Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Best lens for wildlife photography?

Reply
Thread Tools

Best lens for wildlife photography?

 
 
M-M
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-20-2013
In article <2013052008260428635-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> > When a camera auto-exposes a photo, it takes the entire frame into
> > account. If you crop out a portion, it would not be the same exposure as
> > if you zoomed in on that portion and exposed for it.
> >
> > At least _I_ understand what I'm saying.

>
> That depends on the camera you are using and the metering you have
> available and have selected. With my D300S, and usually all DSLR & many
> fuller featured compact cameras, will give you the option of full
> matrix metering, spot metering, & center weighted metering with the
> ability to adjust the center weight spot size.
>
> ...and even if you have the problem you proposed, it is easily fixed in
> post processing.



I guess if you know the exact part you want to crop out, you can weight
or spot meter for it, but it is still largely a guess. It is not the
same as matrix metering the entire frame.

And post-processing a poor exposure is not "easily fixed", in my
experience. Overexposed areas can not be compensated for, and
underexposed areas are often grainy.

--
m-m
Photo Gallery:
http://www.mhmyers.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-20-2013
In article
<(E-Mail Removed)>,
M-M <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > > When a camera auto-exposes a photo, it takes the entire frame into
> > > account. If you crop out a portion, it would not be the same exposure as
> > > if you zoomed in on that portion and exposed for it.
> > >
> > > At least _I_ understand what I'm saying.

> >
> > That depends on the camera you are using and the metering you have
> > available and have selected. With my D300S, and usually all DSLR & many
> > fuller featured compact cameras, will give you the option of full
> > matrix metering, spot metering, & center weighted metering with the
> > ability to adjust the center weight spot size.
> >
> > ...and even if you have the problem you proposed, it is easily fixed in
> > post processing.

>
> I guess if you know the exact part you want to crop out, you can weight
> or spot meter for it, but it is still largely a guess. It is not the
> same as matrix metering the entire frame.


matrix metering will favour the subject, which is generally somewhere
towards the center. cropping won't make much of a difference, if any.

> And post-processing a poor exposure is not "easily fixed", in my
> experience. Overexposed areas can not be compensated for, and
> underexposed areas are often grainy.


the difference is not going to be all that much, probably no more than
1 stop, if that much, and likely less than 1/2 stop. that's trivial to
fix, with no noticeably effect.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Wally
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-20-2013
On Mon, 20 May 2013 11:58:45 -0400, M-M <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>In article <2013052008260428635-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>> > When a camera auto-exposes a photo, it takes the entire frame into
>> > account. If you crop out a portion, it would not be the same exposure as
>> > if you zoomed in on that portion and exposed for it.
>> >
>> > At least _I_ understand what I'm saying.

>>
>> That depends on the camera you are using and the metering you have
>> available and have selected. With my D300S, and usually all DSLR & many
>> fuller featured compact cameras, will give you the option of full
>> matrix metering, spot metering, & center weighted metering with the
>> ability to adjust the center weight spot size.
>>
>> ...and even if you have the problem you proposed, it is easily fixed in
>> post processing.

>
>
>I guess if you know the exact part you want to crop out, you can weight
>or spot meter for it, but it is still largely a guess. It is not the
>same as matrix metering the entire frame.
>
>And post-processing a poor exposure is not "easily fixed", in my
>experience. Overexposed areas can not be compensated for, and
>underexposed areas are often grainy.


Old-fashioned exposure thinking, IMHO.

In the old days you guessed or calculated the exposure as best you
could, and perhaps bracketed, because you wouldn't find out whether
you were close enough until the processed film came back.

Now you just look at the LCD and if there are blinkies, adjust and
shoot again.

W
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-20-2013
On 5/20/2013 1:08 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2013.05.20 11:58 , M-M wrote:
>
>> And post-processing a poor exposure is not "easily fixed", in my
>> experience. Overexposed areas can not be compensated for, and
>> underexposed areas are often grainy.

>
> Within a stop over or a couple under you can save a digital photo
> however. Slide film? Faggetaboutit.
>

the word is pronounced furgedaboudit



--
PeterN
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-20-2013
On 5/20/2013 11:38 AM, nospam wrote:
> In article
> <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> M-M <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>>> An uncropped photo is exposed for the frame. When you crop out a
>>>> portion, the exposure is likely to be off.
>>>
>>> You're not talking sense in either sentence.

>>
>> I'll try to rephrase it.
>>
>> When a camera auto-exposes a photo, it takes the entire frame into
>> account.

>
> not necessarily, depending on metering mode, and it may not matter at
> all, depending on the scene.
>
>> If you crop out a portion, it would not be the same exposure as
>> if you zoomed in on that portion and exposed for it.

