A web site named for me.
http://www.dummies.com/photography/...he-white-balance-setting-on-your-nikon-d5300/
http://www.dummies.com/photography/...he-white-balance-setting-on-your-nikon-d5300/
Macro camera equipment thoughts
- Thread starter FarmerTy
- Start date
- Tagged users None
OP
OP
Ive been YouTube'ing like a madman! [emoji18]
OP
OP
Oh I'm sorry, you're right. I had my spectrums backwards. I have it currently under the shade profile and it's been getting better results though I wish I could manually set it to 10K.
OP
OP
Thanks Mr. V. Its okay, my Vietnamese is terrible so I won't judge you too much. I can barely read it and definitely can't write it. [emoji45]
I will try that with the frag tank, setting the LEDs to 10k. I can't really change my ATI T5 fixture to 10k but maybe I'll turn off the actinic bars and see how things look. The issue I'm getting is the loss of color during shots. I guess that's due to the white balance so might have to manage most of that in post-processing?
Do most of you professional DSLR coral snappers shoot in raw?
If you can get a true color in camera , you don’t need raw. But if you need to correct , yea it helps.
I run warm in my tank. This is strait from my phone. Looks like this in person.
I run warm in my tank. This is strait from my phone. Looks like this in person.
Mr V
Well-Known Member
Oh my, you are Vietnamese too? Cool!
I only shoot 2 things: Corals and Portraits. Either of them, I never shoot anything else but RAW.
...Especially with your camera (Nikon classified them as non-pro models, d3xxx, d5xxx), I can certain non of your photos will come out similar to real life. The color will never be “real” straight out of the camera, they will either too blue, too pale, or too saturated.
I recently got the D500, and it let me set the wb at 10k. I am finally can see my pictures look similar to the corals in real life straight out of the camera. But I still have the habit of post processing all of my pics.
So in your case. Get the corals in focus, let the Lightroom worries about the colors later.[emoji6]
This is my old pic with d3200 and 18-55mm lens.
OP
OP
Thanks for the guidance! Those pictures look great! What phone?If you can get a true color in camera , you don’t need raw. But if you need to correct , yea it helps.
I run warm in my tank. This is strait from my phone. Looks like this in person.
OP
OP
Oh my, you are Vietnamese too? Cool!
I only shoot 2 things: Corals and Portraits. Either of them, I never shoot anything else but RAW.
...Especially with your camera (Nikon classified them as non-pro models, d3xxx, d5xxx), I can certain non of your photos will come out similar to real life. The color will never be “real” straight out of the camera, they will either too blue, too pale, or too saturated.
I recently got the D500, and it let me set the wb at 10k. I am finally can see my pictures look similar to the corals in real life straight out of the camera. But I still have the habit of post processing all of my pics.
So in your case. Get the corals in focus, let the Lightroom worries about the colors later.[emoji6]
This is my old pic with d3200 and 18-55mm lens.
Oh yeah, didn't you know? 1 in every 5 acro tanks have to be owned by a Vietnamese guy? I think its stated in the reefing rulebook somewhere!
Thanks for the tips! I'll have to look into getting Lightroom.
You got the D500! Man, I need to sell more corals like you do!
I’m not gonna make any suggestions cause I think I’m a little late in jumping on this thread. But I think some are way too overthinking the photography process and are buying equipment based upon bad suggestions or simply by the name of which the manufacturers call it, such as “macro lens”.
For future reference, the only thing a macro/micro lens allows you to do, is to get PHYSICALLY close to the subject, which allows you to get shots that show detail in very small objects, make the object “true to size”, and to get a very depth of field. But in order to get these results, you would have to physically get close to the subject. In this case, unless you are actually sticking the lens underwater to get inches away from the coral, you are ultimately wasting your money or picking up a “prime” lens with no other features or advantages other than macro capabilities that you’re not even using (hope this makes sense).
