[The1]

Originally Posted by Prissy

Is Av mode Aperture Mode? I'll give it a try

yes. get it wide open. and crank your ISO up.

[Prissy]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Assuming he has an EVF. It's an option with the NEx-5N.

Originally Posted by dcstep

It'd be a shame to have such a wonderful camera without the EVF.

In one or two generations of theses cameras, particularly if we can still use our legacy lenses, we'll all be shooting these. Soon as I can mount my 500mm lens on one and shoot 60-fps on a high quality APS-C (or full frame... dream on) I'll have one. (I could make due with 30-fps).

I'd use it with all my zooms and big lenses and then have a little pancake 35mm for street shooting.

Dave

Originally Posted by The1

even if you don't have the electronic view finder, at least put a corner against your forehead. 3 anchor points will always work better then just 2

3 = both hands and head
2 = just 2 hands

walls are acceptable alternatives to a head, and sometimes preferred as they don't rock

also depending how you hold NEX-5N change holding to one hand on camera body and one to lens, gives a stagger and spreads the weight of the unit for more stability.

Damn u guys knows ur cameras haha. ya the 5N doesn't come with an EVF and the Sony one cost $300 something Thanks for the tips

How do I photoshop a photo to like this?

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by Prissy

How do I photoshop a photo to like this?

Mega-practice with HDR shots and software. Usually 3 shots (one under, one normal, one over) which are then melded together and tone-mapped to achieve the desired lighting and color. It takes talent to get it to look like that image. And did I mention lots of practice?

[The1]

and a tripod

[Prissy]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Mega-practice with HDR shots and software. Usually 3 shots (one under, one normal, one over) which are then melded together and tone-mapped to achieve the desired lighting and color. It takes talent to get it to look like that image. And did I mention lots of practice?

ya! it looks beyond PP HDR LOL. Amazing

Originally Posted by The1

and a tripod

Def!

[The1]

also, I know dave said to go to 6400ISO on your camera, but i'm not sure how well the NEX handles high ISO like that, so it will be trial and error.

Also, it's going to depend a lot on what photo editing program you have, some have incredible noise reduction software, so it's easy to shoot high ISO and not worry about it, where others don't have such programs, so they try to avoid getting noise in their pictures altogether.

Does the NEX-5N have a RAW file function? I thought it did, but i'm not 100% sure. If it does, and you're serious about learning photography, start shooting in RAW as you can do a lot more with the files when editing then just a JPEG, but if you're not familiar with that stuff, don't worry at this point in time until you learn more.

[Prissy]

Originally Posted by The1

also, I know dave said to go to 6400ISO on your camera, but i'm not sure how well the NEX handles high ISO like that, so it will be trial and error.

Also, it's going to depend a lot on what photo editing program you have, some have incredible noise reduction software, so it's easy to shoot high ISO and not worry about it, where others don't have such programs, so they try to avoid getting noise in their pictures altogether.

Does the NEX-5N have a RAW file function? I thought it did, but i'm not 100% sure. If it does, and you're serious about learning photography, start shooting in RAW as you can do a lot more with the files when editing then just a JPEG, but if you're not familiar with that stuff, don't worry at this point in time until you learn more.

The 5N does a great job on high ISO. it also can be saved as RAW. So ar i havet started shooting in raw, but eventually I will. But whats are some differences between saving as Jpeg or RAW? I know the color isn't compressed in RAW, but how will this make it easier to PP the image?

[M_Six]

The RAW files haven't had NR or compression or anything else applied. Just look at the difference in file sizes. The RAW file has a lot more data to work with. When you start trying to lighten or darken JPEGs, you start getting blotches and other noise artifacts showing up. You won't get them as quickly with RAW files.

[Prissy]

Originally Posted by M_Six

The RAW files haven't had NR or compression or anything else applied. Just look at the difference in file sizes. The RAW file has a lot more data to work with. When you start trying to lighten or darken JPEGs, you start getting blotches and other noise artifacts showing up. You won't get them as quickly with RAW files.

ahh i see...

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Prissy

ahh i see...

Your camera should have come with RAW conversion software. Shoot in RAW and see how the software does.

