Go to a  "printer friendly" view of this message which allow an easy print Printer-friendly copy Go to the page which allows you to send this topic link and a message to a friend Email this topic to a friend
Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D7100, D7000 (Public) topic #15644
View in linear mode

Subject: "1000 Pictures and 99% are bad" Previous topic | Next topic
cartnj Registered since 17th Apr 2010Sat 21-Jan-12 08:50 PM
14 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
"1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"


US
          

Hello,

I have the D7000 using the Nikkor 24-70 ED 2.8 Lens and if I got 10 pictures out of 1000 that I would say could be good that's alot. And sadly I have had the camera since it launched! At first I thought it was the 18-200 Lens so I bought the new 24-70 and I am convinced the pictures are worse but since I paid $1600 for the lens I don't want to give up on it.

I am sure I am doing something wrong but have tried many different settings and cannot seem to get a decent shot.

Alot of the time my ISO shoots up to 6400 and kills the image and other times the image is just too dark or out of focus. (I use auto ISO) I use Aperture priority for still images and Shutter priority for Moving images. I even bought the Light SB910 for low light shots, and still bad pictures.

Anyway here is a picture I took today in the middle of a bright afternoon of my dogs.

And btw I have both Thom Hogans Complete guide and also the Mastering the D7000 book. And as much as I am ashamed to admit it I took 5 classes and still I am ready to throw it in the garbage.

D7000
24-70 2.8 Nikkor
AF-C
Shutter priority
F5.6
1/500
ISO-200
Exposure Bias-0
Focal length: 24

Can anyone tell me what I did wrong? why is the image so dark? Shutter speed to high?

Thanks!!



Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Replies to this topic
Subject Author Message Date ID
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
ejinks4
21st Jan 2012
1
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
elec164 Silver Member
21st Jan 2012
2
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
cartnj
21st Jan 2012
3
     Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
Leonard62 Gold Member
21st Jan 2012
6
     Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
elec164 Silver Member
21st Jan 2012
7
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
SaurianFire
21st Jan 2012
4
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
Leonard62 Gold Member
21st Jan 2012
5
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
elec164 Silver Member
21st Jan 2012
8
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
blw Moderator
21st Jan 2012
9
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
mrginhop Silver Member
22nd Jan 2012
10
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
cartnj
22nd Jan 2012
13
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
mitchDK7
22nd Jan 2012
12
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
lautry Silver Member
23rd Jan 2012
28
     Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
blw Moderator
23rd Jan 2012
29
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
cartnj
22nd Jan 2012
14
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
icslowmo Silver Member
24th Apr 2012
35
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
Jflash
22nd Jan 2012
11
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
cartnj
22nd Jan 2012
15
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
luckyphoto Silver Member
22nd Jan 2012
16
     Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
Kryoclasm
22nd Jan 2012
18
          Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
kentak Silver Member
22nd Jan 2012
19
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
ChrisPlatt Silver Member
22nd Jan 2012
17
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
blw Moderator
22nd Jan 2012
20
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
blw Moderator
22nd Jan 2012
21
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
cartnj
22nd Jan 2012
22
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
blw Moderator
22nd Jan 2012
23
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
fenris117
23rd Jan 2012
27
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
PAStime Silver Member
23rd Jan 2012
25
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
Clint S Silver Member
22nd Jan 2012
24
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
fenris117
23rd Jan 2012
26
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
cartnj
23rd Apr 2012
30
     Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
hawaii502160
24th Apr 2012
31
     Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
billD80 Silver Member
24th Apr 2012
32
     Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
lautry Silver Member
24th Apr 2012
33
     Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
fenris117
24th Apr 2012
34
     Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
icslowmo Silver Member
24th Apr 2012
36
     Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
ShrimpBoy Silver Member
24th Apr 2012
37
          Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
cartnj
01st May 2012
38
               Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
billD80 Silver Member
01st May 2012
39
               Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
cartnj
01st May 2012
40
                    Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
cartnj
01st May 2012
41
                    Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
kippford Silver Member
01st May 2012
42
                    Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
billD80 Silver Member
01st May 2012
43
                    Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
mudman2 Silver Member
01st May 2012
44
                    Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
greenwing Gold Member
03rd May 2012
54
                    Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
icslowmo Silver Member
03rd May 2012
53
               Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
gkaiseril Gold Member
02nd May 2012
52
                    Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
billD80 Silver Member
03rd May 2012
58
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
Omaha
02nd May 2012
45
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
mudman2 Silver Member
02nd May 2012
47
     Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
Omaha
02nd May 2012
48
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
fenris117
02nd May 2012
46
Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
kippford Silver Member
02nd May 2012
49
     Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
dm1dave Administrator
02nd May 2012
50
          Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
fenris117
02nd May 2012
51
               Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
William Rounds Gold Member
03rd May 2012
55
                    Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
cartnj
03rd May 2012
56
                    Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
keribang
05th May 2012
61
                         Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
sleek20 Silver Member
05th May 2012
62
                    Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
gkaiseril Gold Member
03rd May 2012
57
                         Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
kippford Silver Member
03rd May 2012
59
                              Reply message RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad
hawaii502160
04th May 2012
60

ejinks4 Registered since 07th Nov 2011Sat 21-Jan-12 09:18 PM
19 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#1. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 0


US
          

It's hard to say what might be going wrong just based on this one picture. However, in this case, the large amount of very white snow is going to cause your camera to underexpose most of the photo while keeping the white snow around middle gray. I think you needed to dial a little bit of exposure compensation in to get a better exposure given the circumstances.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

elec164 Silver Member Nikonian since 15th Jan 2009Sat 21-Jan-12 09:21 PM
1973 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#2. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 0


US
          

Well first thing is that the scene is predominately white which has a tendency depending on the metering method to cause an underexposure.

So when using one of the semi-auto modes you need to dial in some + exposure compensation (perhaps 1 to 2 stops).

It also appears to be an overcast day so the tonality is going to be a little flat and needs some PP boost to add punch.

Another thing is that at 24mm and f/5.6 with a focus distance of 8 feet you have a DOF of just under 10 foot. It appears the back of the black dog is the focus plane which puts the face of both dogs at the edge of DOF giving the image an overall look of being soft.

I played with it in PS doing a curves and level adjustment and sharpening and overall its not that bad.