As far as image stabilization goes, if you’re using a tripod, then you don’t need it (save your money). If you’re hand holding all the time in very good light, meaning, you can be at 100 iso and still be at around 1/1000 of a sec, you don’t need it. In the case of fish tanks, chances are, this is not the case! You will probably have to crank up your iso to a point where on you’re particular camera, the shot will be somewhat unusable (due to luminance and color noise), so, image stabilization would help allowing you to keep your iso/shutter speed, somewhat lower than what you’ll need to be at without image stabilization.
As far as white balance/raw, etc. don’t overthink it. If you can shoot in raw and you have software to process it,, shoot in raw!! If you shoot with your phones, don’t overthink it, you can’t shoot raw anyway. White balance is real easy to change in post anyway, so don’t overthink it. If you really want to get it right in camera, for whatever strange reason, chances are, in a reef tank, you’ll need to go with a kelvin temp that’s higher than 5500. Really cause in the camera, it works opposite. The higher numbers is to counteract against the blues. If programmed settings, flash (which is a little higher than neutral) or shade settings will probably be your best bet. Then again, try “auto” first!! But, just shoot it and do the WB in post.
John
For future reference, the only thing a macro/micro lens allows you to do, is to get PHYSICALLY close to the subject, which allows you to get shots that show detail in very small objects, make the object “true to size”, and to get a very depth of field. But in order to get these results, you would have to physically get close to the subject. In this case, unless you are actually sticking the lens underwater to get inches away from the coral, you are ultimately wasting your money or picking up a “prime” lens with no other features or advantages other than macro capabilities that you’re not even using (hope this makes sense).
As far as image stabilization goes, if you’re using a tripod, then you don’t need it (save your money). If you’re hand holding all the time in very good light, meaning, you can be at 100 iso and still be at around 1/1000 of a sec, you don’t need it. In the case of fish tanks, chances are, this is not the case! You will probably have to crank up your iso to a point where on you’re particular camera, the shot will be somewhat unusable (due to luminance and color noise), so, image stabilization would help allowing you to keep your iso/shutter speed, somewhat lower than what you’ll need to be at without image stabilization.
As far as white balance/raw, etc. don’t overthink it. If you can shoot in raw and you have software to process it,, shoot in raw!! If you shoot with your phones, don’t overthink it, you can’t shoot raw anyway. White balance is real easy to change in post anyway, so don’t overthink it. If you really want to get it right in camera, for whatever strange reason, chances are, in a reef tank, you’ll need to go with a kelvin temp that’s higher than 5500. Really cause in the camera, it works opposite. The higher numbers is to counteract against the blues. If programmed settings, flash (which is a little higher than neutral) or shade settings will probably be your best bet. Then again, try “auto” first!! But, just shoot it and do the WB in post.
John
OP
OP
Thanks John! I appreciate the advice! I actually plan to stick the lens in the water to get those juicy ultra close pics of some frags and colonies. I just ordered my Avast Marine porthole cover for the lens to do that. I see what you mean though when I'm taking front shots of the corals. Unless they are towards the front of the tank, I won't be able to get those super close shots with the macro.
Image stabilization would be awesome with the newest Tamron lens but it was a $400 difference between the cost of the used lens versus a new lens with IS. Since I'm just getting into it, my rationale was to just get the used one for now and get my feet wet. If I feel later on that I'm sorely needing the IS since some shots will be free-handed, then I may look to invest more at that time. I appreciate the input on the IS so I can keep that in mind.
Oddly, my cellphone can shoot in raw but I never messed with it. I like your thinking though, just shoot and adjust WB later, no big deal. I am currently using the shade WB just because it gets me closer to counteracting most of the blue and saves me a bit of time post-processing.
I've been having a lot more fun shooting pictures of my son. I'll work on the tank... Its a lot harder. Haha.
No problem, anytime. Also, it’s cool that you included pics of your baby (very cute). Between me and you, I personally think you should concentrate more on taking memorable pics of your son then to dump a serious amount of $$ on taking pics of your reef tank (just my opinion).
John
John
Similar threads