Your camera has a lot of "Style" modes, like "Scenice", "Portrait", etc. what's happening is that the camera is modifying the RAW file as it converts it to jpeg inside the camera. You'll have much more control over that if you shoot RAW and do it yourself. However, the RAW file with no modification may look a little "flat" to you. Some common things to do is adjust the RGB curve (red/blue/green) by bending it into a moderate S-curve, or pulling down the middle of the RGB curve, raising Contrast, adding Vibrance, etc., etc., etc. It'll take some practice.

DON'T get carried away with the Saturation slider! Some get enamored with super saturated colors and slide that baby way over toward the Right. In the beginning, resist the urge to add contrast above the level 10.

Make your shots of regular people and places look good and natural to you before you start exploring the extreme regions of PP. It's alright to go there to explore, many people stay there, but don't use it as a crutch to spiff up uninteresting shots.

I've heard that your Sony is super-duper at high-ISO.

Dave

[The1]

RAW is a whole different entity. when you get used to doing post processing you'll be able to see in other peoples pictures if they used a JPEG and edited it or a RAW and edited it, there's that much of a difference in quality.

one tends to appear fake and forced, the other looks like it came straight out of the camera, even though there's been lots of adjustments.

when you alter a JPEG, it's basically maxed out right from the start, so if you add a tiny bit of exposure, you'll start to see bands in your dark colours very quickly, it limits what you can do. (bands are the computer not being able to tell what one colour is from another, so it uses the nearest colour to it as a reference, and then you start to see clumps like M-six mentioned.)

In RAW, you can save parts of an image that you might have thought were over exposed and white, but you'd be amazed at what detail still resides inside of that area sometimes.

same with the darks, although to a lesser extent.

there's bucket loads more control over your white balance as well.

I guess the best way to demonstrate it is in some post processing programs, if you're editing a JPEG a slider will sometimes give you a choice from 0-10, but when it's in RAW, it gives you a choice from 0-100, there's just that much more flexibility.

[Prissy]

Originally Posted by dcstep

Your camera should have come with RAW conversion software. Shoot in RAW and see how the software does.

Your camera has a lot of "Style" modes, like "Scenice", "Portrait", etc. what's happening is that the camera is modifying the RAW file as it converts it to jpeg inside the camera. You'll have much more control over that if you shoot RAW and do it yourself. However, the RAW file with no modification may look a little "flat" to you. Some common things to do is adjust the RGB curve (red/blue/green) by bending it into a moderate S-curve, or pulling down the middle of the RGB curve, raising Contrast, adding Vibrance, etc., etc., etc. It'll take some practice.

DON'T get carried away with the Saturation slider! Some get enamored with super saturated colors and slide that baby way over toward the Right. In the beginning, resist the urge to add contrast above the level 10.

Make your shots of regular people and places look good and natural to you before you start exploring the extreme regions of PP. It's alright to go there to explore, many people stay there, but don't use it as a crutch to spiff up uninteresting shots.

I've heard that your Sony is super-duper at high-ISO.

Dave

Originally Posted by The1

RAW is a whole different entity. when you get used to doing post processing you'll be able to see in other peoples pictures if they used a JPEG and edited it or a RAW and edited it, there's that much of a difference in quality.

one tends to appear fake and forced, the other looks like it came straight out of the camera, even though there's been lots of adjustments.

when you alter a JPEG, it's basically maxed out right from the start, so if you add a tiny bit of exposure, you'll start to see bands in your dark colours very quickly, it limits what you can do. (bands are the computer not being able to tell what one colour is from another, so it uses the nearest colour to it as a reference, and then you start to see clumps like M-six mentioned.)

In RAW, you can save parts of an image that you might have thought were over exposed and white, but you'd be amazed at what detail still resides inside of that area sometimes.

same with the darks, although to a lesser extent.

there's bucket loads more control over your white balance as well.

I guess the best way to demonstrate it is in some post processing programs, if you're editing a JPEG a slider will sometimes give you a choice from 0-10, but when it's in RAW, it gives you a choice from 0-100, there's just that much more flexibility.

Thx for the infos! really helped me a lot to understand the basics. I've view few images of Jpeg VS RAW on dpreview. but only can tell the differences when I zoom in. Do you guys save both RAW and Jpeg files when shooting?

[Chewy734]

In general, there is no reason to save a jpg if you save a raw. However, some people like to view jpgs to decide whether to keep the photo or not. Jpgs take less space and processing power to handle, so it's easier to sort through jpgs than raw images. If you find a jpg to delete, you can delete the corresponding raw file, etc.