Pete

Pete

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
cartnj Registered since 17th Apr 2010Sat 21-Jan-12 09:26 PM
14 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#3. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 2


US
          

Thanks to the both of you for answering.
Is it suggested to NOT use the A or S modes? I was under the impression that most people use these modes..
Thanks again!

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Leonard62 Gold Member Awarded for excellent contributions and sharing his in-depth knowledge and experience with the community, especially of Nikkor Lenses Nikonian since 15th Mar 2009Sat 21-Jan-12 09:41 PM
2941 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#6. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 3


Hatboro, Pa, US
          

>Thanks to the both of you for answering.
>Is it suggested to NOT use the A or S modes? I was under the
>impression that most people use these modes..
>Thanks again!
>
A and S modes are fine. I use A mode 99% of the time. For snow just use the +/- button and rear thumb wheel to dial in the + compensation.

Len

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
elec164 Silver Member Nikonian since 15th Jan 2009Sat 21-Jan-12 09:51 PM
1973 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#7. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 3


US
          


>Is it suggested to NOT use the A or S modes? I was under the
>impression that most people use these modes..

The mode you use is dependent on what your shooting.

Personally when the scene is farily static with a consatant light source and I have time to adjust, I prefer M mode. When the scene is more dynamic with changing light conditions, I will use A or S mode. I will use A if DOF is more important to maintain and S if shutter speed is a priority.

Many even use P mode a lot (I don't but can see why one would).

Another method I have been experimenting with is using M mode with auto-ISO which is very usefull.

As already suggested, stick with it and experiment and shoot a lot and it will come to y and become second nature.

Pete

Pete

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

SaurianFire Registered since 11th Feb 2011Sat 21-Jan-12 09:33 PM
145 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#4. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 0


US
          

I wouldn't worry too much with more experience you will be just fine.

This is a difficult scene to capture. For the overcast day, a very dark subject with a very white or bright background of snow I think the exposure isn't bad. If you lighten up the exposure in Lightroom I think you will find the dog's face is in focus.

The shutter speed should be fast for playing dogs action and f/5.6 will give you plenty of depth of field if you get the capture you want.

Even when things are done mostly correct you may still need corrections to taste and a bit of luck. Practice and don't get discouraged.

Shoot raw as the corrections are easier to make if needed.

Respectfully,
Frank

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Leonard62 Gold Member Awarded for excellent contributions and sharing his in-depth knowledge and experience with the community, especially of Nikkor Lenses Nikonian since 15th Mar 2009Sat 21-Jan-12 09:36 PM
2941 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#5. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 0


Hatboro, Pa, US
          

The photo is about what I would expect with so much snow. I normally dial in +1 and fine tune from there.

Btw, don't use auto ISO with flash. I'm not sure about the D7000 but the D5100 will drive the auto ISO all the way up as if you're not using flash at all. If you're indoors use around ISO 400 and f5.6 aperture priority as a start.

Len

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
elec164 Silver Member Nikonian since 15th Jan 2009Sat 21-Jan-12 09:56 PM
1973 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#8. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 5


US
          

Q>Btw, don't use auto ISO with flash. I'm not sure about the
>D7000 but the D5100 will drive the auto ISO all the way up as
>if you're not using flash at all.

Yes, the D7000 will set auto-ISO dependent upon the ambient light and does not factor in the fact your using flash (learned that the hard way).

Pete

Pete

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

blw Moderator Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004Sat 21-Jan-12 11:33 PM
26574 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#9. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 0


Richmond, US
          

It's just underexposed, and that's pretty typical for images that have a large expanse of white. I loaded it into Lightroom, adjusted the exposure up by 1.3 stops, and this is the result:



It looks pretty reasonable to me, at least technically. The way I handle this situation is to switch to manual mode, then use the spot meter. I point the spot at the snow, and adjust it to be about a 1.3-1.7 stops overexposed. Since it's white, I want it to be overexposed, and not 18% grey - which is more or less what you get in matrix mode. Similarly, if you've got the opposite situation - meaning a frame that has a lot of black in it, in my case often a large steam locomotive - I also go to manual, use spot and adjust the black to be about -1.7 stops underexposed.

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
mrginhop Silver Member Nikonian since 29th Mar 2009Sun 22-Jan-12 12:47 AM
100 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#10. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 9


Newfields, US
          

To get proper exposure when you are photographing look at your histograms in playback mode. The pixels should not be piled up on the left (indicating underexposure) nor piled up on the right (overexposure). I shoot in all the modes except P but am constantly adjusting the exposure compensation (+/-) to redistribute pixels as needed by looking at the histogram. This pretty much guarantees perfect exposure every time. In your shot you would have seen that you had way to many pixels on the left side & that there was a gap on the right.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
cartnj Registered since 17th Apr 2010Sun 22-Jan-12 03:03 AM
14 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#13. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 10
Sun 22-Jan-12 09:28 AM by briantilley

US
          



Yep I forgot about that! I just remembered that the meter will only show if it can't get correct exposure. Thanks.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
mitchDK7 Registered since 04th Oct 2011Sun 22-Jan-12 01:33 AM
19 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#12. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 9
Sun 22-Jan-12 01:34 AM by mitchDK7

US
          

The dog in the b/g looks almost fake.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
lautry Silver Member Nikonian since 02nd Oct 2011Mon 23-Jan-12 07:47 PM
99 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#28. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 12


Panama City Beach, US
          

Dog may not appear belonging in photo because there may be over sharpening in pp. Slight halo around dog would indicate a little too much sharpening.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
blw Moderator Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004Mon 23-Jan-12 08:54 PM
26574 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#29. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 28


Richmond, US
          

Yeah, probably my fault. The original file probably was sharpened to begin with, and then when I went through my normal Lightroom export process, it did some more - it's designed for my own files, which are shot raw and usually not sharpened that much (and are normally much larger, too). There may be some other artifacts there too.

Still, I don't think it takes away from the main point, which is that the original was underexposed by a good 1.3 stops, and that this is something that has to be accounted for by the photographer.

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
cartnj Registered since 17th Apr 2010Sun 22-Jan-12 03:04 AM
14 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#14. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 9
Sun 22-Jan-12 09:29 AM by briantilley

US
          



Wow yes looks much better. Thank you.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
icslowmo Silver Member Nikonian since 01st Jan 2012Tue 24-Apr-12 03:20 AM
499 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#35. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 9


Phoenix, US
          

Played with shadows and highlights and added a tick of sharpening:



Came out OK for me....

