids, kids playing sports, every day activities. I do want at least an 8 MP, I do on occasion make my pictures bigger than the regular 8x10. Movie mode - I love using it now. They have one that is a S51, but it's a f3.3 which someone told me wasn't good, and that I wanted one that was at least as low as a f2.8 Not necessarily. In ordinary use you probably would not notice the difference between a camera with f/3.3 and one with f/2.8, and also keep in mind that these f-numbers only apply to the lens at the *short* end of the zoom range -- at the long end, the f-number is invariably higher ( = smaller relative aperture) in this type of camera, and the long end is where you'd really prefer to have a larger aperture. Many compact/ultracompact cameras are f/5 or so at the long end. - which is why I asked. But I like that the others have better optical zoom, not much, but still, more, and I know the Canon has a lot more, but just not sure about it. A longer zoom is nice dependng on circumstances, but may not be very useful if the aperture at the long end is very small, since the longer the zoom the more it magnifies camera shake -- so to avoid blurring the picture you will need a higher shutter speed, and if the aperture is small there may not be enough light for the camera to set a higher shutter speed. Generally speaking, if you need a pocketable camera I would advise not being too ambitious about zoom ratio. If you really want a camera with a long zoom range I'd suggest looking into one of the several "superzoom" models on the market -- but none of them are really pocketable. So that's the trade-off. Neil |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Shutter Speeds for Studio Work | Paul Furman | Digital SLR Cameras | 9 | February 17th 06 02:54 AM |
Shutter Speeds to Hand-Hold 280mm IS? | Mardon | 35mm Photo Equipment | 7 | February 6th 06 07:28 AM |
Nikon Action Touch-shutter speeds? | Cardamon Dave | 35mm Photo Equipment | 1 | January 20th 05 04:03 PM |
Nikon Action Touch-shutter speeds? | Cardamon Dave | 35mm Photo Equipment | 6 | January 19th 05 07:14 PM |
digital and slow shutter speeds help?? | HooDooWitch | Digital Photography | 8 | July 16th 04 11:25 PM |