Hi Everybody,
Here's the town on the Hudson River while it was still day time -- it was a gray day so I added color.It was all done in Photopaint X6. I wonder if Corel will fix P X8 so that it at least matches X6.
Any opinions on this version versus the night version.
Phil
Hi David
The answer depends on what you call a better capture. The main impact of changing f stops is the depth of field. the low f/stops have less depth of field so a softer focus and lower contrast in the background. IF you are looking for maximum detail go for the small aperature and slow shutter. I still shoot real film the difference is considerable when enlarged to 16 x 20.
You use photopaint for display so the difference in detail will show. Photoshop not so much.
Is the lens an f4 -300 or did you feel rich and get an f2.8.. One thing you may want to explore in the nikon family is the difference between The DX and Fx Cameras. the DX is the original small form sensor where the actual capture area is less than a full 35 mm frame. The effect is that a dx body with 200mm lens capture about the same image as a 300 mm would on film.
The Fx body has a full frame sensor which has better dynamic range and contrast and image relates to film capture directly.
The big difference Fx body and lenses are 2x -5X the price dependng on features the good news the Dx lens do work on the FX body
Nikon have a great lens simulator http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/simulator/
lets users compare image scale and angles of view of different focal lengths.
I still shoot film because it would cost 30,000 to replace the gear.
Have to say though the idea of Stabilization is attractive I have several tripods instead.
Have fun
ross blair
Ross you hit the nail on the head, HAVE FUN.
I have way too much work for a 62 year old and enough stress for three people. The camera a Nikon D50 with 3 lenses was given to me and I take shots of the family functions. I took up playing with the 300mm lens and realized it was bad but it peaked my interest so I replaced it with the f4, I didn't spend much on a used one, under $300 with a warranty. I did a little testing and I now believe the camera was a Ritz kit setup as my tests show the new to me 300mm lens is in the best of the three.
My image work consists of 97% high end architectural images which are supplied to me by others and edited by me so this foray on this side of the camera for me is a way to relax and learn something interesting. If it becomes WORK it goes.
I'll check our you words of wisdom with my next round of experiments, thanks.
Sounds like the fun has begun. Your results are part of why I still shoot film my lenses are f1.8- f2.8 and f4. the depth of field effects aren't as visible above f 2.8 . Longer focal lengths also won't effect the depth of field so your results are as expected. If you have a camera around with a 50mm lens it is likely 1.8 ore 2.8 shoot a shot wide open and f16 you will see it.
Digital does make a difference the d50 captures an area roughly 1/3 smaller than full frame 35mmshown below so the angle of view is different and depth of field less apparent
I was checking out digital a while ago an equivalent body is 3,000 the digital 400 mm 2.8 lens is 11,000 so fil I use.
Here is an article on focus testing and a free file for you it fits with your tech stuff.
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/focus_testing.html
are you able to download other profiles to your camera I know Nikon have changed theirs over time to provide better detail in highlights?
Ross