# Sharpness Priority - What is your secret?



## ORourkeK (Jun 19, 2014)

Whenever I am taking pictures of people, I try to make sure they are as sharp as possible. I will go through the settings to try and determine how to set my camera for the best results. Let me take you through my thought process



Shutter speed is one of the most important settings in assuring your subject is sharp. Because of this, I like to start by setting my shutter speed. I like to set my starting point at about 1/80. If my subject is moving I will increase it accordingly. I do not like to go below 1/60.
 


Next is aperture. For a nice shallow DOF I like to keep my aperture as close to 2.8 as I can. The more people added to the photo, the higher I go. This actually helps with the low light problems my D3100 has.
 


My last step is ISO. Being that my D3100 isnt the best in low light settings, I try to keep my ISO as close to 100 as possible. Anything past 400 and it starts to get iffy. So my priority is to keep my ISO as close to  100 as possible.
 
So, this is my thought process while taking photos of people. This can start to become tricky pretty quickly. If I take a picture with these settings and it is underexposed, I will adjust my ISO first. If I get to 800 and it is still underexposed, I will move onto shutter speed. Being that I am trying to get the sharpest photo possible, slowing down my shutter speed kills me. Anything slower than 1/60 will result in a picture with  a blurry subject. So I guess this has really become a topic of proper exposure, while focusing on keeping your subject sharp. 

Next is focus. You cant have a sharp subject if your focus is poor. I have been using my focus points to choose what I want to focus. I am going to start using the two step shutter for focusing and see if that helps. I read that it is more effective than selecting a different focus point. Anyone have experience with this?

After going through these steps, I still cannot get my subjects as sharp as I would like sometimes. This probable had a lot to do with the lens I was using, and hopefully my new Tamron 24-70 will help. I see some pictures where the subjects almost seem like they are jumping out of the picture they are so sharp. I have yet to be able to achieve this. Am I expecting too much from my 3100? Or am I just not skilled enough yet? Maybe my thought process is completely wrong and someone can point out my mistake. 

I will leave you all with the question, how do you all make sure your subject is nice and sharp? **What is your secret?**


----------



## D7K (Jun 19, 2014)

"two step shutter for focusing" - are you back button focusing at the moment?

May be you could post a few images you're struggling with to give us an idea of the pains you're seeing?

I am no great photographer myself, but i tend to use single point AF mostly, same as you with close to 100 as poss and accept that just because I have a fast 1.8 lens, does not mean I shoot that in all situations...


----------



## robbins.photo (Jun 19, 2014)

ORourkeK said:


> Whenever I am taking pictures of people, I try to make sure they are as sharp as possible. I will go through the settings to try and determine how to set my camera for the best results. Let me take you through my thought process&#8230;
> 
> 
> 
> ...



A few options here:

Stop down the lens - it will give you more depth of field and thus a sharper photo - if you don't have enough light to keep your ISO low enough to be at your comfort level, use a flash or add some other form of lighting.  If your still wanting background seperation, move your subject further away from the background.

Tripod or monopod - for those times when you need to drop your shutter speed, you can still get nice sharp photos - particuarly if you add a remote trigger along with the tripod.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 19, 2014)

Now that we're in The Digital Era, I try and buy a reallllly good camera for the era. ISO 100 is a recipe for low-noise, blurry images under many fluid shooting situations. Unless f/2.8 happens to be stropped down to f/2.8 on a TOP-shelf lens, f/2.8 is a recipe for a very faintly-soft, all-over thing called veiling glare, which is a fancy way of saying the picture quality is ever-so-slightly low in contrast and the," Ultra-fine details are just.not.rendered.very.well." As far as speeds go... 1/80 second is very risky on people who are moving, and on longer-lens work, it's a recipe for disaster. Today's better cameras offer a HUGE range of workable ISO values. I shot the Canon 5D for six years while it was considered good,and the 5D classic has excellent ISO response from 100 to 1250, a very nice almost flat performance line on DR and color. I went to the old Nikon D3x in early 2012, bought used, when it was in the top-10 in sensor performance. It has more DYnamic Range than I know what to do with, now that we have Lightroom and "digital fill-light" processing and so on. Having a good camera for the era helps, a lot.

There is a balancing point, and a tipping point in ALL camera setting scenarios. I'll come right out and state it plainly: hewing to ISO 100 for ANY outdoor people work is a mistake, 9 times out of 10. Period. The time it is not a mistake is when you need to use flash-fill or synchro-sun flash or flash-as-mainlight outdoors.

