Playing with this new camera - First Video Created

[thor447]

Sounds like a good starter set, which should work for you for quite some time. I don't know why, but I'm not seeing the pictures in your first post.

The biggest issue that I might have with the Z30 would be that it doesn't seem to have a separate viewfinder and that one has to use the back screen for composing the photos. I seem to have issues when outside that I can't see the back screens well enough to really compose properly. I have the same issue with trying to take photos with my phone. The outside light just "washes out" the screen to where I have difficulty seeing what I want.

I think so. The lack of a viewfinder didn't really concern me. The screen is adjustable, and I brightened it up while out in the sun today. I was able to see the screen fine. Nikon is marketing this one for the YouTube and social media creators, who really don't use a viewfinder for their stuff. With the articulating screen, and the sensor and specs that were beyond what I initially wanted to use it for, it seemed like a good deal. Time will tell I suppose, but it hasn't bothered me yet.

 

[Pstmstr]

What camera did you get? Inquiring minds are really nosey and want to know!

I have a couple I play with. By far the best is a Sony RX10 IV. Really a nice camera. But last year I finally upgraded my phone to the Galaxy S22 Ultra and the dang camera on it is so good I rarely get my real cameras out any more.

The RX 10 IV is the best all around camera available I think. I keep hoping they will come out with the V but it looks doubtful. From wide to super telephoto and a tack sharp lens to boot. Even with the 1 inch sensor it’s a great camera. It’s baby brother the RX100 VII is no slouch either. I broke my RX 10 IV last year and have been looking for a good used replacement for grandkids sports this year. I like using my iPhone 14 Pro but need telephoto at softball and baseball.

 

[Pstmstr]

I've already started focus stacking, primarily due to the macro lens. I found a (free) program that will let me edit the raw files and will compile the stack into a single image. It's been interesting to play with thus far.

You’re a quick study if you’ve gone from beginner to focus stacking already The depth of field in a macro lens is very shallow as I’m sure you’ve found out.

 

[thor447]

You’re a quick study if you’ve gone from beginner to focus stacking already The depth of field in a macro lens is very shallow as I’m sure you’ve found out.

I certainly have found that out. It doesn't take much time to learn to do something. It does take time however to do something well. I am beginning the journey.

 

[TerryMiller]

I saw the photos finally. As you stated, reducing the size of the image files can affect the quality. Just as an FYI, I went to get one of my photos printed out in a 16x24 print and was told that because it was 1.5meg in size, if I tried getting any larger, the print would be pixelated.

As I stated earlier, the camera should do well for you for some time. Even in my case, my "collection" of equipment has been a long gradual process. I look forward to seeing good results from your work.

Oh, and as for focus stacking, I have never even studied how to do that nor see what it would do for me and my photos.

Good luck.

 

[DavidMcmillan]

Some great information in this thread. Now you have me thinking about a couple of new lenses.

 

[thor447]

I saw the photos finally. As you stated, reducing the size of the image files can affect the quality. Just as an FYI, I went to get one of my photos printed out in a 16x24 print and was told that because it was 1.5meg in size, if I tried getting any larger, the print would be pixelated.

As I stated earlier, the camera should do well for you for some time. Even in my case, my "collection" of equipment has been a long gradual process. I look forward to seeing good results from your work.

Oh, and as for focus stacking, I have never even studied how to do that nor see what it would do for me and my photos.

Good luck.

Yes, just for the purposes of posting them on this thread I had to drastically reduce the size of files. I am aware the photos here aren't of superior quality, but they were just examples. I was playing with the focus, etc. Even as little JPG's, they look pretty good if you're not zooming in. The RAW files I have of those photos are super sharp when zoomed in.

 

[OKCHunter]

Yes, just for the purposes of posting them on this thread I had to drastically reduce the size of files. I am aware the photos here aren't of superior quality, but they were just examples. I was playing with the focus, etc. Even as little JPG's, they look pretty good if you're not zooming in. The RAW files I have of those photos are super sharp when zoomed in.

Does your camera have an option for pixel shifted imaging? For static objects and landscapes without movement, you can get some amazingly sharp and detailed images.

 

[thor447]

Does your camera have an option for pixel shifted imaging? For static objects and landscapes without movement, you can get some amazingly sharp and detailed images.

I haven't dug that deep into it. That isn't ringing a bell, but there has to be 50 different options just for the photo mode alone. I'll look into it. Thanks!

 

[OKCHunter]

I haven't dug that deep into it. That isn't ringing a bell, but there has to be 50 different options just for the photo mode alone. I'll look into it. Thanks!

I should have looked it up first before asking the question. You purchased a Nikon camera, correct? I don’t think Nikon offers pixel shifted imaging since they don’t use in-body image stabilization of the sensor. But, I could be wrong - I‘m just not familiar with Nikon. I’m a Pentax guy and use the K-3 iii and the K-1 ii.