Photography questions

[stormbind]

Hi all,

My digital camera has add-on lenses, filters, and complete manual control of aperature; shutter speed; focus. I no longer use autofocus.

I am still a beginner and am confoosled by ISO 35mm film standards in the age of DSLR.

When using a filter, we devide the 35mm film ISO value by the filters X factor (i.e. +1.1) to give a new exposure.

But I'm using digital so there is no predefined ISO value! What is the default? What ISO should I tell my camera to use when I'm not using filters, and hence, when I am using extra filters?

You would think this information is in the manual, but that only tells you how to change the setting to something other than automatic - without stating what the default is

 

[MOTH]

It really depends on what you are shooting. Using the ISO's can help the camera automatically compensate in response.

Ex: using 1600 ISO when shooting "action" events the camera will use a very short exposure time with a large enough aperture to get a decently exposed shot. The downside is that you will have very little depth of field unless things are very brightly lit.

Unless you are planning on becoming an advanced amatuer photographer, you should try leaving some features on automatic to compensate for the other settings you place on full manual.

 

[Merkinball]

I've never shot film. But I'm pretty heavy into digital.

First of all, what camera are you shooting with?

Second of all, I don't really know if I would dub it "default ISO," but if there is one, whatever that means, I bet it would ISO 100.

I only adjust my ISO according to light conditions. To me, it really doesn't matter what filters or what lense I have. If there is any sort of light, I'm shooting ISO 100. I won't go any higher than 400, and that's at night. Usually when I shoot at night I am STILL shooting ISO 100.

To me, the downside of shooting at ISO 1600 is not necessarily a lack of depth of field, or things being brightly lit, but GRAININESS in the picture. Once you get to 400 ISO, you really see a lot of graniness. If graininess isn't a problem for you, then you can adjust brightness via F-stop or shutter speed.

Also, if you have a good camera, and a good lense, shooting ISO 1600 in the day is a real good to fry the hell out of your sensors if it's sunny out.

The beauty of digital is that it's all your choice. I like crisp shots. So I try to always shoot ISO 100, and make adjustments with F-stop and shutter. I make ISO my priority.

 

[stormbind]

Ok thanks for dispelling some concern - so I'll do well to simply ignore the ISO thing all together?

Well, I didn't name it because my equipment is old

I'm using a FinePix S304 and Minolta Z1. The Minolta provides much greater manual control (while the FinePix is nicer to handle).

I have the shutter speed, aperature, and focus set to manual. I like this because auto-focus is way too slow (pisses me off) and auto-exposure sometimes makes bad decisions

I have previously played around with accessories like the wide angle and telefocus lenses, tripod, &c. but still using the built-in fill flash and that exposes me as a beginner - especially when I bought the Z1 specifically because it has a hotshoe

I have only just begun to use light filters; polarised, uv, skyline, &c. I looked this stuff up online and sites talk about adjusting the ISO to compensate for reduced light. My camera's ISO setting has been left to automatic. That is where my question/confusion lies, and you kind of answered it

 

[Merkinball]

Oh. With digital, always shoot with a UV filter. It will save your lense, and it will save the sensor.

I'm unfamiliar with Minolta's. I would imagine there has GOT to be a button somewhere on your camera's interface where you can adjust the ISO. If you can't, I'm sorry, because if your Minolta is anything like my camera when left to the whims of "auto" mode, you're gonna have some crazy, unnecessarily high ISO shots.

 

[stormbind]

No button - the ISO setting is in the stupid menus!

The other manual settings are a convenient finger-touch though (unlike the FinePix where they are also hidden in menus, or just hidden)

 

[Merkinball]

If can set your ISO in them menu's, do it. You shouldn't have to switch it too often, just when switching from daylight, to evening, to night shooting.

It's not like film where the ISO is preset, and you need to adjust Fstop and shutter speed according to the ISO of the film.

 

[Fuzzz]

I've never used a digital camera and I'm just an old school and a beginner photgrapher, but haven't ISO or ASA values got something to do with how many silver there is in the photo paper (in analog photography, in other words using film). The amount of silver has an effect on light and can also give you an either more or either less "pixelated" effect.
I might be wrong a bit, cause it's been a while since I photographed, but this is what I remember.