Personally, I don't save jpgs with raws, but I know other photogs here do.

[Prissy]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

In general, there is no reason to save a jpg if you save a raw. However, some people like to view jpgs to decide whether to keep the photo or not. Jpgs take less space and processing power to handle, so it's easier to sort through jpgs than raw images. If you find a jpg to delete, you can delete the corresponding raw file, etc.

Personally, I don't save jpgs with raws, but I know other photogs here do.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Prissy

Thx for the infos! really helped me a lot to understand the basics. I've view few images of Jpeg VS RAW on dpreview. but only can tell the differences when I zoom in. Do you guys save both RAW and Jpeg files when shooting?

I shoot RAW and low quality jpeg, but I don't save the jpeg. I only use it to decide which RAW files to convert and process.

I find when converting RAWs that I can apply a preset RGB-curve/contrast/brightness/WhiteBalance adjustment to 80% to 90% of most any shoot. That's what your camera is doing when you ask it to produce a jpeg. For the other 10% to 20% I have to make additional adjustments to get the final levels where they please me.

Dave

[The1]

Originally Posted by Prissy

Thx for the infos! really helped me a lot to understand the basics. I've view few images of Jpeg VS RAW on dpreview. but only can tell the differences when I zoom in. Do you guys save both RAW and Jpeg files when shooting?

we've covered the pros pretty well for you, but here are a few cons.

-takes up more hard drive space
-takes up more memory card space
-if you shoot burst of pictures often, the buffer runs out faster, and you won't get as many shots before it maxes out on the camera and you have to wait a couple of seconds
if you load pictures to a friends computer, they likely won't have a program that will read RAW so there's no point in giving photos away until you've taken them home

other then that, with todays technology out there, taking up hard drive space isn't a good argument, as you can buy 3TB for about 150$

you can carry a laptop with you and convert files quickly if someone really needs them, and if someone really needs them, you can also shoot jpeg and raw at the same time, depending on the camera.

the only real negative if you consider it a problem, is shooting in bursts. that being said, as cameras are coming along, the camera can process the large files faster then ever before. I know if i shoot raw only on my 7D without any noise reduction settings or light altering, i can shoot burst almost continuously, if i turn on those features, i can shoot maybe 15 in a row, but who really needs to have 15 in a row unless they like the noise.

if you shoot raw and jpeg on the 7D with all the noise filters and etc on, you can maybe if you're lucky shoot a burst of 6.

[M_Six]

Can the 7D shoot RAW and low quality JPEG? My T1i will only do RAW + High Quality JPEG, which really slows things down and fills the card, so I do RAW only.

[The1]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Can the 7D shoot RAW and low quality JPEG? My T1i will only do RAW + High Quality JPEG, which really slows things down and fills the card, so I do RAW only.

you get the full spectrum of choice.

RAW+ small medium large regular or fine
and RAW small med and all the choices above.

and there's a button on the back that will switch for as long as you hold the shutter button down raw and jpeg, so it can also switch off i believe, so if you need to do a burst, you do a quick hit of that button, and it will cancell all the extra crap so you get a nice long burst.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by The1

you get the full spectrum of choice.

RAW+ small medium large regular or fine
and RAW small med and all the choices above.

and there's a button on the back that will switch for as long as you hold the shutter button down raw and jpeg, so it can also switch off i believe, so if you need to do a burst, you do a quick hit of that button, and it will cancell all the extra crap so you get a nice long burst.

Cool. I'm looking at mid-February to get the 7D. Can't wait.

[The1]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Cool. I'm looking at mid-February to get the 7D. Can't wait.

it's a nice piece, you'll enjoy it. don't forget, you can still fetch some money for the t1i to put towards the 7D

i should mention, the real killer on the pro bodies, is the expensive compact flash cards... they are expensive to replace if you ruin one, my advice, never take it out of you camera once you've put it in, just use the provided usb cable to transfer to your computer. (if you don't already)

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by The1

it's a nice piece, you'll enjoy it. don't forget, you can still fetch some money for the t1i to put towards the 7D

The T1i is going to get a Katzeye and become my dedicated MF body. I want to get back to manual focusing.

[The1]

Originally Posted by M_Six

The T1i is going to get a Katzeye and become my dedicated MF body. I want to get back to manual focusing.

that could work out alright

i added more to my last post in case you missed it too