Get the ISO UP, so that you can hold a shutter speed that will FREEZE movement, and STOP camera shake. And stop shooting at f/2.8, unless you've got a realllllllly good prime lens like an 85 or 105 or 135, stopped down two full f/stops from wide-open. The difference between f/2.8 and even f/3.5 can be a remarkable difference. Using f/5.6 can cure all sorts of "focusing problems".

Just today on TPF we had a young professional shooter complain about missed focus on a shoot; the basic theory is to shoot at an f/stop that has at least "a little bit" of a focusing/shutter speed "safety margin".

Your ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/80 to 1/60 second scenario is reallllly doing you no favors whatsoever. You're actually limiting yourself terribly. Get that ISO level UP! Stop down to f/3.5 at least. Get the shutter speed to a FAST speed. You're just totally, totally working on the margins and are not leveraging anything. I started digital shooting with a Nikon D1, a 2.7 megapixel d-slr with absolute S**+ ISO performance...the D3100 is like eight generations better and newer. You definitely need to reconsider the exposure triangle parameters you are using as your start point, at least for *fluid shooting situations*. Think more along the lines of f/4.5 at 1/500 second at ISO 320.


----------



## D7K (Jun 19, 2014)

^^ These guys explained much better than I did.... I like to keep an ISO low in general but i know my camera's limits.. the rest is as they say.. Good advice and well said..


----------



## Derrel (Jun 19, 2014)

You wanna pass some idiot going EXACTLY 64.5 MPH in the middle lane on the freeway??? You'll never do it tached out in 1st gear...drop her into third gear and TACH it out till you revv up to near the red-line, then catch 4th and make your pass.....Zooooooooom!!!!!!!!!


----------



## ORourkeK (Jun 19, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Now that we're in The Digital Era, I try and buy a reallllly good camera for the era. ISO 100 is a recipe for low-noise, blurry images under many fluid shooting situations. Unless f/2.8 happens to be stropped down to f/2.8 on a TOP-shelf lens, f/2.8 is a recipe for a very faintly-soft, all-over thing called veiling glare, which is a fancy way of saying the picture quality is ever-so-slightly low in contrast and the," Ultra-fine details are just.not.rendered.very.well." As far as speeds go... 1/80 second is very risky on people who are moving, and on longer-lens work, it's a recipe for disaster. Today's better cameras offer a HUGE range of workable ISO values. I shot the Canon 5D for six years while it was considered good,and the 5D classic has excellent ISO response from 100 to 1250, a very nice almost flat performance line on DR and color. I went to the old Nikon D3x in early 2012, bought used, when it was in the top-10 in sensor performance. It has more DYnamic Range than I know what to do with, now that we have Lightroom and "digital fill-light" processing and so on. Having a good camera for the era helps, a lot.
> 
> There is a balancing point, and a tipping point in ALL camera setting scenarios. I'll come right out and state it plainly: hewing to ISO 100 for ANY outdoor people work is a mistake, 9 times out of 10. Period. The time it is not a mistake is when you need to use flash-fill or synchro-sun flash or flash-as-mainlight outdoors.
> 
> ...



Thanks for your reply. I try to keep my shutter speed as fast as possible, while keeping a good exposure. I don't like to go past 800 ISO because of all the noise, but maybe you are right and that is one of the only options I have besides bringing in external light.


----------



## D7K (Jun 19, 2014)

Work with the light, if you are shooting mainly low light then maybe look to upgrade to a body that will handle a higher ISO with less degradation .. And as always...just enjoy shooting, why else do we do it!


----------



## D7K (Jun 19, 2014)

Derrel said:


> You wanna pass some idiot going EXACTLY 64.5 MPH in the middle lane on the freeway??? You'll never do it tached out in 1st gear...drop her into third gear and TACH it out till you revv up to near the red-line, then catch 4th and make your pass.....Zooooooooom!!!!!!!!!



Even as a non-driver I appreciated this analogy...


----------



## ORourkeK (Jun 19, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> A few options here:
> 
> Stop down the lens - it will give you more depth of field and thus a sharper photo - if you don't have enough light to keep your ISO low enough to be at your comfort level, use a flash or add some other form of lighting.  If your still wanting background seperation, move your subject further away from the background.
> 
> Tripod or monopod - for those times when you need to drop your shutter speed, you can still get nice sharp photos - particuarly if you add a remote trigger along with the tripod.