 

[stormbind]

I have another, more foolish question

My wide-angle converter is not double threaded so any filters must be screwed on behind the converter lens (unless anyone knows of an alternative approach).

Sooo... polarised filters won't work when they are behind the lens, right?

 

[stormbind]

I've never used a digital camera and I'm just an old school and a beginner photgrapher, but haven't ISO or ASA values got something to do with how many silver there is in the photo paper (in analog photography, in other words using film). The amount of silver has an effect on light and can also give you an either more or either less "pixelated" effect.
I might be wrong a bit, cause it's been a while since I photographed, but this is what I remember.

For one reason or other, I have been too embarassed to have films processed and haven't the space for my own equipment

Sooooo... digital is the only thing that works for me and I stick to second-hand gear to avoid getting carried away

 

[Merkinball]

Converter lens? You're gonna have to explain this set up a little more in depth and what you're using for me to be of any help.

 

[Fuzzz]

For one reason or other, I have been too embarassed to have films processed

Are you a porn photographer?

Sooooo... digital is the only thing that works for me and I stick to second-hand gear to avoid getting carried away

Small tip I once heard from someone who photographed digitally: try to use as little effects as you can with your digital camera, just set your shutter speed and f-stops (use enough light and stuff, perhaps some filters in front of your lenses if you have them), later photoshop the rest.

 

[stormbind]

lol @ porn. Noooo... just very easilly embarassed. I don't want someone to question why I took a certain picture... badly... numerous times. Or why I seem to like pictures showing the underside of a lens cap, my feet, or something equally accidental &c.

With digital you can hide the evidence of having made wasted shots.

I have written digital filter algorithms (equivalent to photoshop) and its not fun. Plus, computers are boring. Plus, I cannot see the effect until long after taking the shot which is very bad timing imho (think expressionism &c.). Plus, Photoshopping is cheating but cropping to make a nicer composition (or remove messy background) isn't

@Merkinball

The 52mm w/a converter reduces the default 38-380mm lens to a 28mm equivalent. The original Minolta w/a converter lens is not double threaded and sadly that's the one I have (pictured below) and - afaik - this prevents the use of filters, lens cover, or even a lens cap

 

[Carl v.]

Photographic film needs a certain amount of light (energy in the form of photons) to initiate the chemical process which creates a negative image. Digital cameras also need a certain amount of light to create a picture. I will try to explain the ISO-thing as one of three factors to determine the amount of light to reach the film/digital chip.

Let us assume light is water, and our film (or digital chip) is a bucket. To fill this bucket, we use a hose.

We can compare the intensity of light to the water pressure in the hose. In order to fill the bucket, we turn on the water (pressing the exposure button) and wait until the bucket is full (the shutter closes). If it takes too long, we can use a hose with a bigger internal radius (open the aperture a few steps; but remember f:2.8 is eight times bigger than f:8), and the time to fill the bucket is shortened.

If the light is poor (low water pressure) and our lens is poor too (for example with an aperture of f: 5.6), a rather long exposure time is necessary (it takes long time to fill the bucket). With long exposure time (more than 1/30 of a second) it is hard to hold the camera so firm the picture is not blurred from camera motion.

And here is where ISO comes in: If the water pressure is poor, we simply use a smaller bucket. It means we turn to higher ISO-values. So if we measure correct exposure to f:3.5 and shutter time to 1/8 with ISO 100, we can also obtain correct exposure at
f:5.6 1/15 ISO 200
f:5.6 1/30 ISO 400
f:4 1/60 ISO 400

The drawbacks are poorer quality at higher ISO-settings. Film gets bigger grains, and digital shots will have their colors blurred.

Cromatical aberation is something quite different, and depends on lens quality.

And I can see no reason why a polarization filtre should not work if it is placed behind a converter. Please try, stormbind, and let us know the result. And you should know we all have thown away a lot of picktures to find the one we would like to show others.