Chris

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Jflash Registered since 15th Nov 2011Sun 22-Jan-12 01:24 AM
49 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#11. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 0


US
          

You can spend all the money you have on hardware, but until you "pay your dues" in terms of learning to be a photographer, you won't get those great images. Others have produced wonderful results with that same gear. I'm not being flippant, but some people expect that just because they spend a large amount of money on gear they would then automatically produce great photos with it. Photo gear is only a tool, not a guarantee. As they say, your results may vary.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
cartnj Registered since 17th Apr 2010Sun 22-Jan-12 03:07 AM
14 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#15. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 11


US
          

>You can spend all the money you have on hardware, but until
>you "pay your dues" in terms of learning to be a
>photographer, you won't get those great images. Others have
>produced wonderful results with that same gear. I'm not being
>flippant, but some people expect that just because they spend
>a large amount of money on gear they would then automatically
>produce great photos with it. Photo gear is only a tool, not a
>guarantee. As they say, your results may vary.
Agreed. I just wanted the best chance at decent shots as I read that lens is better in low light as well as fast to focus. Thank you.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
luckyphoto Silver Member Nikonian since 27th Dec 2010Sun 22-Jan-12 03:13 AM
743 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#16. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 11


Port Charlotte, US
          

You've focused so much on how the camera operates so now you need to focus on how to take a good photo. A good start is to understand exposure and how it relates in real life to a scene you want to photograph.

-Where's the light coming from?
-What white balance do you need?
-Do you need to add flash?
-If the flash is too bright, how many EV do you reduce it by?
-How much contrast is in the photo?
-If you meter on peoples faces will another part of the photo be blown out (overexposed)? In your case the camera metered on the abundance of white show and underexposed the dog's face. That was entirely predictable.


The list goes on, but you get the idea. Even though these cameras can do wonderful things, they still don't "see" as well as the human eye so we have to understand their limitations and augment when necessary.

There's a good book by Bryan Peterson called "Understanding Exposure". It's a easy read and a great way to start understanding why the dog's face was dark.

Good luck and post some photos of your successes in the future.

Larry

"Red is gray and yellow white, but we decide which is right
....and which is an illusion"

Moody Blues - Nights in White Satin

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Kryoclasm Registered since 10th Jan 2012Sun 22-Jan-12 05:19 AM
14 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#18. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 16


Ketchikan, US
          

Larry is spot on.

I like this quote below that sums up many things in life including photography...

"He who loves practice without theory is like the sailor who boards ship without a rudder and compass and never knows where he may cast." - Leonardo da Vinci.

Shawn

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
kentak Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd Jul 2010Sun 22-Jan-12 06:43 AM
918 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#19. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 18
Sun 22-Jan-12 07:00 AM by kentak

US
          

Don't give up on the gear or yourself. It will all come together, and you'll start getting the kind of images you want.

It's not wrong to want good gear. But, a photographer's most important piece of gear is located between his ears--in the form of understanding all the various elements that make up the craft and art of photography. That didn't come overnight or without an expenditure of time, study, and effort to anyone here.

Your sample photo was, unintentionally perhaps, very telling. The underexposed snow scene is one of those classic examples used to illustrate the principles of exposure and how camera metering systems interpret a scene. It's fair to say that just about everyone who saw your photo immediately knew that you failed to compensate for the fact the meter would set an exposure for an average "gray" scene--which is exactly what you got. The gear did what it was designed to do, the photographer, you, needed to do your part. That isn't a put-down, we've all been there in the learning process.

I strongly urge you to spend an additional small fraction of what you've already spent and get the latest edition of Bryan Peterson's "Understanding Exposure." Practice the principles he explains as you go through the book and you should start to see improvement in your exposures very quickly.

Edited to add: I see at least one other poster has recommended Peterson's book, as it often is on this site.

There are a couple ways the snow scene could have been approached for a better result. One is simply "knowing" that such scenes need more exposure and dialing in anywhere between one and two stops more exposure (a rule of thumb). Or, you could have switched to spot metering and metered off the brown dog, which is a more average tone, and used that exposure. Or, you could have metered the palm of your hand. Any one of these would likely have given better results.

Kent

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

ChrisPlatt Silver Member Nikonian since 04th Jun 2011Sun 22-Jan-12 03:38 AM
515 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#17. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 0
Sun 22-Jan-12 03:42 AM by ChrisPlatt

US
          

You certainly have some nice equipment now, you should soon be capturing a high percentage of very nice images. As mentioned above there is a lot to learn. (I would not have the D7000 Auto ISO set to go all the way to 6400 by the way - 3200 is tops IMO).

As others have mentioned, there is a lot to learn. The topic of meter limits and shooting snow is covered on page 309 of Thom's book, but it is a THICK book.

The D7000 is a very sophisticated camera that can determine many shooting solutions for you. Have you tried any of the Scene modes to see if you increase your keeper rate? You might try that to see what the camera is capable of and increase your keeper rate as you learn more about the camera and how to make it work for you. Perhaps capture some images in Scene modes, then experiment with other settings. There is a scene mode for snow/beaches. You paid a lot for the technology, there is nothing wrong with letting it help you.

I've grown comfortable with operation of the D7000 and rarely use scene mode, but I have a Panasonic GF2 that I am much less comfortable with. I tend to leave that camera in Intelligent Auto mode so I don't foul up quick shots. It picks the scene mode for me! I usually start in iA mode then switch to A priority and shoot the way I normally do. The iA mode gets it right every time and makes me feel like a dummy, but at least I get some good pictures as I'm trying to get more comfortable with the camera.

Visit my gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

blw Moderator Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004Sun 22-Jan-12 01:24 PM
26574 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#20. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 0


Richmond, US
          

By the way, the same thing happens with the 18-200VR, since what you're seeing is not a function of the lens.

