Advice on getting the most out of my D3200

[antillar_maximus]

<p>Hi all,<br>

New member and DSLR newbie here. I own a D3200 (kit lens) and I'm looking to get the most out of it before making any upgrades. My main interest is landscape photography. I've been experimenting a bit, but in the typical unsystematic manner common to newbies. I have a few specific questions (and I intend to post results of your suggestions within the day.)<br>

1. What is the best aperture to shoot at during dawn (foggy), noon (bright) and dusk? <br>

2. I have both a circular pol and a UV filter. Do I need them both?<br>

3. I love vivid/saturated colors and would like to minimize the need for retouching. Does ISO 100 yield significantly more saturated colors than say ISO 400? Does this even matter?</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

 

[mike_earussi1]

<p>1. Under those conditions flare will be your biggest enemy, so you should do a series of test shots with your lens at varying focal lengths and apertures to see how your lens reacts. The normal rule of thumb for most lenses is 2-3 stops down from the maximum aperture is usually best, but as each lens is different testing is always the best way to find out.<br>

2. A UV filter is usually unnecessary optically. They are primarily just used to protect the front element from damage. For landscapes a polarizer is most effective at noon, but can increase the saturation of colors slightly at all times. But it is best to buy a high quality one with a good multicoating to keep down flair. Really good ones usually cost over $100 depending on size. <br>

3. The lower the iso the more saturated the colors usually are. But modern sensors are so good that this is usually only noticeable at really high ISOs. Again, testing is the best way to find out what iso is best for your particular camera/lens combination. </p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>My main interest is landscape photography.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Which tripod and head are you using?</p>

<p>Concerning landscape photography at high noon in a bright, sunny day, generally speaking, it is best not to take pictures in that kind of lighting. However, there are always exceptions to the rule.</p>

[huntrbll]

<p>My suggestion is see if a local camera club offers a beginning photography course.....and if not, look for a couple good books on basic photography. There is no "best" aperture to shoot at a given time, it depends on the subject and what you are trying to convey. To do that effectively, you must learn the correlation among apertures, shutter speeds and ISO. Briefly, large apertures allow less depth of field and isolate subjects, faster shutter speeds freeze action better and higher ISOs allow you to shoot in lower light, but usually with a sacrifice in quality. Learn how these things work together and then you will control the camera and results.</p>

[john_h.1]

<p><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=8272898"> Antillar </a></p>

<p>Hi Antillar,</p>

<p>I think Mike had some good answers to your questions. I can tell by your questions that there are some comprehensive things to learn that will naturally be the answers to potential future questions. Thing such as how aperture and shutter speed change images and how they interact with each other.<br /><br />There is a great and easy to understand and read book by Byron Peterson called "Understanding Exposure". It really helped me after I checked our other sources and still had some confusion with all the different things being said. I bet it will be a great value for you...<br>

<br />http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Exposure-3rd-Edition-Photographs/dp/0817439390<br /><br /><br /></p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>For landscape, some of the best light is just as the sun comes up. I did a landscape/nature course through the Maine Photographic Workshops a few years ago and we tried to be on-site by sunup for many of the shoots. I'm not talking shooting the sunrise, but rather the way things look in early morning light. And it's not the same as sunset.<br /><br />Use a tripod. Don't shoot during the middle of the day. Read John Shaw's books on nature photography. They were written during film days but most of what he says still applies.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>All good stuff up there.</p>

<p>Most lenses have a "sweet spot", and for every lens I personally own, it's f8 - f11 with a DSLR.</p>

<p>I will give you a suggestion that might help in addition to the great stuff posted above, and it's totally free.</p>

<p>Put your camera in manual mode. Leave it there for a few weeks (except candid kid and family shooting, for goodness sake, use P for that stuff). Take photos, look at them critically, look at how you are capturing light. You will learn a lot this way. Also, get a good tripod (it'll be expensive) if you're serious.</p>

