| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/15/2007 04:30:51 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by soup:
with studio lights i think you set the power of the light by f:stop.
so at f:22 the light is going to be super powerful and too bright assuming you're camera is set to say a typical f:8... |
depending on how close you have the lights set, and how far they will actually stop down, you might be stuck with f/22 anyways.
My lights are pretty crappy and only stop down to 1/4, which doesn't allow me to stop down at all without moving the light back pretty far, and then you have to scrim/diffuse to make the light less specular and it gets pretty complictated just to get the same look as a set of good lights that will stop down more. f/7 is usually my minimum allowable before I start blowing things out since I'm usually in a pretty cramped space. |
|
|
|
12/15/2007 05:23:55 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by soup:
with studio lights i think you set the power of the light by f:stop.
so at f:22 the light is going to be super powerful and too bright assuming you're camera is set to say a typical f:8... |
depending on how close you have the lights set, and how far they will actually stop down, you might be stuck with f/22 anyways.
My lights are pretty crappy and only stop down to 1/4, which doesn't allow me to stop down at all without moving the light back pretty far, and then you have to scrim/diffuse to make the light less specular and it gets pretty complictated just to get the same look as a set of good lights that will stop down more. f/7 is usually my minimum allowable before I start blowing things out since I'm usually in a pretty cramped space. |
Thats one of the bad things about having cheaper lights, and also using Nikon in the studio. ISO 200 is tough sometimes with strobes. I have a friend who bolts on a ND filter on his Nikon to help him shoot a bit more wide open when he wants too, might help you if you want to shoot a bit more wide open.
MattO |
|
|
|
12/15/2007 05:52:40 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by MattO:
Thats one of the bad things about having cheaper lights, and also using Nikon in the studio. ISO 200 is tough sometimes with strobes. I have a friend who bolts on a ND filter on his Nikon to help him shoot a bit more wide open when he wants too, might help you if you want to shoot a bit more wide open.
MattO |
wow, Canon would let me use f/5.6 instead. this is not a CaN/ikon debate. Sheesh. the camera is not the limitation here.
But cheap lights are what they are. Instead of an ND filter, I'd rather get a full set of Nikon SB's and then I could stop down to f/1.4 if I wanted to at 1/128th on the flashes. even the better strobes will cost you f/ at any rate. f/2.8 is usually just not an option in the studio unless you're using very low power flashes. |
|
|
|
12/15/2007 05:54:48 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by soup:
with studio lights i think you set the power of the light by f:stop.
so at f:22 the light is going to be super powerful and too bright assuming you're camera is set to say a typical f:8... |
Normally, especially with film stock, your ASA dictates what your peramiters are for lighting.
So, therefore, you would make your settings first on the camera, and adjust the levels of your light accordingly.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2007 06:29:33 PM · #30 |
well this thread has gotten off topic.
the fact is lighting is complicated or everyone would be able to take that 'perfectly lit' shot...
experimentation and documentation are the keys to being able to re-create the light you like with the tools you have.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2007 06:47:14 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by soup:
well this thread has gotten off topic.
the fact is lighting is complicated or everyone would be able to take that 'perfectly lit' shot...
experimentation and documentation are the keys to being able to re-create the light you like with the tools you have. |
Maybe so, but it is not brain surgery.
Anyhow, your correct that this thread is off topic, and if my original quote was the catalyst, I appologize.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2007 08:19:03 PM · #32 |
but maybe it becomes similar when you try to think about it too much...
Originally posted by Man_Called_horse:
Originally posted by soup:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
well this thread has gotten off topic.
the fact is lighting is complicated or everyone would be able to take that 'perfectly lit' shot...
experimentation and documentation are the keys to being able to re-create the light you like with the tools you have.
Maybe so, but it is not brain surgery.
Anyhow, your correct that this thread is off topic, and if my original quote was the catalyst, I appologize. |
|
|
|
|
12/15/2007 08:49:08 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by MattO:
Thats one of the bad things about having cheaper lights, and also using Nikon in the studio. ISO 200 is tough sometimes with strobes. I have a friend who bolts on a ND filter on his Nikon to help him shoot a bit more wide open when he wants too, might help you if you want to shoot a bit more wide open.