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

blw Moderator Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004Sun 22-Jan-12 01:46 PM
26574 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#21. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 0


Richmond, US
          

By the way, it's easy to make this kind of mistake. Here's one I did last month. This is pretty much the straight raw conversion, out of the camera:



It's pretty horrible - obviously very overexposed, to the point of almost being blown out. The main culprit is that the photographer failed to account for the fact that the frame is dominated by creosote-colored wood, which is a long, long way from 18% grey. Now I don't advocate the "shoot whatever and fix it in the darkroom" approach as a default, but here's what happened when I looked at it later and found that it was a disaster shot:



This is a lot closer to what I saw in the field. This is also a demonstration as to why shooting raw is a good idea. Had this been a baked jpeg, the entire sky would surely have been blown to heck in a handbasket, with very little recovery possible. As it is, this file withstood -1.3 stops of reduced exposure, and furthermore there was a little left in the highlights to do a bit of recovery. I'll also admit to a bit of touchup with fill light, to keep the archbar trucks from going completely to blocked shadows. It's still not anything I'm proud of, but at least it's moderately close to what I saw and not the monster that popped up on import. I really should have caught this one before I pressed the button - it's a classic case when the matrix meter just isn't going to get it right, and spot meter / zone system would.

By the way, this was "accomplished" on a D3 with a 24-70/f2.8 - demonstrating once again that it's the nut behind the viewfinder that wrecks lots and lots of images...

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!

Attachment #1, (jpg file)
Attachment #2, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
cartnj Registered since 17th Apr 2010Sun 22-Jan-12 02:34 PM
14 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#22. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 21


US
          

Yes big difference there..

So to be clear in the first picture, your exposure meter was not centered on the 0?

Also is it suggested to use EASY exposure compensation? so that the meter always shows and can be controlled from either S or A modes by one of the dials? or is it safer to just keep that off and when I want to change exposure, press the exposure button and rotate the dial?

Right now I have that off.

I am getting that book also to read up on exposure.

Thanks Everyone!

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
blw Moderator Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004Sun 22-Jan-12 03:06 PM
26574 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#23. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 22
Sun 22-Jan-12 03:10 PM by blw

Richmond, US
          

> So to be clear in the first picture, your exposure meter was not centered on the 0?

No, but yes. I was shooting in aperture preferred mode, so there was no "centered" situation. I just pointed, AF, and pressed the button. Had I been in manual mode, though, that same (bad) exposure would have been centered at zero. Had I been thinking before I pressed the button, I would have been in manual mode, with the spot meter pointing at the car on the right, and the indicator would have been about -1.3 stop. And I'd have gotten the second picture, more or less. Had I done that, I probably would have had a fair bit more saturation in the yellow leaves. They were really close to the edge of bombed out in the actual exposure, so getting it right in the first place would likely have yielded a better overall result.

> is it suggested to use EASY exposure compensation?

I don't have an opinion on that. The real issue is getting to the proper exposure, regardless of what the meter suggests. In this case, and in yours that started the thread, the meter suggested something that was clearly wrong from a human point of view. Whether that is accomplished by adding exposure compensation via EASY, by dialing in EV via the regular exposure compensation button/dial, or by using manual mode with the spot meter and the Zone System - or some other mechanism - it doesn't really matter.

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
fenris117 Registered since 18th Dec 2011Mon 23-Jan-12 08:20 AM
76 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#27. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 22


US
          

Personally, I do not use easy exposure compensation. I mostly stay on a modified version of Aperture Priority saved to my U1 slot. I like to use the Aperture to create the Depth of Field I want as one of the main elements of composition so it's perfect for me. I also have the exposure lock button handy. If your scene has a bright part and a shadowy part, in a lot of cases you have to give up one or the other. I usually like to set the exposure so the highlights are not blown out and hope that I can fish out the shadows from the RAW files in Lightroom, but that's just me. I also have a graduated neutral density handy for sunsets or situations like the picture above where there is a distinct line between bright and dark.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
PAStime Silver Member Nikonian since 10th Feb 2009Mon 23-Jan-12 12:20 AM
2669 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#25. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 21


Kingston, CA
          

Nice example and mini-tutorial Brian

I'm as guilty as all of taking too many shots and later saying "oh, that wasn't thought through... !"

Peter

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Clint S Silver Member Nikonian since 02nd Jan 2011Sun 22-Jan-12 08:03 PM
445 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#24. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 0
Sun 22-Jan-12 08:32 PM by Clint S

Chula Vista, US
          

What I quickly learned about the D7000 was the focus point(s)and exposure metering interact. So even if you understood about exposure compensation for bright or dark scenes, one may not get what they expected. This goes for focusing as well.

Since you have Thom Hogan's guide read through the section of Meeting and Exposure and then pages 402-404. If you have more problems with focus start with the latter pages first.

I almost forgot, turn off Auto ISO and set it manually. Auto ISO will only complicate your problems till you have a good understating of what is changing with all of the other settings.

Visit my Nikonians gallery - my Spare Time gallery

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

fenris117 Registered since 18th Dec 2011Mon 23-Jan-12 08:13 AM
76 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#26. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 0
Wed 25-Jan-12 01:47 AM by fenris117

US
          

Discaimer... I might sound like a jerk, so please don't take this the wrong way.

1000 images is nothing. My friend shoots more than that at one basketball game, and I shoot about 250 on a hour photo walk. At 1000 images, that would be the photography equivalent of a baby learning how to sit up. Classes are great on how to use the camera, but with respect to the creative element, you really need to learn from doing. I suggest that you carry your camera to all places (except for unsafe places or torrential downpour (unless you have the right gear because those make good shots too)) and shoot shoot shoot shoot shoot. That being said recall what you learned in those classes and think before you press the shutter.
Create a checklist: check your settings, check your DoF, check your composition, check to see if your subject is interesting etc.
You're still learning, I'm still learning, hell we're all still learning so don't give up hope sir, for you have only begun!

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
cartnj Registered since 17th Apr 2010Mon 23-Apr-12 11:51 PM
14 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#30. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 26


US
          

ok so now about 5000 pictures and we are still at 99% bad.
I think I am giving up and going to buy the D800 I am not sure what to do but I will say that when I put my lenses on the D3000 I see better pictures so its either an incorrect setting on my D7000 or a bad camera.

I did send some of my out of focus images to Nikon so we will see what they say but man this is frustrating.

Here are 2 of 500 Pictures I took on a Disney Cruise and my wifes $300 point and shoot took better pictures then my D7000 with the $1600 24-70 big heavy Lens on it. The only time the pictures are in focus are when I am close up or zoomed into the subject.