<p>and if you start doing internet research and you happen along k3nr0ckw3ll.com do yourself a favor and ignore him...</p>

[andrew_powers]

<p>In regards to not shooting in the middle of the day, and the early morning being the best time to shoot. I've been shooting film since the late sixties, and got into dslr shooting for the last 2 years or so, and IMHO I like shooting landscape when the light is right for what I trying to get. The time of day does not really matter, unless I want the sun in the picture. I think it's what's best for the shot. Just my opinion really.<br>

Andy</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>All what is said before, plus... try to start experimenting structured. Try all apertures available to you under those conditions, for different compositions and see what happens. Compare the results critically, and learn as you go. The biggest advantage of digital is exactly that you can try all these things for free.<br>

Experiment structured, check the results. Learning that way will typically make you remember a lot more than shooting according to some recipe (f/8, on a tripod, ISO as low as possible). Those recipes do not learn you a single thing.</p>

[Matthew Currie]

<p>I'm pretty much a newbie too, but have been using mine for a month or so, and taken thousands of pictures already (you can't take too much on the Galapagos Islands, can you?) If you have the 18-55 kit lens that comes with the D3200, you cannot use a polarizing filter unless you focus manually first, because the front element rotates with focus. Every time focus changes it will mess up the filter setting. If you have time, of course, you can manually focus and then adjust the polarizer, but you must remember not to allow it to autofocus.</p>

<p>The old style metal screw-in HN3 hood is a nice fit on that lens, no vignetting, and it's nice and sturdy. </p>

<p>My 18-55 focuses appreciably beyond infinity, so be careful with manual focusing, and remember to look before you click. </p>

<p>If you want more vivid colors, but not so vivid as you get with the "vivid" setting, try adjusting the white balance. The D3200 runs cool, especially when weather is overcast. If you set the white balance to "cloudy" in any but full sun conditions, the colors will be both warmer and more punchy. </p>

<p>The Landscape setting on the main dial also produces a more vivid color set, but at the cost of taking over some controls. But because it defaults to infinity, this is a handy one for hand shooting landscapes when the autofocus cannot find a target. </p>

<p>If you have space on your memory card, shoot in RAW and you can then use the Nikon View program to adjust white balance, picture control (color saturation, etc.) and exposure after the fact without messing up your pictures. It will also be a tiny tad sharper than the JPEG version, so if you can afford the space, shoot raw and save to JPEG any that you need to be readable by others, and to TIFF those that you need to read into another program of your own. </p>

<p>I would not bother to shoot in RAW + JPG, because it just clogs up the memory card. The D3200 double mode saves only the largest JPG, which is rather fat. The preview you see in a graphic program uses the camera settings that would occur with JPG, so if you like what you see you can always just save to JPG later. </p>

<p>Remember this thing is digital, and you can take a million pictures and erase them all. I bought mine for a long-awaited trip, and in the month before going, shot tons of trash. Just aiming at book shelves and trees and walls and whatever was there, in order to figure out how much difference various settings made, and to be sure I could find them when needed. </p>

<p>My default is aperture priority, around F8, and for trips without a tripod, ISO 100-400. The kit lens works pretty nicely up to there, with diffraction getting bothersome at smallest apertures, so unless you need the added depth of field, you're probably better off in the middle. 100 is better, but the difference in sharpness at 400 is less than the difference in ability to hand hold. 800 and above get a bit noisier, though for some subjects and magnifications it just doesn't matter. For landscapes on a tripod, I don't expect you'd have any reason not to use 100, but it depends on what you see when you try it.</p>

<p>The multi-area and tracking autofocus settings are not as smart on this camera as they are on, for example, my wife's D7100, and I find that I'm better off with a single point to avoid misfocusing. Tracking works to some extent, 3D sometimes and sometimes not, and the multi-point often misses everything. The matrix meter is pretty good, but for some things it seems to overexpose a tad, and you might find you get better looking shots at 1/3 or 2/3 minus. </p>

