reza_rezazad

<p>I used 'dcraw -e' to extract JPG's out of NEF files. The look almost exactly the same as the camera generated fine JPG's but their sizes are several times smaller. Why is that?</p>

<p>The shutter speed in those two shots was 1/500 and the camera was focused on the head of the dragon which I think had good contrast with the lit background. I'll test again with a well light object again. The problem with using the LV with D5300 is that you can't change the aperture (so you have to switch to VF change aperture and move back). It also has a shutter lag of 2-3 seconds when using LV.<br> <br /> I'm thinking of swapping my D5300 with a D7100. The only reason I've not done so already is the extra weight of the latter.</p>

<p>And here using viewfinder. You see a clear difference if you zoom to 100% and I get this kind of difference consistently between viewfinder and live view shots.</p><div></div>

<p>I understand what you are saying William but here are two images taken at high shutter speed and medium open aperture.</p><div></div>

<p>I use center point focus and yes I've been consistently getting sharper images when using the live view. In the DPRevew thread that I linked before the OP sent his camera to Nikon for adjustment but my camera warranty is expired.</p>

<p>"To get the best use of depth of field, you want to focus between the front and back of parts you want in focus. That isn't always so easy with AF."<br /> Good point. My lens has a focus ring on it but it has nothing written on it and I don't know how to get precise manual or M/A focus for a 24MP sensor using the view finder. It seems that using the live view gives better AF as someone else mentioned on <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3585452">DPReview</a>. Here is the only sharp photo I've been able to take with this lens so far and I used LV.</p><div></div>

<p>Wide open shot.</p><div></div>

<p>Thank you. In the DPreview of the lens the sharpest aperture was mentioned to be 2.8 (ad far as I remember).<br> Good to know about 1/400-1/500 speed. I thought a speed of 1/125 would be enough to freeze small movements of the subject.<br> I did a quick test of the lens with a focus chart (using a tripod and a remote shutter release) and the results are attached. The wide open shoot looks a bit blurry but the one with f2.5 looks good to me.</p><div></div>

<p>Yeah the blurring of the background is something useful but it's a different thing when someone's left sleeve is in focus but his face is not. That's very narrow DoF. </p>

<p>Thanks. AF was on automatic. So it seems I'd better use center spot focus when shooting with a wide aperture, at least when I don't have much time to recompose. It seems that the benefits of a wide aperture lens are pretty limited, mostly to portraiture? </p>

<p>My first prime lens, a 35mm 1.8G Nikkor on a D5300. The pictures I take all seem to be out of focus. I don't know if it's because the aperture is wide (although I didn't shoot wide open) or is it an AF issue. Please see the attached image and also this one: (I applied the unsharp mask to the latter one.)</p> <p> </p><div></div>

<p>Thank you guys.</p> <blockquote> <p>There is no camera that does that. One of the key elements in photos that appear completely sharp is the quality of light - light that renders clear contrasts, is not (too) diffuse, sufficient etc.</p> </blockquote> <p>But isn't a photo like <a href="/photo/17912513">this one</a> tack sharp even though it's taken at dusk? Maybe I can take a photo like that with my RX100 using a tripod.<br> One problem with RX100 is that when taking a photo in low light, say in the city at night, it takes several photos and then superposes them. This takes several seconds and also is not suitable for shooting a moving, even slow moving, subject. So the camera is almost impossible to use it for street photography at night. I thought DSLRs have an edge in this area.</p>

<p>Thank you guys. Good to know that this is not a big problem. @Lex Thanks for the tips. I'll try them. @Wouter Thank you I didn't know about that software.</p>

<p>I've had a Sony RX100 for a year and have been thinking of getting an entry level DSLR in the sub-kilobuck range. I read an <a href="/equipment/choosing-a-dslr-camera">article</a> on this site which basically said cameras in this category are not that different from each other. But the article doesn't cover all the aspects that are important to me<br> The main reason I want a DSLR is to be able to take tack sharp photos in suboptimal light (say at dusk) and also be able to take photos fast in street photography. I'm looking for these qualities:<br> Light weight.<br> Fast (startup as well as shooting)<br> Good battery life.<br> Weather resistant<br> Easily accessible settings (in my RX100 settings are crammed into very few dials and buttons.)</p> <p> </p>