jim schwaiger

At those distances, I'd buy a 50mm f/1.7 and see how you like it (only $77). You won't be able to get very close, but you will get the feel of a fast lens and some good kart shots. Then consider the 100mm f/2 ($450) if you really need to get closer with a fast lens. The 200mm f/2.8 would be nice, but at $900 it is probably more than what you really need at those short distances.

 

The relative lateral movement is what causes the blurring. Panning with the kart should blur the background & wheels, but not the car & driver (takes a lot of practice and a lot of film to get good at this). I would stick with the Xtra 400 for most of you work, but consider a slow film like Reala 100, especially for any non-action or slow-action shots. The Portra 400 VC is not as saturated as the Xtra 400.

 

Another thing that can help tremendously is a monopod. You can still move around quickly (unlike with a tripod) and you'll reduce camera shake significantly.

I'd go with a fast prime or two in the 100 to 200mm range, as fast as you can afford. I imagine you have to anticipate shots anyway, so pick your spot, focus and compose, then wait for the go-kart to get there. The sharpness plus the speed of the prime should make a noticeable difference, but you will lose some DOF when wide open.

 

If you are printing 8x10 or less, 400 speed is fine. If you want to go bigger, you might have to go with a slower film. What film are you shooting and what problems are you seeing in the prints?

 

Another thing to consider is where & how you shoot. If the cars are going by at full speed, you almost have to learn to pan with them to keep any focus. If they are coming at you or slowing for a corner, the apparent movement is much less, so you can use the shutter to freeze them. Fully explore the options and techniques that are possible with what you have before buying that next lens.

Carolyn, if you upload a 400x600 image and someone prints it from their browser, it will be quite large, but low quality. If they bring it into an image editor and change the dpi to 200 dpi (marginal quality) they will get a 2x3 inch print. Even at 800x800, they really can't get a decent sized, good print. <br><br>

 

If you are scanning a 4x6 print, that means a scanning resolution around 100ppi (for 600x400). If you are scanning film, use about 400ppi. Many people scan at the highest optical resolution their scanner has and then downsample to the appropriate pixel size. That will work too, but can be overkill, especially for web use. A lot of scanners can go about 10 times what's needed for web usage which makes the original files 100 times larger than they need to be.<br><br>

 

Please check out <a href ="http://www.scantips.com" > www.scantips.com</a> for scanning and printing tips.

Is there any way to get a set of risers out there? Normally you can only get 3 rows, sitting, kneeling, standing which means you'll have 167 people wide. If you could get 5 rows, that cuts it down to 100 people wide which helps a lot.

 

You have to shoot with wide prints in mind, maybe 8x40 for the big group shot. Or maybe do the teams individually and then do a group shot. Either way, I think organization and helpers are a must.

Stop thinking in dpi and think pixels. 800x800 pixels is the most photo.net desires, and most sites assume some minimum monitor size in pixels, 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, etc.

 

Monitors (LCD and CRT) have widely different and changeable resolutions. I imagine that you could get anywhere from 50 to 150dpi with a big CRT. Many LCDs are in the 120dpi range.

 

72dpi came from the old printing press days and it just so happened that older CRTs could be about the same. Apple still uses 72dpi and MS went with 96dpi, but neither have much to do with the actual screen resolutions available today.

 

So, forget trying to present an actual size image and pick reasonable pixel dimensions based on the fact that most people have 800x600 or better displays.

The meter simply measures the reflected light of whatever you point it at. The N80/SB-50 use TTL metering which means that the flash cuts off when enough light reaches the film (there are sensors that monitor how much light is reflected off the film in the N80).

 

Places where the flash can't reach will be shadowy. The SB50 may struggle if the room is large.

 

Marc, please purchase a basic photography book as it will have the answers to most of your questions. Or, simply search on this site, I believe there are sections that cover all the basics.

For a simple border, just increase the canvas size with the color you desire as the background color. Multiple cancas size increases can give you a thin white line and then a larger black area or vice-versa.

 

For some images, the borders help, but I try to avoid them here. The background is white anyway, so I never do a white border, but I have done a few simple black ones.

 

Unless you are a pro already, I'd spend my time learning better techniques and such. Putting a neat frame around a mediocre image looks bad and great images rarely need more than a simple frame. Just don't get too carried away with framing.

Maybe Adorama will do a commercial with 2 babes tearing each others clothing screaming "Nikon 300mm AF-S is better!!!", "No Canon is better!!!" and have 200 guys taking pictures from nearby buildings, cars, rooftops, etc. Could be quite funny...

Hyperfocal distance for 28mm lens.