<p>If you are shooting landscapes, I would also turn off the in-camera D-lighting. D-lighting will increase your apparent dynamic range a little, and it works well, brightening shadows without blowing highlights, but at the cost of a minuscule loss of sharpness. As an old slide film shooter, I expect dark shadows and don't generally like the effect of D-lighting. In cases where it turns out to be needed, another version can be added in post-processing either in the camera or in Nikon View. </p>

<p>Advice above mentions a certain Mr. R who has some useful advice for people who want a big point and shoot camera, but it is not likely to be as useful to you if you want the maximum quality you can get. It's true, for example, that the difference between the smallest format and most compressed file, and the biggest, is small, especially if you're printing small. But it is not nonexistent. If you are sending postcards, go ahead and follow Mr. R's advice. If you are trying to get the best landscapes, trust no-one, but I would suggest you use every iota of capability the camera can give you, as it will probably cost you nothing. </p>

<p>Take everything you read here with a grain of salt, and shoot the same scene with a variety of settings to see what you like and need. As Wouter mentions above, do it in a structured way. You can manipulate the playback on this camera to page through histograms and exif info if you need more information than you can remember, but it's quicker to be systematic. </p>

[johne37179]

<p>Look at the work of other photographers and figure out how they took those shots. I've been learning about photography for 60 years and I am still at it. Good photographs are made in the heads of photographers, not in cameras. Understanding how light paints pictures -- whether in a camera or on a canvas or piece of paper is critical to conceiving and executing good photographs. Never stop searching for good photographs and good photographers. Eventually, you will recognize a photographer by looking at the photographs. All the really good photographers develop their own vision and show that in their work. Good photography is about the vision of the photographer. The camera is a tool and the digital SLR is a very powerful tool -- but only half of the process. Understanding the darkroom (now the computer) is the other half of the tool set. One of the great things about photography is that there is always more to learn and it stays fresh and rewarding the more you do learn,</p>

[panayotis_papadopoulos]

<p>Lots of very good advices so far...my two cent opinion<br>

1) Get a good and sturdy tripod.<br>

2) An aperture of f/8 to f/11 will give you the best results in most of the times for landscaping.<br>

3) Use your camera's self-timer to get the picture.<br>

4) Be sure to use the lowest possible ISO setting (depending on situation).<br>

5) Use a good polarizing filter if you are to shoot in a very bright condition, or prefer deep saturated colors.<br>

6) Use your camera's menu to increase color adjustment since you prefer more colorful pictures. Don't overdo it though. <br>

7) If money permits, get a good UW lens such as the <a href="http://www.tokinalens.com/tokina/products/atxpro/atx1228prodx/">Tokina 12-28 f/4</a><br>

8) Most of all, start experimenting and enjoy what you do! We all started from point zero.</p>

[antillar_maximus]

<p>Thanks for the detailed replies guys!<br>

<strong>Mike:</strong> I got a UV filter because I was told that direct UV exposure can damage the sensor.<br>

<strong>Shun: </strong>I am using a $30 tripod (cheap!). I usually buttress it with some rocks or my bag.<br>

<strong>Bill and John: </strong>I purchased the book on exposure you suggested and Roberto Valenzula's book "Picture perfect".<br>

<strong>Craig, Andrew: </strong>It is super foggy in the mornings (I live in the CA central coast area), but perhaps evenings would also work?<br>

<strong>Peter: </strong>I started using manual mode since day 1. :) 99% of the pictures I took were garbage, but one or two turned out ok. I use a cellphone camera as a backup (probably stupid, but I have no skills right now :) ). I did come across Rockwell, did not know that site was useless.<br>

<strong>Wouter: </strong>I started that way, but quickly realized that there are hundreds of combinations. Perhaps a few general guidelines no narrow the possibilities would make things easier.<br>

