Photography: Camera sensor size difference

Fuck live view, tethered shooting and lightroom 2 ftw.

there are plenty of fast primes with chromatic aberration and distortion out there.
i don't own/use any primes, does that make me mental?

Yeah but you are just a happy snapper. You may as well go back to Instamatic and cut your losses.

live view? fucking waste of battery mate. ive tried it once just out of curiosity, and for fucks sake! two battery bars would last weeks of intermittent shooting in normal mode, whereas you play with live view for five to ten minutes and the battery is empty. you might find it useful but i have absolutely no use for it. i think it's one of the most useless things ive ever seen on a slr and would rather have paid less money for a camera without live view. i am actually mildly pissed off that ive paid for something that i'm never going to use, and that my camera would have been even cheaper if that function was not built into it. i'd rather just look through the viewfinder and use AF, or just estimate the camera-to-subject distance and turn the focus ring to the distance printed on it. FUCK LIVE VIEW!!!

ffs you talk a lot of shit!

my mum could take a pic of a flower and get something in focus.

live view in the studio is invaluable. Every SLR camera going forward will have Liveview - it's going to be like AF.

How dare you. The hipster photographer of 2009 shoots only on Lomo cameras. Preferably a Diana model. Cause film is where it's at man.

Film scmilm.

Do you know Lomo is an anagram of homo.

there are plenty of fast primes with chromatic aberration and distortion out there.
i don't own/use any primes, does that make me mental?

er, you use a zoom on a p45?

" well, i have a 17-35 zoom which is impossible to focus accurately because"

you need live view with the 10x zoom function, focusing is spot on. one of the most useful features of the newer cameras.

Abso-fucking-lutely.

I use mainly manual Nikon's on the Canon 5D2 and focussing it super easy with Liveview and 10x magnification - in fact 10x is sometime a bit overkill, the x5 is easily enough.

er, you use a zoom on a p45?

I use zooms on my digital camera !!

To the prime/film congregation that must be like admitting to pedophilia.

Zooms are cool, if you extend them to their longest focal length it makes you look like a strong and powerful man with a big cock and a decent set of medium sized balls.

Christ MessenJah, stop blaming your equipment! I don't see Ansel Adams complaining about bringing his home made large format camera with lens that are never as good as a modern day 50mm around Yosemite several decades ago!

i like af in low light/ fast moving situations, i like mf +teathered or live view in the studio. I also shoot zooms and primes, I'm fairly easy going in life.

ffs you talk a lot of shit!

my mum could take a pic of a flower and get something in focus.

live view in the studio is invaluable. Every SLR camera going forward will have Liveview - it's going to be like AF.

Bellend.

Who cares about what your mum can and can't do? Who cares about shooting still life in a studio? Do I shoot still life in a studio? Erm, NO.

My point was that I (or anyone else for that matter) can get something in perfectly sharp focus without live view, therefore it's unnecessary for me.

Maybe it's useful for you, but I didn't say it wasn't useful for you, did I?

May I reiterate, 'bellend' (you).

Christ MessenJah, stop blaming your equipment! I don't see Ansel Adams complaining about bringing his home made large format camera with lens that are never as good as a modern day 50mm around Yosemite several decades ago!

Err... for what exactly am I supposedly blaming my equipment? To blame something for something, surely something must have gone wrong. NOTHING HAS GONE WRONG so how can I be blaming equipment for something?

My friend's band is named after people like you

lol Messenjah you are talking to people who know what they are talking about, I kinda agree with the liveview but the way that you put your point across makes people want to argue with you.

hmmm... i got pin sharp images manually focusing with me 100/2.8 macro near the minimum focus distance (i.e. near 1;1 reproduction) at about f/5.6 on an eos 5 (film camera.... remember them?) before i had to sell it, and that was on a breezy day, handheld, with the flowers that i was shooting actually moving about every so often... pics have been blown up to 18 x 12 inch and yep, dead sharp (obviously not the entire image but the bits that were within the depth of field range)

thats not saying im good at photographing stuff, thats saying that if it can be done by a complete amateur fucktard like me with complete ease, then wtf does anyone need live view for.

just wondering what your settings were because what you described above would only be possible shooting using a small aperture and extremely bright conditions as the depth of field on macro lenses means keeping a certain point in focus handheld is very had as it will shift every small movement.

hmmm... i got pin sharp images manually focusing with me 100/2.8 macro near the minimum focus distance (i.e. near 1;1 reproduction) at about f/5.6 on an eos 5 (film camera.... remember them?) before i had to sell it, and that was on a breezy day, handheld, with the flowers that i was shooting actually moving about every so often... pics have been blown up to 18 x 12 inch and yep, dead sharp (obviously not the entire image but the bits that were within the depth of field range)
thats not saying im good at photographing stuff, thats saying that if it can be done by a complete amateur fucktard like me with complete ease, then wtf does anyone need live view for.

but you didn't know they were sharp until the film came back.
if you are at a location or hire studio with props or models (which all costs money) and the client looking over your shoulder do you think you would just chance it, trust the cameras af or use live view to ensure critical focus? it's easy to use and means no fuck-ups, this is a good thing as it puts food on the table and makes your life easier.