@ f/22 .99 m

@ f/16 1.4 m

@ f/11 2.0m

@ f/8 2.7m

@ f/5.6 3.9m

@ f/4 5.5m

@ f/2.8 7.8m

@ f/2 10.9m

 

So, even at f/2 you only need to focus out to about 35 feet to get the background (at infinity) in focus. Sounds like a non-issue.

Finally, someone with basic math skills. Also note that you can define enlaregments in terms of dpi as well. That is, if you scan at 2400dpi and want to print at 300dpi, the enlargement is 8X. For the 4x5 film that would give you 30x38 inch prints. At 12000dpi, you get 40X enlargements or 150x190 inch prints.

 

Having said all that, I would recommend a scanner that does about twice the resolution you need. If the math says you need 2000dpi, choose a scanner that will do about 4000dpi. Also know that you will start seeing the grain of the film at 3000 to 4000dpi.

There is a consensus here that there is no consensus about what "Originality" means for the rating system. The tutorial defines it totally different from your concept (and most members probably think of it like you do). Even the management of the site agreed long ago that they need to simply remove the Originality/Aesthetics system of ratings. Aesthetics doesn't mean how "attractive" the image is either.

Long cords have 2 problems, signal attenuation and time delay. Tell us what distance you need and what you are trying to achieve. There may be a simpler solution than you think.

You can take a couple of shots at max aperture and see if the focus is where you placed it. Also know that at some small aperture, infinity will be in focus if you ever do care.

300dpi output should be fine, so you need 300x6 = 1800 pixels in the long dimension. The film is about 1.5" wide so a 1200dpi scan will give good resolution for printing.

 

After scanning, you may need to adjust the levels and fix dust/scratches and sharpen (Unsharp Mask) before printing. See www.scantips.com for scanning and printing advice.

 

Scanning at 4000dpi creates huge files that may stress your computer to work with, but scanning at 2400dpi and then downsampling to 1200dpi might be worth trying.

 

Investing in a decent printer and good photo paper can make a huge difference as well.

If memory serves Samsung manufactures the Apple monitors, so they may have the same spec's at a lower price.

Nikon's DOF charts are the same as eveyone elses. Seems like there is a page where you can buy a set of charts for your particular lenses. Or you can do the math yourself and create the tables you want.

Angel,

 

My comment was that after using the N65, the N80 wasn't intuitive. I was constantly turning the wrong dial on the N80. Like I said, you have to get used to either one. If Lisa was used to a pro body, I would not recommend the N65 for that reason.

 

Obviously the N65 has to make some assumptions in the Vari-Program modes and in general they are decent assumptions. In general, landscapes look best with a large DOF, portraits look best with a narrow DOF, etc. It also assumes that most N65 owners aren't going to start with a $2000 fast-telephoto lens. A 50mm prime, wide to tele zoom, and a 70-300mm are much more likely for N65 owners.

 

Don't get me wrong, I wanted to learn everyhting about exposure, aperture, etc. and I watched the settings for each mode carefully. It didn't take me long to realize that these modes were not always using the optimal settings. At the same time, I don't hesitate to use those modes when I hand the camera to someone else.

 

Certainly the P,A,S,M modes are more versatile for someone who understands aperture and shutter speeds, but there are times when you don't want to think about them, you just want to take a picture. The N65 is simply easier to use in those situations.

 

So, if you want a simple SLR that you intend to use as a point & shoot often, I'd recommend the N65. On the other hand, if you intend to take it more serious and don't mind climbing a learning curve, the N80 is indeed a slightly more capable camera.

You want soft diffuse light. Try open shade or a north facing window (no direct sunlight). Cloudy days work too. The pros use big softboxes and a "hair" light (strong narrow beam) to provide a highlight in the hair where they want it. Put some thought into the background as well.

Some cameras focus "beyond" infinity which is probably what you are experiencing. Things contract and expand with temperature changes, so this allows focus at infinity over a wide temp. range.

Lisa, to clear up a few things above. I have used both cameras and still think the N65 can be "better" for some people.

 

The N65 and N80 support all the Nikon AutoFocus lenses. The N80 can use some manual focus lenses as well, but in a limited way. If you want AutoFocus, there is no difference.

 

Film has DX encoding that both the N65 and N80 use to set the film speed by default. You'll probably never see film that isn't DX encoded, so it's really not an issue. Some guys fake the ISO to apply a little over/underexposure to the film. With the N65, you can do the exact same thing with exposure compensation for an entire roll of film, it's the same rose, different name (and easier to do with the N65).