>
> it *might* not be the same, and if it is different it probably won't be
> different enough to matter. it depends on a lot of things.
>
> what matters is if the subject is exposed properly.
>


WARNING: CHECK YOUR CARDIOLOGY BEFORE READING THIS:

I agree completely with nospam, with this and another post in this thread.

--
PeterN
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-20-2013
On 5/20/2013 12:27 PM, Wally wrote:
> On Mon, 20 May 2013 11:58:45 -0400, M-M <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> In article <2013052008260428635-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> When a camera auto-exposes a photo, it takes the entire frame into
>>>> account. If you crop out a portion, it would not be the same exposure as
>>>> if you zoomed in on that portion and exposed for it.
>>>>
>>>> At least _I_ understand what I'm saying.
>>>
>>> That depends on the camera you are using and the metering you have
>>> available and have selected. With my D300S, and usually all DSLR & many
>>> fuller featured compact cameras, will give you the option of full
>>> matrix metering, spot metering, & center weighted metering with the
>>> ability to adjust the center weight spot size.
>>>
>>> ...and even if you have the problem you proposed, it is easily fixed in
>>> post processing.

>>
>>
>> I guess if you know the exact part you want to crop out, you can weight
>> or spot meter for it, but it is still largely a guess. It is not the
>> same as matrix metering the entire frame.
>>
>> And post-processing a poor exposure is not "easily fixed", in my
>> experience. Overexposed areas can not be compensated for, and
>> underexposed areas are often grainy.

>
> Old-fashioned exposure thinking, IMHO.
>
> In the old days you guessed or calculated the exposure as best you
> could, and perhaps bracketed, because you wouldn't find out whether
> you were close enough until the processed film came back.
>
> Now you just look at the LCD and if there are blinkies, adjust and
> shoot again.
>

Does that apply if you use upgrade pricing?


--
PeterN
 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul J Gans
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-21-2013
PeterN <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On 5/20/2013 1:08 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
>> On 2013.05.20 11:58 , M-M wrote:
>>
>>> And post-processing a poor exposure is not "easily fixed", in my
>>> experience. Overexposed areas can not be compensated for, and
>>> underexposed areas are often grainy.

>>
>> Within a stop over or a couple under you can save a digital photo
>> however. Slide film? Faggetaboutit.
>>

>the word is pronounced furgedaboudit


Fuhgedaboudit.

--
--- Paul J. Gans, posting from Brooklyn
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-21-2013
On 5/20/2013 8:30 PM, Paul J Gans wrote:
> PeterN <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> On 5/20/2013 1:08 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
>>> On 2013.05.20 11:58 , M-M wrote:
>>>
>>>> And post-processing a poor exposure is not "easily fixed", in my
>>>> experience. Overexposed areas can not be compensated for, and
>>>> underexposed areas are often grainy.
>>>
>>> Within a stop over or a couple under you can save a digital photo
>>> however. Slide film? Faggetaboutit.
>>>

>> the word is pronounced furgedaboudit

>
> Fuhgedaboudit.
>


You must be from either Bensonhoist, or Greenpernt. I loined it in
Flatbush.

--
PeterN
 
Reply With Quote
 
M-M
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-21-2013
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Wally <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Now you just look at the LCD and if there are blinkies, adjust and
> shoot again.



Yea, just tell that animal or bird to go back to what he was doing.

--
m-m
Photo Gallery:
http://www.mhmyers.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-21-2013
Paul J Gans <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> PeterN <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>On 5/20/2013 1:08 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
>>> On 2013.05.20 11:58 , M-M wrote:
>>>
>>>> And post-processing a poor exposure is not "easily fixed", in my
>>>> experience. Overexposed areas can not be compensated for, and
>>>> underexposed areas are often grainy.
>>>
>>> Within a stop over or a couple under you can save a digital photo
>>> however. Slide film? Faggetaboutit.
>>>

>>the word is pronounced furgedaboudit


> Fuhgedaboudit.


Fagottaboutit.

-Wolfgang

--
see http://tinyurl.com/Fagottaboutit
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon lens for wildlife roy@carealternatives.com Digital Photography 11 11-29-2005 03:12 PM
megapixels or zoom lense? Which is best for wildlife,landscapes? northfork500@netscape.net Digital Photography 26 07-25-2005 02:32 PM
Re: megapixels or zoom lense? Which is best for wildlife,landscapes? VK Digital Photography 15 03-12-2005 07:28 AM
Best digital for wildlife shots? Ray Muensch Digital Photography 15 12-27-2004 07:25 PM



Advertisments