That picture of the boy my viewfinder showed perfect focus on his face but as you can see it is out of focus.
Any Ideas or suggestions?

First image was
D7000/24-70
Aperature Priority
1250 ISO
24MM Zoom
0EV
F2.8
1/100
AF-S

Second Image is
D7000/24-70
Aperature Priority
320 ISO
44MM Zoom
0EV
F6.3
1/1000
AF-S





Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)
Attachment #2, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
hawaii502160 Registered since 11th Feb 2011Tue 24-Apr-12 01:02 AM
183 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#31. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 30


Cleveland, US
          

It may be just me, but on my laptop, I don't see any issue with the first photo. The second one doesn't look too bad either...

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Tue 24-Apr-12 02:43 AM
2141 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#32. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 30


US
          

>ok so now about 5000 pictures and we are still at 99% bad.
>I think I am giving up and going to buy the D800

I don't know that I'd do want to do that. The D800 will likely give the same results, but for a great deal more money.

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
lautry Silver Member Nikonian since 02nd Oct 2011Tue 24-Apr-12 02:45 AM
99 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#33. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 30


Panama City Beach, US
          

On my monitor,these 2 pics look pretty good to me. I would have called them keepers.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
fenris117 Registered since 18th Dec 2011Tue 24-Apr-12 02:57 AM
76 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#34. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 30


US
          

Yeah, 5000 is still just starting out. Remember to keep thinking about those shots!

Also, those pictures aren't really bad if you ask me. From what I see, I don't really see any focus issues and the tones seem good.

Personally, I would have gotten up closer and cut out extra detail. For example, did you need to have them pose in front of the stairs? Does the piano need to be there? Why not get a tight shot of their faces and have the nice golden glow of the background become a blur.

With the second picture, same thing. Why is Donald's head cut off? Could Donald have been cut out all together? Does the Mount Rustmore sign have to be there? Why not a low angle wide shot of your son with goofy? or just the Rustmore sign? It's also a little over exposed if you ask me.

These are questions that I would ask myself. Remember, get close, cut the fat, and don't expect pictures to be amazing straight out of the camera and do some post processing. The power of post will make an okay picture worthy of becoming a large scale print. This is a good tutorial on basic things to look out for. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EURb_ZbxzRY

By the way, getting the D800 will not do anything except drain you of $2500 and more frustration. The D7000 is a great camera to learn on, and the key to learning is mistakes.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
icslowmo Silver Member Nikonian since 01st Jan 2012Tue 24-Apr-12 03:37 AM
499 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#36. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 30


Phoenix, US
          

These aren't bad either some miner shadow and highlight corrections and they're fine:







Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)
Attachment #2, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
ShrimpBoy Silver Member Nikonian since 08th Jan 2006Tue 24-Apr-12 04:01 AM
882 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#37. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 30


Brighton and Hove, GB
          

I don't see anything horrendous in these two pictures either.

The background in the first picture is blurry because of the aperture you (or the camera) chose. Depth of field at f/2.8 is pretty shallow, and gets shallower the closer you are to the subject. So the people are in sharp focus but everything behind them is not. You might have got away with f/5.6, f/8 would have been better, but then you'd be shooting a much slower shutter speed, a higher ISO, higher flash power (but the background would go dark), or some combination.

The second image does look overexposed. I've only had my D7000 a few days but I'm beginning to see that in matrix metering mode, and in scenes where there is a good mix of brightness and strong shadows, it will tend to expose for the shadows (which basically means overexpose). You could try setting say -2/3 compensation in these conditions, or perhaps try center-weighted metering where the camera isn't doing any clever scene recognition stuff but is just metering off the average light level over the center of the scene.

If those weren't your complaints about the images, please tell us a bit more about what you think is wrong with them. It's sad to think that you have this really nice gear and can't make images you're happy with.

Gary
"Yea, Sussex by the sea!" - Rudyard Kipling

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
cartnj Registered since 17th Apr 2010Tue 01-May-12 03:07 PM
14 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#38. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 37


US
          

I have been shooting with my new Canon 5D MIII and now find it much easier to take really good images when compared to my D7000.
I really dont know, maybe it was a bad D7000 or just that the D7000 required a more experienced photographer (which I am not)or maybe needed the settings tweaked for every shot and every lens..
Anyway right out of the box, the 5DMIII is taking the best photos I have ever shot. I still have the D7000 and lenses and would love to get it working for me but I have no luck with this camera.
I shoot mostly in Aperture and Shutter priority and sometimes try manual. Even when I tried AUTO on the D7000 the images sucked..



>I don't see anything horrendous in these two pictures
>either.
>
>The background in the first picture is blurry because of the
>aperture you (or the camera) chose. Depth of field at f/2.8 is
>pretty shallow, and gets shallower the closer you are to the
>subject. So the people are in sharp focus but everything
>behind them is not. You might have got away with f/5.6, f/8
>would have been better, but then you'd be shooting a much
>slower shutter speed, a higher ISO, higher flash power (but
>the background would go dark), or some combination.
>
>The second image does look overexposed. I've only had my
>D7000 a few days but I'm beginning to see that in matrix
>metering mode, and in scenes where there is a good mix of
>brightness and strong shadows, it will tend to expose for the
>shadows (which basically means overexpose). You could try
>setting say -2/3 compensation in these conditions, or perhaps
>try center-weighted metering where the camera isn't doing any
>clever scene recognition stuff but is just metering off the
>average light level over the center of the scene.
>
>If those weren't your complaints about the images, please tell
>us a bit more about what you think is wrong with them. It's
>sad to think that you have this really nice gear and can't
>make images you're happy with.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Tue 01-May-12 07:15 PM
2141 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#39. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 38


US
          

>I have been shooting with my new Canon 5D MIII and now find
>it much easier to take really good images when compared to my
>D7000.

Please post some.

>Anyway right out of the box, the 5DMIII is taking the best
>photos I have ever shot.

Please post some.

>Even when I tried AUTO on the D7000 the images
>sucked..

Like this one? http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showphoto.php/photo/356550/cat/20965/ppuser/424276

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
cartnj Registered since 17th Apr 2010Tue 01-May-12 07:41 PM
14 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#40. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 39


US
          

NICE! amazing shot with the kit lens you took there.


