Mostly modern, but when there's occasion of course steam to. And word modern doesn't describe the state of railways in Poland - which is great for photographs, but sadly not so good for average passenger... That's the problem - when one is young and have all the time for shooting, than there's not enough money to afford proper equipment. And later on it's just the other way around Right now I'm thinking about buying back some old manual SLR and shooting some velvia. I know, those colors aren't quite natural, but so beautiful!
I do not want to diminish results of other fine photographers here - but simply Linie 9 is the grand-master .
Really!? May be because I do not use CaNikon stuff... I use good equipment that works and my feeling tells me what to do. May be the experience (and feedback here) steers the feeling in the fine tuning...
Thank you Baroque, I'm pleased The full frame sensor will push the picture file size from 16 to 36 MegaPixel and reduce the noise a lot. More space around with all lenses: the crop factor shrinks from 1.55 down to 1 that is: none.
Still learning the basics. I always assumed that lowest sensitivity is best for good light conditions and that higher ISO leads to more grain.
It does, but as they say, you can always denoise a picture. Deblurring, however, is far more challenging
It took me a while to be comfortable with higher ISO, but the thing is that you need an appropriate lens anyway to get your object to fill most of the frame. If you have to crop a lot, the image quality will decrease. So if you have your object on 80-90% of your frame already, you can denoise easily and then reduce the picture's size so that 8-9 pixels turn into one and most of the noise is gone. The thing with denoising is that no matter how good your program, you always lose a bit of your image detail. The texture looks a little less lively, little details are lost. That's less of a problem with airplanes where surfaces are smooth most of the time and most "noise" really is just noise. With nature photography, it's different. What you can do is you can denoise your picture and overlay it with the original and "cut out" the parts you don't want denoised. I'll be so bold as to plug my own photos for these examples:
Both objects are far too detailed for a denoise, but if you were so inclined, you could denoise the background and keep the original insect. For me, that's too much work and fiddling to be honest, but it's what a lot of people do with their airplane photos, too, so they can edit the sky in a different way than the airplane, for example.
Either way, I've come to think of noise as "the character" of photos.. not unlike wrinkles on a face
Last Edit: Jul 25, 2015 12:55:20 GMT 1 by Taliesin
If you have to crop a lot, the image quality will decrease. So if you have your object on 80-90% of your frame already, you can denoise easily and then reduce the picture's size so that 8-9 pixels turn into one and most of the noise is gone.
I never thought of using higher ISO this way. Thanks! Blur is frequently an issue in some of my zoomed in shots.
What you can do is you can denoise your picture and overlay it with the original and "cut out" the parts you don't want denoised.
I've tried this technique for some of my (horrible looking ) HDR images I've been working on. It gets a bit tedious though.
As an aside, you seem to know your arthropods as well as your planes!