Thanks Robbin. I will make sure I use a higher aperture from now on. I was actually thinking about picking up a monopod. I will start to do some research on them.


----------



## ORourkeK (Jun 19, 2014)

D7K said:


> Work with the light, if you are shooting mainly low light then maybe look to upgrade to a body that will handle a higher ISO with less degradation .. And as always...just enjoy shooting, why else do we do it!



My next upgrade will definitely be a new body.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 19, 2014)

What Derrel said is totally right on track.
I suggest you go to dofmaster.com and look at the size of the DOF for your lenses and camera at the different f stops that you use.
 Then practice a lot because taking good pictures cannot be done by the numbers alone.

If I am in a tough situation where the exposure triangle is getting pushed out of shape, I would rather have a noisy image that can be managed to some degree than have one with so much motion blur that it is unusable.

That being said, sharpness is not the ultimate criterion for the worth of a picture.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 19, 2014)

ORourkeK said:


> My next upgrade will definitely be a new body.



Or a 50 mm 1.8 which will give you more light, good portrait length on a crop body and a inexpensive upgrade to your lenses.


----------



## ORourkeK (Jun 19, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> ORourkeK said:
> 
> 
> > My next upgrade will definitely be a new body.
> ...



I will keep that in mind. Thanks Lew.


----------



## Braineack (Jun 19, 2014)

ORourkeK said:


> Shutter speed is one of the most important settings in assuring your subject is sharp. Because of this, I like to start by setting my shutter speed. I like to set my starting point at about 1/80. If my subject is moving I will increase it accordingly. I do not like to go below 1/60.




I try to maintain no lower than 1/125sec.  I'll turn off VC/VR if I start to get about 1/500.



> Next is aperture. For a nice shallow DOF I like to keep my aperture as close to 2.8 as I can. The more people added to the photo, the higher I go. This actually helps with the low light problems my D3100 has.



You want to stop the lens down to maintain the best sharpness throughout, however that lens is pretty sharp wide-open.  But you'll have a narrow DOF.  I suggest starting at f/5.6 unless you need the extra light.



> My last step is ISO. Being that my D3100 isn&#8217;t the best in low light settings, I try to keep my ISO as close to 100 as possible. Anything past 400 and it starts to get iffy. So my priority is to keep my ISO as close to 100 as possible.



800 ISO is fine on the D3100.  I often took it to 1600--Above that is gets iffy for sure, but still complete usable.   This was shot at ISO 2800 with a D3100 using the cheap 55-200mm and it's fine: https://www.flickr.com/photos/80607199@N08/9527687182/sizes/l

Dont worry so much about ISO if it means you need a very slow shutter that will capture your motion or your subject's. While ISO 100 is great for quality,  modern cameras handle high ISO values pretty well if you have to sacrifice.



> So, this is my thought process while taking photos of people. This can start to become tricky pretty quickly. If I take a picture with these settings and it is underexposed, I will adjust my ISO first. If I get to 800 and it is still underexposed, I will move onto shutter speed. Being that I am trying to get the sharpest photo possible, slowing down my shutter speed kills me. Anything slower than 1/60 will result in a picture with  a blurry subject. So I guess this has really become a topic of proper exposure, while focusing on keeping your subject sharp.



Not a horrible process.  But I try, even at short focal lengths, to stay about 1/125sec. Working on your method here helps as well.  I have very sharp images with the Tamron at 1/30sec.



> Next is focus. You can&#8217;t have a sharp subject if your focus is poor. I have been using my focus points to choose what I want to focus. I am going to start using the two step shutter for focusing and see if that helps. I read that it is more effective than selecting a different focus point. Anyone have experience with this?



not quite sure I understand this. 



> After going through these steps, I still cannot get my subjects as sharp as I would like sometimes. This probable had a lot to do with the lens I was using, and hopefully my new Tamron 24-70 will help. I see some pictures where the subjects almost seem like they are jumping out of the picture they are so sharp. I have yet to be able to achieve this. Am I expecting too much from my 3100? Or am I just not skilled enough yet? Maybe my thought process is completely wrong and someone can point out my mistake.