>>I have been shooting with my new Canon 5D MIII and now
>find
>>it much easier to take really good images when compared to
>my
>>D7000.
>
>Please post some.
>
>>Anyway right out of the box, the 5DMIII is taking the
>best
>>photos I have ever shot.
>
>Please post some.
>
>>Even when I tried AUTO on the D7000 the images
>>sucked..
>
>Like this one?
>http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showphoto.php/photo/356550/cat/20965/ppuser/424276

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
cartnj Registered since 17th Apr 2010Tue 01-May-12 08:08 PM
14 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#41. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 40


US
          

Here are what look to me good shots. Although I am sure there are problems but at least to my untrained unprofessional eye they look good so that's a start.

The fly shot was sitting on my finger so I was moving all over plus I had no flash and it was in my dark garage and the pic still came out pretty good-- At least his head looked in focus to me.
http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showphoto.php/photo/373438/cat/500/ppuser/320922

the frog I am shocked it came out so good. I wasnt even looking thru the view finder just extending my hands out to shoot that.
http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showphoto.php/photo/373439/ppuser/320922

And then just a regular shot here really just did nothing to the camera except put it in Aperture mode and press the shutter. I think it looks in focus
http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showphoto.php/photo/373437/size/big/cat/500/ppuser/320922

just a landscape shot probably using the wrong settings but still not bad looking to me.
http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showphoto.php/photo/373436/size/big/cat/500/ppuser/320922


>NICE! amazing shot with the kit lens you took there.
>
>
>>>I have been shooting with my new Canon 5D MIII and
>now
>>find
>>>it much easier to take really good images when
>compared to
>>my
>>>D7000.
>>
>>Please post some.
>>
>>>Anyway right out of the box, the 5DMIII is taking the
>>best
>>>photos I have ever shot.
>>
>>Please post some.
>>
>>>Even when I tried AUTO on the D7000 the images
>>>sucked..
>>
>>Like this one?
>>http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showphoto.php/photo/356550/cat/20965/ppuser/424276
>

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
kippford Silver Member Nikonian since 21st Feb 2012Tue 01-May-12 08:47 PM
63 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#42. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 41


falkirk, GB
          

They certainly look better to me and better than anything I can manage.

Colin.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Tue 01-May-12 10:25 PM
2141 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#43. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 41


US
          

Well, if you think you're getting better results with the Canon 5Diii than you were with the D7000, then fine.

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                
mudman2 Silver Member Nikonian since 14th May 2009Tue 01-May-12 10:49 PM
167 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#44. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 43


Jamison, US
          

Took just under a thousand this last Saturday, - mix of 70-200 f2.8 and 17-55f2.8

95% good

Just fyi

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
greenwing Gold Member Nikonian since 18th May 2006Thu 03-May-12 07:17 AM
1299 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#54. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 41
Thu 03-May-12 07:25 AM by greenwing

Yorkshire, GB
          

deleted

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
icslowmo Silver Member Nikonian since 01st Jan 2012Thu 03-May-12 12:52 AM
499 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#53. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 40


Phoenix, US
          

Here is another bee pic I took with the 85mm F1.8G @ F1.8 with a little bit of sharpening in post...



Glad you liked Little Bee, the blue hue back ground was done in post processing also with a little sharpening also. I feel post processing is the second half of the battle to get good pics....

Chris

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
gkaiseril Gold Member Nikonian since 28th Oct 2005Wed 02-May-12 09:47 PM
6739 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#52. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 38


Chicago, US
          

The DXO mark for both cameras:

Canon EOS 5D Mark III vs. Nikon D7000

The scores are not that different. It might be some obscure camera setting like Nikon's D Lighting or Vivid being off but the Canon's version was On, a difference in metering method selected, etc.

If you know a Nikon shooter, you might let that person look at the camera and see if he/she changes the setup.

George
My Nikonian Galleries

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Thu 03-May-12 04:21 PM
2141 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#58. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 52
Thu 03-May-12 04:23 PM by billD80

US
          

>The DXO mark for both cameras:
>
>Canon
>EOS 5D Mark III vs. Nikon D7000>
>
>The scores are not that different.

Check this comparison:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/795%7C0/(brand)/Canon/(appareil2)/792%7C0/(brand2)/Nikon/(appareil3)/680%7C0/(brand3)/Nikon

The D800 just blows the doors off the Canon, and for $500. LESS! Meanwhile, the D7000 holds it's own with the 5D, while being $2300 LESS.

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Omaha Registered since 07th Jan 2012Wed 02-May-12 03:33 AM
527 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#45. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 0


Omaha, US
          

You know, its funny. I've been following this thread, and it occurred to me that your frustration with the D7000 is/was exactly the same thing I had with my D70 years ago.

I kept getting dull, lifeless shots. The colors were off. They just didn't "pop" like I wanted them to.

It took me a long time to figure it out. Well, actually, it didn't really take that much actual time...I just spread it out over the course of many years of not taking a lot of pictures. Once I dug in, it became pretty simple. And while I still consider myself a complete noob, I'd like to think that I've become something of a "noob's noob"

Here's what I figured out:

If you want to be able to pull "presentation ready" JPG images right off the camera (ie, no post-processing), you're going to have to spend a lot of time getting to know your camera. When you set the camera to produce JPG files (of whatever size...doesn't matter), you are at the mercy of whatever internal settings (ie, white balance, sharpening, saturation, etc) you have specified.

But (as has been thoroughly covered on this thread), no amount of fiddling with settings is going to fix a fundamentally bad exposure. As one of the earlier comments put it, its all about understanding the relationship between the brightest and the darkest elements in the image you are trying to capture. The D7000 has a dynamic range of 13.9 EV. That's insane. Back in my film days, we never had anything near that good.

What 13.9 EV means is that you've got a really good chance of getting everything exposed correctly. If the actual dynamic range of your shot is less than 13.9 EV, a perfect exposure is possible.

However, if the actual dynamic range of your scene is greater than 13.9 EV (say you have some bright-white cumulus clouds on top and some subject in a deep shadow down below), then you're going to have to make a choice: If you keep the exposure low enough that the clouds are not blown out, then you risk losing all detail on the subject (meaning that there is not enough light to expose the sensor at all...its left pure black). Get the subject properly exposed, and you risk blowing out the clouds (meaning that so much light hit the sensor that its completely overloaded and rendered pure white with no detail).