Fuck live view, tethered shooting and lightroom 2 ftw.

tethered is great but often if i want to be a bit more mobile or shoot in a public place, without an assistant to carry the laptop or in shitty weather then live-view and the big screen on the back of the camera is incredibly useful.

er, you use a zoom on a p45?

yes it has been known.

lol Messenjah you are talking to people who know what they are talking about, I kinda agree with the liveview but the way that you put your point across makes people want to argue with you.
What makes you think I don't know that I'm talking to people who know what they are talking about?

And does that mean you think somehow I don't know what I'm talking about? So.. me saying "live view is useless to me" - does that mean I'm clueless?

just wondering what your settings were because what you described above would only be possible shooting using a small aperture and extremely bright conditions as the depth of field on macro lenses means keeping a certain point in focus handheld is very had as it will shift every small movement.

Like I said... f/5.6ish on a sunny day. Only wanted the centre of the flower in focus. It was about four years ago, but if I remember rightly, the shutter was about 1/180 of a second (I remember it wasn't much higher than 1/f), ISO 100 slide film. In some of the shots I used a piece of white paper to block the sun, to de-harshify the shadows. Used hand-held TTL flash set to about -1 & 2/3 of a stop on some of the shots, dunno if I used it on this one, but I may have - but in either case I was holding the camera with one hand. Kneeling down so I was probably resting the lens on my knee. If you think that;'s impossible, then, well you're entitled to your opinion :-)

Like I said... it was moving, and it was difficult to keep it in focus, but I didn't just shoot one picture, you know? If I wasn't just doing it for the sake of trying the lens out maybe I would have brought the flower indoors and shot it in a breezeless environment with the camera on a tripod... because then I'd be able to 'win' an argument about live view on an internet forum, or something.

but you didn't know they were sharp until the film came back.
if you are at a location or hire studio with props or models (which all costs money) and the client looking over your shoulder do you think you would just chance it, trust the cameras af or use live view to ensure critical focus? it's easy to use and means no fuck-ups, this is a good thing as it puts food on the table and makes your life easier.

And this is what pisses me right off about pro internet photographers

Every argument they make is based on "if you were a pro, and you were doing this or that for a client"

They seem to think that everything that they do relates to amateur photographers too

Listen (or rather, read), try to understand that I am not a pro, and that I do not shoot for clients, or anyone other than myself. Therefore, I do not need to ensure critical focus in order to recieve a salary or to please my boss, therefore, try to understand that while live view and other such tools may be highly useful to you, they may be completely useless to amateur photographers like me.

if i'm just wandering around taking pictures i still use it.
mainly because i don't want to get home and find out that something isn't sharp. and that refocussing would have meant a usable image
zooming in to the shot after you have taken it is not always 100% perfect at judging focus because of the screen quality (and the fact that you are looking at the embedded jpeg not the processed raw) but being able to go past the point of perfect focus (at 100%) and back again means you know it's pin.

Messenjah, I cant be bothered to feed a troll so you carry on taking your photos and we will all carry on taking ours, you live with your equipment and we shall live with ours.

he's not a troll, he's probably just a bit over exited that's all

it's just an internet forum about bikes (and cameras)

Isn't the whole point of Flickr being a site where amateur discuss lengthly about which lens is sharper, a Nikon 50mm or a Canon 50mm so they're confident enough to take a photo of their daughter grinning like a toothless hippy, and then go back complaining about the lack of sharpness at the widest aperture and end up thinking they need a high end Carl Zeiss lens just to get it slightly sharper that no human eyes can detect from a small print?

Someone please explain in layman's terms what live-view is and how it works.

Ed was good enough to start this thread, which prompted me to go out and buy a full frame camera, now tell me what live-view is so I can chuck it away to buy another one......!

god you guys are a bunch of little bitches.
it's sunny, go out and take some photos.

Someone please explain in layman's terms what live-view is and how it works.

Ed was good enough to start this thread, which prompted me to go out and buy a full frame camera, now tell me what live-view is so I can chuck it away to buy another one......!

you can look at what you're shooting on the screen, as well as through the view finder.
like a compact.

wouldn't it have to be a largish, very high quality screen to be better than an optical viewfinder?

One of my first compact digital cameras had an optical viewfinder, I was dismayed when it was superceded by digital viewfinders....

thats the point of th 10x zoom.
you can zoom the screen right in on what you're shooting to focus on a precise point.
the screens on modern DSLR's are quite good these days anyway.

i, personally, don't really see the point of them outside the studio (maybe still life). but thats just my opinion, and i've prob just started a 10 page argument now.

you can look at what you're shooting on the screen, as well as through the view finder.
like a compact.

though it should be pointed out that you cant see through the viewfinder when youre using live view as the mirror flips up when live view's activated.