D3100 and a sharp lens (85mm @ f/2.8): https://www.flickr.com/photos/80607199@N08/9647214582/

It's not the camera; it's the user.   I also post all my images and apply sharpening.  *This is a must*

My D600 is sharper for sure, but it's not noticeable unless you're looking at full size pictures, then it become apparent.  But I've seen MUCH worse...


----------



## ORourkeK (Jun 19, 2014)

Braineack said:


> ORourkeK said:
> 
> 
> > Shutter speed is one of the most important settings in assuring your subject is sharp. Because of this, I like to start by setting my shutter speed. I like to set my starting point at about 1/80. If my subject is moving I will increase it accordingly. I do not like to go below 1/60.
> ...



Cool. Thanks for the info. I will make sure I get myself out of the habit of not going above 800 ISO. I also have to learn how to apply sharpness properly in LR.


----------



## KmH (Jun 19, 2014)

For shooting portraits hand-held, absolute minimum shutter speed of 1/100, and 1/500 is even better.

If you want sharp portraits use a good camera stand. Not a tripod, a camera stand.
Manfrotto 806 Mini Salon 190 Camera Stand with Counter-Balanced Cross Arm (Black)


----------



## TWright33 (Jun 19, 2014)

All I read was the first post and I want to touch on one thing.

I keep seeing people talking about degradation of there images due to ISO values.

ISO 1600 and under on nearly every modern DSLR is a very usable image.

Not using ISO over 400 is a bit ridiculous.

If there were a couple ISO values under 100 then people would start complaining about ISO 100 being grainy.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Jun 19, 2014)

Also, do some research and find some reviews/tests on your lens. Every lens has a "sweet spot," and the antithesis. For the Tamron 17-50 f2.8, for example, it's pretty much useless at 17mm wide open. f5.6 and 30-40mm or so would be what I would say is its sweet spot. I mean it's good pretty close to everywhere, but every lens has its strong and weak points. Learn them and you can use them to your advantage.


----------



## Vince.1551 (Jun 19, 2014)

First ... Let me take a selfie lol

Jokes aside you probably want to look at DXOMark for a portrait lens that gives you the best sharpness for your camera.


----------



## ORourkeK (Jun 19, 2014)

KmH said:


> For shooting portraits hand-held, absolute minimum shutter speed of 1/100, and 1/500 is even better.
> 
> If you want sharp portraits use a good camera stand. Not a tripod, a camera stand.
> Manfrotto 806 Mini Salon 190 Camera Stand with Counter-Balanced Cross Arm (Black)



I am assuming the advantage of this over a tripod is the sturdiness? I will check this out. Thanks


----------



## ORourkeK (Jun 19, 2014)

TWright33 said:


> All I read was the first post and I want to touch on one thing.
> 
> I keep seeing people talking about degradation of there images due to ISO values.
> 
> ...



Yeah this point has been repeated in most of the comments. I am going to get myself out of the habit of not going over and ISO of 800.


----------



## Vince.1551 (Jun 19, 2014)

Btw you only need to have a shutter speed longer then your focal length to prevent any camera shake plus to freeze a walking pedestrian  1/60 is all you need  ;-)

I shot at ISO 50 and don't find any graininess as with ISO 100. Again it largely depends on your camera sensor, processor and general setup. Careful not to regurgitate what you read from google searches ...


----------



## SnappingShark (Jun 19, 2014)

Derrel said:


> You wanna pass some idiot going EXACTLY 64.5 MPH in the middle lane on the freeway??? You'll never do it tached out in 1st gear...drop her into third gear and TACH it out till you revv up to near the red-line, then catch 4th and make your pass.....Zooooooooom!!!!!!!!!



I knew you overtook me on the 205!!


----------



## WayneF (Jun 19, 2014)

ORourkeK said:


> I will leave you all with the question, how do you all make sure your subject is nice and sharp? **What is your secret?**



Simply provide enough light so that I don't have to suffer with slow shutter speed, wide aperture, or high ISO.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 19, 2014)

WayneF said:


> ORourkeK said:
> 
> 
> > I will leave you all with the question, how do you all make sure your subject is nice and sharp? **What is your secret?**
> ...



Translation: MOVE to Texas, Southern California,Arizona, New Mexico, Florida, etc.!