Your camera is pretty smart at figuring all that out, but it can only take you so far. In the most challenging situations, you have to make the choices that the camera can't make for you. For example, in a situation like I described above (bright clouds in the sky, subject in a dark shadow below) I've found that Nikon's are brilliant at using fill-flash: Set the camera manually to correctly expose the clouds, and trust that your Nikon flash unit will correctly fill in the subject.

Going back to your shot of the dogs in the snow, I've achieved great results in precisely that situation by using a graduated, neutral-density filter (to knock down the overall light level while still maintaining wide-open aperture along with a shutter speed slow enough to sync with the flash) combined with a Nikon Speedlight for fill flash on the subjects.

You can get some fantastic shots using that technique, but sadly (since you've moved to Canon, that is), as far as I can tell Nikon is well ahead of Canon in this particular area. I've tried this with Canon gear, and it just doesn't seem to work as well. Nikon fill-flash is just magic.

The other big area to discuss is shooting RAW vs JPG. When you go to RAW, you are making a commitment to a lot more work to process your images. With JPG, your goal should be to have the camera set correctly so you can pull the images and publish them directly. With RAW, you are committing to some post-processing, but in exchange for that, you are gaining orders of magnitude more control.

When shooting RAW, you have dozens of options for manipulating the image in post. Highlight recovery, shadow enhancement, exposure compensation, white balance correction, saturation, sharpness, etc, etc, etc. When shooting to JPG, you are pre-setting every one of those in the camera, before you ever take the shot, and hoping that it works out. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't, but if not, your options for downstream correction are very limited.

Many on this thread have advised the taking of lots and lots of pictures. I couldn't agree more. Its become something of an obsession of mine in the last few months: Look at a situation and really think through how to get the right shot. Try to understand what the camera is going to "think", how it might get it wrong, and what to do about it. It becomes addicting.

Quick comment about composition: The best advice I ever read (and this goes back to the early 1980's when I was shooting film) said "Get close. Then get closer. And when you think you are close enough, get a little closer". Most of your shots strike me as typical "snapshots"...photographs taken from too far away (or with insufficient zoom) from eye level. Try getting a lot closer. There is 'something' in the scene that caught your eye and said "shoot me!" Figure out what that is and isolate it. Also, try getting down on your belly and shooting from ground level. Or find something to stand on and shoot from overhead. 99% of routine snapshots are taken from eye level. Just changing to a different perspective will instantly make your photographs more interesting.

Sorry for the long-winded post. I hope it was of some help. Just remember that I'm still on the very beginning of the learning curve myself, so I hope that someone will come along and correct anything I've gotten wrong here!

Visit my Nikonians gallery
Most of my Nikon photos end up here.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
mudman2 Silver Member Nikonian since 14th May 2009Wed 02-May-12 12:18 PM
167 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#47. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 45
Wed 02-May-12 12:19 PM by mudman2

Jamison, US
          

Good points, perhaps people are thinking that photography ended when digital started when in fact nothing has changed

For important stuff I always only shoot raw with second slot backup as raw also. More work afterwards but better results.

Troll, maybe hmmm

>You know, its funny. I've been following this thread, and it
>occurred to me that your frustration with the D7000 is/was
>exactly the same thing I had with my D70 years ago.......

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Omaha Registered since 07th Jan 2012Wed 02-May-12 01:40 PM
527 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#48. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 47


Omaha, US
          


>Troll, maybe hmmm

One is inclined to wonder what exactly they talked about during the five digital photography classes he took.

Visit my Nikonians gallery
Most of my Nikon photos end up here.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

fenris117 Registered since 18th Dec 2011Wed 02-May-12 07:14 AM
76 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#46. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 0


US
          

I dunno... just how this thread went... did I sense a troll?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
kippford Silver Member Nikonian since 21st Feb 2012Wed 02-May-12 07:23 PM
63 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#49. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 46


falkirk, GB
          

That seems a bit harsh. I see no reason to think he is a troll.
He came here posted pics and presumably paid for the silver membership. Is the definition of troll having a different opinion?

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
dm1dave Administrator Awarded for high level knowledge and skills in various areas, most notably in Wildlife and Landscape Writer Ribbon awarded for his excellent article contributions to the Nikonians community Nikonian since 12th Sep 2006Wed 02-May-12 09:04 PM
11299 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#50. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 49


Lowden, US
          

"That seems a bit harsh. I see no reason to think he is a troll".

I agree. Both personally and as a Nikonians Moderator.

The OP seems to be having genuine problems and has come to us for help. In the end he prefers some Cannon gear that does not make him a troll.


Dave Summers
Lowden, Iowa
Nikonians Photo Contest Director

Nikonians membership -
"My most important photographic investment, after the camera"

My Nikonians Gallery | SummersPhotoGraphic.com | My Crated Gallery
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Showcase your best work in any of our 7 Monthly Nikonians Photo contests.


Wildlife | Landscape | Macro | Sports | Travel | Online Assignments | Best of Nikonians 2014

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
fenris117 Registered since 18th Dec 2011Wed 02-May-12 09:20 PM
76 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#51. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 50
Wed 02-May-12 09:22 PM by fenris117

US
          

If I offended anyone, then I am sorry.

The first half of the thread was completely valid, and I have asked similar questions in the past as well. I didn't feel like he was trolling then, but asking for genuine help. However, how the thread developed ticked the trolldar, that's all. From my experience with trolls in forums, this thread followed a similar route.

1. OP asked a question that will attract lots of different responses for possible solutions.(often long winded responses)
2. After getting responses, a rather out of the blue solution that we advised against (in this case, getting a more expensive camera) was chosen.
3. Now everything was fixed with magic.