<strong>Matthew, Panayotis:</strong> Thanks for the tips! Regarding RAW+JPEG, I was gifted 5x32Gb cards, so memory is not an issue. </p>

<p>Looks like I have a lot to learn! On the spectacularly bright side, I live in an area with brilliant landscapes featuring the ocean, mountains and amazing open spaces. I'll post some pictures soon!</p>

<p> </p>

[Matthew Currie]

<p>One thing to add on the self-timer suggestion. The D3200 has provision for an IR remote release which can be gotten quite cheaply. A third party one is about 7 bucks from B&H. The camera will sense it from either front or back. You can set camera for 2 second delay (time to hide it when doing selfies) or instant firing - same button as self timer. </p>

[mike_earussi1]

<p><em><strong>Mike:</strong> I got a UV filter because I was told that direct UV exposure can damage the sensor.</em><br>

Ha, Ha, that's a new one. I suppose if you pulled the lens off and popped up the mirror then exposed it to the sun while it was turned on, some slight damage might occur, but otherwise, no. Just salesman BS.<br>

All modern lenses, as well as most sensors, already have a UV filter built in, so none is needed today--just for protection. </p>

 

[antillar_maximus]

<p>Here are a few pictures from an evening walk/hike near my home and an afternoon hike.<br>

<a href="/bboard/">https://www.dropbox.com/sh/k61rcn27iz63r5e/AACgzfBKKFqgYj5r_8ietGZDa</a></p>

<p>Do you guys think I should get the Nikkor 10-24mm DX down the line? Also, do you use ND filters extensively?</p><div></div>

[Matthew Currie]

<p>I see what appears to be camera movement blur (note that the distant lights are displaced vertically) rather than overall softness. If this was taken freehand you may need to raise either the shutter speed or the ISO. If on a tripod, you had better use either self timer or IR remote. Remember too that "live view" locks up the mirror.</p>

[ChrisSpeaker]

<p>Antillar. All good advice above. To answer your question of ND filters they are designed to block out light to lower the shutter speed with a given aperture. Stronger the filter the more light it blocks out. Useful with your tripod for creating effects such as flowing water over water falls, streams, etc.</p>

[bob_bill]

<p>Antillar, take a look at Kelby on line training. Moose Peterson does some landscape courses. I believe there are several others. It's about $25 for a month of unlimited access. If you are a newbie, there are courses about using your particular camera, photoshop, sports, portraiture, lighting, you name it. Great value. </p>

[antillar_maximus]

<p>Thanks guys! I purchased a 1000x ND (B+W), a $7 IR remote and a circular polarizer (also B+W). Took them out for a test run yesterday afternoon. I spent about an hour taking 10 pictures and all of them were garbage. Nothing to to with the equipment, just poor technique on my part. I think I need to buckle down and practice obtaining front to back sharpness when I photograph a scene.</p>

<p>I'm going to try the same shot as in the previous attachment later this evening, only this time using the remote and the B+H circular polarizer. I think the ND filter is too strong for evening photography, but since I have a remote, I'll give it a go (exposure time would probably be 2min+).</p>

[Matthew Currie]

<p>You might consider separating issues first. If you're not quite sure what is responsible for loss of sharpness, leave the filter off, put the camera on a tripod and fire it at various shutter speeds and apertures. Try among other things a large aperture and find a scene with considerable depth and an object somewhere in the middle with fine detail. Outdoors, a mailbox or sign works well. Now check your result very carefully to make sure your autofocus is hitting the right place.</p>

<p>The D3200 does not have a user compensation for focus errors, so if it's appreciably off, you'll have to have it serviced. Mine, luckily, is pretty accurate, but they can vary. </p>

<p>Remember that if you are using the kit lens with a rotating front element, you will have to readjust the polarizer every time it focuses even a tiny bit. It's not very practical, and if you wiggle it, it may disturb the focus. </p>