Seriously though: if you want 3-D or real sharpness consistently, you NEED a fast shutter speed, and a good lens performance. The suggestion above about 1/60 second being adequate is fine for short lenses and static subjects...but once you start REALLLLLLY being critical, the old 1/over focal length rule, or 2x over focal length rule falls flat on its azz. You really need about 3x to 4x focal length to make things totallty,totally "frozen sharp" with longer focal lengths. And that....in much of the USA, for much of the year, means that ISO 100 is a really baaaaad idea.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Jun 19, 2014)

Derrel said:


> WayneF said:
> 
> 
> > ORourkeK said:
> ...



I've found sometimes ISO 1600 is required to achieve 3x focal length at 300mm, f10 or 11. Outdoors. On a normal day in Wisconsin. Sad, but true.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 19, 2014)

My sensor's seldom clean enough to shoot at f/11...

just a frame from a 20-second, "Here, let me take your picture!" kinda deal with one of the field reps from TravelOregon.com, whom I met in the Columbia Gorge National Scenic area last month...we're up above the Columbia River on a hiiiiiiigh overlook, maybe 1,000 feet above the river, with gusting 15- to 20 MPH winds coming out of the Columbia Gorge from the east...the f/5.6 aperture and 260mm focal length is to give foreground/background separation and the 1/1250 second shutter was to stop the moving hair that was flying around in the gusting conditions. Sot on AUTO ISO at ISO 400 under solid,gray overcast skies.

traveloregon_D3X_7792_Aelisa.jpg photo - Derrel photos at pbase.com

What makes this shot "sharp" is the 1/1250 shutter speed and a 260mm focal length on the 70-300 VR-G, a $329 used pawn shot lens and a 24MP Nikon.


----------



## bratkinson (Jun 20, 2014)

Perhaps the two biggest issues of 'sharpness priority' in my mind are accurate focus and necessary DOF. On this forum and elsewhere, too often someone new to photography posts some not-quite-sharp pictures and doesn't understand why. In almost every case, either they missed focus (ie, the camera focused on the wrong point) or their DOF was so thin one person was sharp and the person perhaps 12" behind and left/right of the first person is out of focus. 

So, for almost all my people photography, my first consideration is DOF. How thin/wide must the DOF be to get all the subjects desired in focus? Shooting a small group of 4-5 people at f2.0, for example, is almost guaranteed to fail, even with my super-sharp 135 f2.0 L lens, as the DOF is likely less than a foot. Perhaps if they were all leaning against a wall and the camera sensor is perfectly parallel to the wall I might get them all in focus. If I were to 'move in' to intentionally get only 1 person in focus, my DOF could easily be less than 2 inches! His/her nose is in focus, but the ears aren't, and of course, everyone else is just a blur.

My next issue is ensuring the camera focuses on exactly where I want it to focus. Although my camera has 63 usable focus points available, I usually limit it to center focus point only to guarantee it will focus exactly where I want. Unless I know which of several focus points the camera will likely choose (if I allow it to do so), the camera will most often pick the closest object, which may not be the one I wanted it to choose. 

I sometimes resort to focus and recompose, but then a too-thin DOF will end up making the subject a tad out of focus as his/her location is no long inside the 'plane' of focus (sheet of plywood in my mind). So, for focus and recompose shots, I have to increase the DOF slightly to compensate (a half to full f-stop reduction).

My next concern is shutter speed. As 3 of my 4 lenses do not have Image Stabilization, I have to make sure that my old hands don't shake things up, so I generally shoot at 1/<focal length> and faster to compensate for any unsteadiness. While reasonably motionless people can be 'stopped' at 1/100th or so, that's usually my slowest shutter speed, unless 'really pressed' by low lighting situations. Somebody/something at walking speed, 1/250 and up. In low light, no flash, indoors shots, I'll always take some at 1/250 as 'insurance' against motion blur...mine or the subjects, with other exposure triangle settings adjusted to compensate. Outdoors in daylight, the same shutter speed issues apply to moving subjects. I just have more latitude in aperture and ISO settings. 

But, there are times I care ONLY about the aperture/DOF, or the shutter speed. At a recent outdoor car show, I put the camera in Av and set my aperture at f8, and let it do the rest. I wanted at least the front half of each car(s) in focus no matter what, and with my 24-105 zoom usually at the wider end, that was no problem. And taking pictures from a moving train, Tv at 1/200th to stop the blur of everything except the closest 10 feet or so. 

As you can see from my thinking, ISO speed is my least critical setting. Of course, depending on the noise limiting abilities of the camera sensor, there are practical limits of how fast one can go on the ISO speed before the noise is unacceptable or cannot be reduced enough in post processing. Many cameras 'top out' about 1600-2400. More recent cameras have acceptable levels of noise at 3200 and faster. 