I just feel that I am alerting future posters of the possibility before other respond with "OMG WHY U GO TO CANON?" See what I mean?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
William Rounds Gold Member Nikonian since 25th Mar 2011Thu 03-May-12 09:35 AM
311 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#55. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 51
Thu 03-May-12 09:39 AM by William Rounds

Rambouillet, FR
          

I knew about Ken Rockwell and his site long before I knew of this Nikonians site, and some of what he suggests may be pertinent to the way you use your camera. I shoot NEF files (which apparently Rockwell rarely does) with my D7000 I set U1 for my NEF shots (which I intend to post-process) and U2 for my JPG shots, using at first the settings he suggests for shooting JPG in a Nikon D7000. Rockwell has suggested settings for extra vivid eye-popping colors in JPG and other suggested settings for people photography. Most of the people on this forum (at least that's my impression) are fairly adroit with post-processing software and this contributes greatly to the excellence of the images they present, and in an iterative way lets them know exactly what they are doing with their camera, since they use both to get the images they want.

You will have noticed that almost all the comments about the acceptability of your photographs were AFTER they were treated with software by people who know how to use the software.

Rockwell has some basic suggestions for getting a proper exposure and correct white balance in JPG with the software internal to the camera, by simply looking at the photo on the camera back's screen, and how to quickly make adjustments "on-the-run". It is valid advice, not for a user who is setting up his tripod and trying to get a NEF file with a maximum of the sensor can do, but very good for people out taking casual photos with no desire to spend hours in front of a computer screen with software which may not be very user friendly for a beginner.

I will probably get a lot of flack from others here for suggesting you try anything suggested by Rockwell, but if it works for you then why complain?

http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/d7000/users-guide/index.htm

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
cartnj Registered since 17th Apr 2010Thu 03-May-12 09:49 AM
14 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#56. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 55


US
          

Thanks everyone. I'm still trying with the d7000. I will say the canon forum is a little harsh. I really like this forum and don't post a lot but I do read a lot here.
I'm not selling any of my gear yet so I will continue with it.
I did get my son a 60D even though his Nikon d3100 produces nice pics I just thought he would take more interest with an additional camera and so far he is using both so that's good.

I am sending off my d7000 to Nikon To let them do whatever they have to do to make sure it's right.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
keribang Registered since 20th Apr 2012Sat 05-May-12 06:35 PM
15 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#61. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 56


Kuala Lumpur, MY
          

>I am sending off my d7000 to Nikon To let them do whatever
>they have to do to make sure it's right.

Greetings,

Thats great that you escalate the problem to Nikon, always the best way forward if you believe your unit is faulty.

I am a DSLR noob myself & D7k is my 1st DSLR. However, I have some experience with film SLR in the 90s (it was a full manual - only the light meter has batteries ) & later bridge-cam.

Just like to share my noob experience with D7k for last couple of months & hope it'll help:

When I took my first couple of outdoor shots, I was horrified! Exposures were wrong & subjects were out of focus. I went back, re-evaluate and realized that my main mistake was thinking since its an advance DSLR it will somehow knew what i was thinking, i.e. where is my focus in the composition & what exposure I want to achieve.

So going back to basic with some of my meager understanding of exposure from shooting fully manual, I researched and re-read both the metering & autofocus systems of the D7k. After every point re-learn on both systems, I set out to test & practice them wherever I can. I won't elaborate those points here since the earlier replies from Nikonians basically covers most of them especially wrt exposure. I am happy to say I get most of the shots I want.

A few sample of my shots on D7k are here in my Flickr photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/77726359@N03/

My point is to don't give up on the D7k yet. I suggest for next few hundred shots to 'play' with spot & matrix metering and also dial-in compensations and see how it affect your shots. Then play around with different ISO levels and autofocus (& manual) modes. Btw, the autofocus is another beast, it really needs to be comprehend thoroughly to get sharp focus.
Just FYI, I have AE-L/AF-L button set to AF Lock Only to help me to keep my subject focus locked. My Fn button set to AE Lock (Hold), this help me to maintain exposure setting when using Spot metering.

Lastly, here's a quote from Thom Hogan latest post that I think is relevant to your issue. Good luck!

"Then there's the usual "doesn't focus right" complaints. I say usual because as we've gotten higher resolution cameras we're finding more people who aren't handling their cameras right or understand the autofocus system correctly. We've had this complaint now about the D3/D300, the D7000, and now the D4/D800. Yet the vast majority of those complaints actually turn out to be user misunderstanding or AF Fine Tune tolerance differences. Yes, I'm aware of the "left side doesn't focus same as right side" complaints. I can't verify them on three bodies I've tried, so short of actually getting a body in hand that displays this problem, I can't really say anything. At the same time, I know that if you do experience a real issue and can report it to Nikon clearly and show examples, they'll definitely look at your problem and fix it if they find it is real. Ranting online won't fix your problem, should you actually have one. Sending your camera and maybe lens back to Nikon with a clear report of the problem and how it is triggered will."

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
sleek20 Silver Member Nikonian since 26th Jun 2011Sat 05-May-12 07:04 PM
1 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#62. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 61


Hayward, US
          

Great series of shots, thanks for your input.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
gkaiseril Gold Member Nikonian since 28th Oct 2005Thu 03-May-12 04:18 PM
6739 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#57. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 55


Chicago, US
          

Ken Rockwell does have many good points, but he makes generalizations sound like absolute truths and does not discuss the real issues and changes his opinion with the wind.

Yes this site tries to be friendly and the founders know that good photography is a lot about the photographer's skill and knowledge and not the equipment used by the photographer.

George
My Nikonian Galleries

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
kippford Silver Member Nikonian since 21st Feb 2012Thu 03-May-12 07:25 PM
63 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#59. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 57


falkirk, GB
          

I just had a look at Ken Rockwell's site.
He says there is no need for a tripod with vr lenses in daylight.
That seems to be contrary to everything I have read elsewhere.


Colin.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
hawaii502160 Registered since 11th Feb 2011Fri 04-May-12 12:34 AM
183 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#60. "RE: 1000 Pictures and 99% are bad"
In response to Reply # 59


Cleveland, US
          

A tripod is a good idea anytime. The problem is that it isn't always practical. I use my tripod whenever I can.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D7100, D7000 (Public) topic #15644 Previous topic | Next topic


Take the Nikonians Tour and learn more about being a Nikonian Wiki /FAQ /Help Listen to our MP3 photography radio channels Find anything on Nikon and imaging technology - fast!

Copyright © Nikonians 2000, 2014
All Rights Reserved

Nikonians®, NikoScope® and NikoniansAcademy™ are trademarks owned by Nikonians.org.
Nikon®, Nikonos® and Nikkor® are registered trademarks of Nikon Corporation.