phule

<p>[[You should consider moving your primary 'subject' out of the dead-center of the images.]]<br> Except, taken as a collection, a theme emerges. </p>

Leszek, Why not just Copy and Paste the files as a group?

<p>[[Whether or not you'll notice a difference between the DX and FX formats depends on what you shoot, under what circumstances, and how you use the output.]]</p> <p>This and again this. </p> <p>There are very specific cases where the differences between FX and DX are noticeable. But if those cases do not generally apply to your photography, then there is no difference, to you. </p>

<p>https://forums.adobe.com/message/5731963</p> <p>Have you tried deleting the Preview Cache? </p>

<p>[[Only thing that it could be is just me rocking back and forth slightly, but even where the focus point was, it seems terribly out of focus no matter how I shot it.<br /> Perhaps it is just me, but for straight footage untouched from the camera I expected alot better from the D7000.]]</p> <p>How much experience do you have shooting video with a DSLR. How much experience do you have shooting any video? </p>

<p>Dave, <br> It is not difficult to re-direct your domain to another site/service, even if all you have for a short period of time is a placeholder and a contact link. </p>

<p>I am very surprised that Ricoh/Pentax would put out and advertisement like that. That's very obvious a terrible photoshop job. My guess is that the company hired to do the ad work is going to be asked some very pointed questions.</p>

<p>For long exposures, the default behavior of the camera is to take a second exposure, of equal length, without the shutter open. It uses that image to subtract out noise from the previous photo. This is called a dark frame exposure and the process is called dark frame subtraction.</p> <p>So, if you have a shutter set for a 30 second exposure, the camera will be exposing the image for 30 seconds, and then perform the dark frame exposure for another 30 seconds. So your camera will not respond (unless you turn it off) for a total of 60 second.</p> <p>You can turn this option off in the CFn menus. </p>

<p>In PNG 3 the subject is soft because you shot at f/1.8 and have a very shallow depth of field. I think this is a rather typical result with the 50mm f/1.8 II shot at f/1.8. You are not going to get a keeper every time you press the shutter button when you shoot at f/1.8</p> <p>In PNG 5 the shutter speed was low enough to show subject movement and you are again fighting depth of field issues but to a lesser extend. </p> <p>What I would recommend is an external flash allowing you to stop down to f/5.6 or greater. Shooting in higher amounts of ambient light will allow you to balance the flash against the background light. </p>

<p>If you're choosing one layer as a template and discarding it after each photo, can't you just change the color of it? Make it monochromatic or duo-tone. </p>

Marcus, Wouldn't pressing the DOF preview button on the body tell you if the lens is being stopped down? You wouldn't need to take a picture and you could listen for the aperture blades to move.

Why do you feel you need to do this in the first place?

<p>Nikon is not alone in this regard. They "stuff the shelves" like some sort of mating display.</p> <p>Canon, for example, lists 35 different point and shoot models on their web page, not including the individual color options.<br /> http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/digital_cameras<br /> <br />Some of those models have been discontinued, so I'm not sure why the page has not been updated, but still, that's an absurd number of cameras to offer an ever-shrinking market.</p>

<p>My money is on them expanding their 3D printing partnership/offerings (currently Japan only). Not a lot of money, mind you...but 2 bits at least... :) </p>

<p>[[However, as stated in my question initially posted, it is obviously not the right lens when shooting multi dimensional groups of people]]</p> <p>The lens is not really your problem here. The problem with people being out of focus is due to the large aperture you're using. When you shoot at f/1.8, only a thin slice of your subjects will be in focus. </p> <p>Assuming you have the 18-55mm lens, there's no real reason for you to buy a 28-105, or any other lens for that matter, until you've got a better handle of your specific needs. </p>

<p>[[if you open a raw file from the camera in Photoshop, you can get the shutter count from a section in the metadata]]</p> <p>This is not true for many Canon cameras. </p>

Marvin, the question has been asked 1000 times about every camera made. The answer does not change. It will fail when it fails. Some fail very early some fail very late and the rest fail somewhere in between. There is no way to predict when any individual camera will have a fault. If you are a professional photographer then you should have a backup. If you are not then do whatever you and your wallet wants.

<p>I would assume that it means the least amount of compression. You may notice a difference in file size with more complex subjects, though that is a bit of a guess.</p> <p>According to the manual, you can grab individual frames from video in-camera. So you might be able to tease out the differences by shooting video of the same subject with both options and extracting individual frames. </p>

The Sony RX10 checks many boxes but not all of them.

<p>Does your camera have Live View? If so, how does the focus look on the LCD after you AF the lens?</p>

<p>It appears you've done everything you can do. Now you just need to wait until Sigma responds. </p>

<center><img src="https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2669/3728694462_61069f0e2e_z.jpg?zz=1" width="640" height="512" alt="holga 120S + SB80 Polaroid Back + diopter lens"></center>

<p>[[What seems to be missing is wi-fi, I can't imagine this coming without it]]</p> <p>Indeed. Rumor sites have been claiming no Wifi for a couple weeks now but I just don't buy it. Not this class of camera and not in 2014. </p>

<p>[[ I don't know if that was a result of the wide angle or something else. I really wanted them larger as well......]]<br /> <br /> I think the Sweep Panorama mode on the A65 only produces lower resolution images. For truly large panoramas, you will need to shoot individual frames and stitch them together in Photoshop or similar later.</p> <p>http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_a65_review/image_quality/</p> <blockquote> <p>The Sony A65 allows you to take panoramic images very easily, by 'sweeping' with the camera while keeping the shutter release depressed. The camera does all the processing and stitching and even successfully compensates for moving subjects. The main catch is that the resulting image is of fairly low resolution.</p> </blockquote>

<p>I guess if you compare the pixel density of current 1" sensors from Sony, you could see a (not necessarily /the/) path forward for m4/3rds.</p>