So, for those times when I would want to set my ISO speed too high, then starts the 'exposure triangle battle'. What tradeoffs am I willing to make to get the desired exposure? Open wider? - thinner DOF. Slower shutter? - subject blurring. Faster ISO? - more noise. What am I willing to sacrifice a little on to get that shot? Someone here called it 'an acceptable compromise' 8-10 months ago. And that's what it is...An acceptable compromise.


----------



## sashbar (Jun 20, 2014)

Does D3100 have an Auto ISO mode with a shutter speed limit? If yes then I think the OP should try a completely different approach.
Try shooting in aperture priority mode. Make your priority the right DOF for the image. 
Limit the minimum shutter speed to what you need. I would recommend, to start with,  1/125 for still objects and 1/250 for people.
And let the camera set the ISO. I think you should trust the camera more in this respect, Nikon has a good Auto ISO algorythm. 
Other things that will help:
 A good modern noise filter, like Topaz, it will give you another stop or two easily. 
 Unsharp Mask used very lightly


----------



## Mike_E (Jun 20, 2014)

Sharpness in a portrait is vastly overrated in my book unless the subject has _perfect_ skin.

The only thing that needs to be tack sharp is the leading iris.

Real people have blemishes, splotches, wrinkles, scars, moles and so on that only detract from the image (unless you're using it as a tool for some medical prognosis).  Just a bit of softness saves you tons of time in post.


----------



## Braineack (Jun 20, 2014)

I bet youre one of those people who apply gaussian blur layers to photos...


----------



## astroNikon (Jun 20, 2014)

If I was the OP, to learn, I would set the camera to Sharpness Priority   - aka Shutter Priority - to about 125ish
with AUTO ISO.  Take some test shots and note the ISO & aperture and compare his test photos to his past photos.


----------



## ORourkeK (Jun 20, 2014)

astroNikon said:


> If I was the OP, to learn, I would set the camera to Sharpness Priority   - aka Shutter Priority - to about 125ish
> with AUTO ISO.  Take some test shots and note the ISO & aperture and compare his test photos to his past photos.



I think I may take this advice as it has been mentioned a few times. I wanted to jump right into using manual mode, but perhaps I need to learn more first. I picked up a couple books last night, hopefully they will help.


----------



## Braineack (Jun 20, 2014)

There's nothing wrong with using manual mode, but if A or P gets you to the same result, faster, then what's the point.  Plus without have two wheels, changing settings on the D3x00 and D5x00 takes a bit more effort and requires diving into the menus to change the ISO (unless you've setup a function button).


----------



## robbins.photo (Jun 20, 2014)

ORourkeK said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > If I was the OP, to learn, I would set the camera to Sharpness Priority  - aka Shutter Priority - to about 125ish
> ...



To be honest I rarely shoot in manual mode.  I generally only use it when I have plenty of time to prep a shot and nothing in the photo is going to be moving or at least not moving to any great extent.  Manual mode is great for getting just exactly the settings/style you want, but truthfully at least for me it is entirely more hassle than it's worth in most of the real life shooting situations I generally find myself in - for those I use either Shutter Priority or Aperture Priority - by controlling either the shutter and ISO or the aperture and ISO I can get the kind of shot I want with a minimum of fuss, and I'm always ready to shoot should a great shot present itself and I just don't have time to make much in the way of adjustments.

I do recommend you shoot in manual mode when learning exposure, it's a great way to test out for yourself and see how things like Aperture, shutter speed and ISO all affect the final image.  Gives you a much better feel for how high you can go with the ISO before you really start to notice the noise, for example - which does vary from camera to camera.  Also gives you a much better feel for Aperturre seetings and depth of feild.  But honestly for me at least that was the most useful thing about manual mode, was just using it to take a couple hundred test shots and try out some various things I'd read about for myself.

After that, well I probably only use manual mode once in a blue moon or so - Shutter priority probably 80% of the time, Aperture Priority roughly 20%.


----------



## ORourkeK (Jun 20, 2014)

Braineack said:


> There's nothing wrong with using manual mode, but if A or P gets you to the same result, faster, then what's the point.  Plus without have two wheels, changing settings on the D3x00 and D5x00 takes a bit more effort and requires diving into the menus to change the ISO (unless you've setup a function button).