MattO |
wow, Canon would let me use f/5.6 instead. this is not a CaN/ikon debate. Sheesh. the camera is not the limitation here.
But cheap lights are what they are. Instead of an ND filter, I'd rather get a full set of Nikon SB's and then I could stop down to f/1.4 if I wanted to at 1/128th on the flashes. even the better strobes will cost you f/ at any rate. f/2.8 is usually just not an option in the studio unless you're using very low power flashes. |
Did I offer this as a Nik/Can debate? I was offering a suggestion to help you shoot a bit more wide open. Offering what a friend does to help him with his cheaper lights and his D200. Geeze why do people alays assume that offering help to someone who shoots with a different brand means your speaking down to them.
Note to self, dont offer help in the forums to people who dont shoot the same brand as you do. It only makes people mad.
MattO |
|
|
|
12/15/2007 10:31:54 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by MattO:
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by MattO:
Thats one of the bad things about having cheaper lights, and also using Nikon in the studio. ISO 200 is tough sometimes with strobes. I have a friend who bolts on a ND filter on his Nikon to help him shoot a bit more wide open when he wants too, might help you if you want to shoot a bit more wide open.
MattO |
wow, Canon would let me use f/5.6 instead. this is not a CaN/ikon debate. Sheesh. the camera is not the limitation here.
But cheap lights are what they are. Instead of an ND filter, I'd rather get a full set of Nikon SB's and then I could stop down to f/1.4 if I wanted to at 1/128th on the flashes. even the better strobes will cost you f/ at any rate. f/2.8 is usually just not an option in the studio unless you're using very low power flashes. |
Did I offer this as a Nik/Can debate? I was offering a suggestion to help you shoot a bit more wide open. Offering what a friend does to help him with his cheaper lights and his D200. Geeze why do people alays assume that offering help to someone who shoots with a different brand means your speaking down to them.
Note to self, dont offer help in the forums to people who dont shoot the same brand as you do. It only makes people mad.
MattO |
FYI, the D200 goes to ISO 100. The 300 is ISO 200, but drops down to 100 via the low settings. I have not tested it, but from what I've read, the image quality shows negligible difference in quality. |
|
|
|
12/15/2007 10:39:39 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by Gatorguy:
FYI, the D200 goes to ISO 100. The 300 is ISO 200, but drops down to 100 via the low settings. I have not tested it, but from what I've read, the image quality shows negligible difference in quality. |
Right and the lights my friend has are full and half power only. So he uses an ND filter to drop to a lower F stop. When I shoot with him I use ISO 50 and just close down the lens a bit.
MattO |
|
|
|
12/15/2007 11:11:43 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by MattO:
Originally posted by Gatorguy:
FYI, the D200 goes to ISO 100. The 300 is ISO 200, but drops down to 100 via the low settings. I have not tested it, but from what I've read, the image quality shows negligible difference in quality. |
Right and the lights my friend has are full and half power only. So he uses an ND filter to drop to a lower F stop. When I shoot with him I use ISO 50 and just close down the lens a bit.
MattO |
No problem. I was just referring to the post where you said your friend is having problems with ISO 200 and later said it was a D200. But as for full, and half power only, yeah, that would be a problem, particularly in a small studio. |
|
|
|
12/15/2007 11:26:46 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by Gatorguy:
Originally posted by MattO:
Originally posted by Gatorguy:
FYI, the D200 goes to ISO 100. The 300 is ISO 200, but drops down to 100 via the low settings. I have not tested it, but from what I've read, the image quality shows negligible difference in quality. |
Right and the lights my friend has are full and half power only. So he uses an ND filter to drop to a lower F stop. When I shoot with him I use ISO 50 and just close down the lens a bit.
MattO |
No problem. I was just referring to the post where you said your friend is having problems with ISO 200 and later said it was a D200. But as for full, and half power only, yeah, that would be a problem, particularly in a small studio. |
Sorry that was a typo. It should have been 100 for the D200. But he does have another Nikon, cant remember which one and its lowest setting is ISO 200 and he uses a stronger ND on it.
MattO
MattO |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 09:56:00 AM EDT.