 

The glass is more important than the body. A cheap body with great glass will do better than a great body with cheap glass every time. And you can upgrade bodies if you feel the need for more options.

 

The N65 remote is about $15, which may be more than a cable release, but certainly isn't expensive relative to the cameras and bodies. I like the remote and use it often for family pictures (it is easy to use from a distance).

 

The N65 metering is very good, the N80's is better, but not enough to make a difference in most situations. In well lighted conditions, my meter has never failed me. The N80's flash controls are better as well, but the N65 does just fine with both internal and external flash.

 

The 2-dial issue is only an issue in manual mode and not much of one even then. After using the N65, the N80 is not intuitive, but I imagine both take a little getting used to. The pro cameras have 2 dials, so the pros hate the N65 for that reason alone.

 

The "silly" settings are quite useful to the beginner. They allow them to tell the camera what they are shooting and the camera will respond appropriately. It gives normal people an understandable interface so they can use the camera without studying f-stops and apertures. They are e also useful when handing the camera to a friend.

Is this critical to your survival in some way? The asterisks and the urgency are annoying if your life isn't hanging in the balance over these ceiling fan shots.

 

If you are using negative film, the lab can probably correct for the underexposure to make them look okay. They may look a little grainy enlarged.

 

There are a couple of easy solutions. If you weren't wide open when shooting, open up the lens and let the camera overexpose a little. You can also set the fan to a lower speed or turn it off entirely so the blades are moving slower. Then slow down the shutter speed to get the same amount of blur. You can also try adding more light, but it will be a little tricky as most light sources are narrow are hard (you want soft and diffuse light).

 

By the way, if the blades are dark and the ceiling is white, the blades aren't going to show up a whole lot anyway as the ceiling is reflecting more light than the blades. White blades with a dark ceiling would work much better, but who has a dark ceiling?

If you want to freeze the action, a good TTL flash is a must, and getting it off-camera can be a good thing. Otherwise you'll need a fast lens and fast film. 800 or 1600 speed film with a 50mm f/1.8 is a possibility, but if it is really dark, even that may not be enough. Almost any SLR body will do fine.

 

If you decide a flash is a must, consider Nikon as their flash system is a little better. Either way, get a body and flash that have TTL metering. For the lens, I'd get a prime in the 35mm to 50mm range (assuming you'll be fairly close to the action). That will give decent DOF while providing a normal perspective. Autofocus zooms (or any lens slower than about f/2.8) struggle in low-light, so they would not be my first choice. Note that name-brand 50mm f/1.8 primes are only about $100.

Sounds to me like you'd be better off with the N65. It has several automatic modes like "Portrait" "Landscape" and "Action" where the camera makes all the decisions for you. It even has an "Auto" mode that makes it just like a P&S camera. It can also work in fully manual mode if you want to control the exposure and focus.

 

The N80 has a couple of extras, but will feel a lot more intimidating to a P&S user. The "Program" mode is the closest thing to an automatic mode, but you will have to understand a little about aperture and shutter speeds to use it effectively.

 

The Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AF-D is a superb starter lens that is fast and cheap ($100). I also own a 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-D that is great for general use. The 28mm is great for landscapes and the 105mm end is perfect for portraits. It also has a macro option that lets you focus as close as an inch or two from the lens. Avoiding the kit lenses is a good idea, they are usually slower and softer than other reasonably priced zooms.

 

The other key ingredients are film type and where you get it processed. Slower negative films work great out in the bright sunshine and look better at large print sizes. I use 100 and 160 speed film most of the time in the great outdoors. You start seeing grain with 800 and 1600 speed films when enlarged, so use them sparingly unless you want the grainy look.

 

Different labs can give very different results, so try a few local labs and see which ones do the best job. Pro labs usually do very good work, but I have found a local 1-hour lab that is reasonable and does great work, especially for snapshots and such. If a roll of film has lots of precious photos, consider the more expensive pro labs. Having a good shot ruined by the cheapo lab scratching the film can be devastating.

If you have a local pro lab, walk in and look for the guy with the grey hair. Ask him about the cameras and their value. The models seem to be written on the front of the bodies, so I'm not sure what more you want. A local library or bookstore might help you identify more about them as well.

Mark,

 

The number of mega-pixels isn't as critical in PJ. The real issue is how fast you can shoot with the camera. If the camera is tied up writing images to the memory, you have to wait.

 

Look at Nikon's D1H (5 fps for up to 40 shots) to see a digital SLR that was designed for PJ. At only 2.7MP, this is probably the most popular digital SLR for PJ. Compare anything you are considering to it to have a good reference point.