There is a button on the front left of the camera that I can hold down while using the wheel to change the ISO. I have become pretty comfortable changing ISO, aperture, and shutter speed quickly.


----------



## astroNikon (Jun 20, 2014)

I tend to shot in Manual *alot*

I've noticed when I shoot in manual, even sports, the shot only needs a little tweaking in post.  But yes, I'm busy with the ISO and shutter speeds to keep the exposure good.

versus when I use Aperture priority where the shots usually need *alot* of Post exposure tweaking.

I never use Shutter Priority

usually I get more annoyed with Auto WB issues nowadays that I have to correct in post.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jun 20, 2014)

astroNikon said:


> I tend to shot in Manual *alot*
> 
> I've noticed when I shoot in manual, even sports, the shot only needs a little tweaking in post. But yes, I'm busy with the ISO and shutter speeds to keep the exposure good.
> 
> ...



I think a lot depends on your shooting style too - with me a lot of the shots I take are at the zoo, so I'll be going from bright daylight conditions to horrible dungeon like lighting and back to bright daylight again multiple times in an hour usually.  By using shutter priority even when I walk into say the cat complex from outside if I see a shot I really want just as I walk in a quick spin of the command dial to set the shutter speed is all I need, and I'm ready to shoot.  Takes only a fraction of a second really and I've got a shot - the camera will set the aperture and ISO automatically unless I override them so I don't have to worry so much about exposure I can just concentrate on getting the picture.  If I have a bit more time then I can set the shutter speed and adjust the ISO so I get the aperture/iso balance I think is best, etc - but if I don't have the time I know I can still get a usable shot firing from the hip.  Just seems to work best for my shooting style, my equipment (the D5200 only has the one command wheel and fairly limited control buttons compared to say something in the 7X series), and the shooting situations I usually find myself in.

But hey, if your coming home with the shots you want, well then whatever method your using must be a good method for you.


----------



## astroNikon (Jun 20, 2014)

Yes, being comfortable with your shooting style is key.

I found my peace with Manual last year shooting sports outside with a train of clouds .. dark . bright .. in between.  My finger was busy on ISO and shutter while I was fixed at f/2.8.  Now i'm very comfortable in Manual but you are busy checking settings.


----------



## Braineack (Jun 20, 2014)

I find A and P much easier.   My approach, in uncontrolled settings, is typically first: what aperture/shutter will be best for this shot?

If I decide I want a shallow DOF, i'll use A.  So then it's a matter of turning the finger wheel to set the aperture.  Then ill use the thumbwheel to set the ISO, while metering, until the shutter is at a speed I'm happy with (typically a min of 1/125 with the short lens and 1/300 with the long*). Then I take the picture.  I'll typically leave the setting until the situation changes.  *If I notice a shutter speed of above 1/500 I'll turn off VC.

I spend much less time chimping and fussing over setting this way, and typically do it initially while looking through the viewfinder; it's that easy.

I used to shoot in manual almost exclusively because I liked the control, but in an ever changing environment, it's not the best approach, for me, anymore.  Having the dual wheels helps--manual on a consumer-level camera is a lot tougher to switch between settings; no LCD panel and only one wheel.


----------



## jjtarnow (Jun 22, 2014)

sashbar said:


> Does D3100 have an Auto ISO mode with a shutter speed limit? If yes then I think the OP should try a completely different approach.
> Try shooting in aperture priority mode. Make your priority the right DOF for the image.
> Limit the minimum shutter speed to what you need. I would recommend, to start with,  1/125 for still objects and 1/250 for people.
> And let the camera set the ISO. I think you should trust the camera more in this respect, Nikon has a good Auto ISO algorythm.
> ...



I would agree with sashbar....let the camera do the ISO work for a while and shoot in Av or Tv..when you are reviewing your images make sure you look at the metadata too. This way you can see what the exposure algorithm thought was "best" for a particular shot based on your choice of aperture or shutter selection. It will help guide you when you go back to manual mode to get a sense of what ISO to choose. I say "best" because best isn't always based on objective inputs. Algorithm's work on a given set of variables...photography is an art form and art is based on appeasing the subjective...we have all seen incredible artwork that has been achieved through unconventional means...meaning...sometimes what seems completely off kilter and random creates great works of art.

Good luck!

jj


----------



## TreeofLifeStairs (Jun 23, 2014)

The op mentioned ISO and noise but one thing I don't think has been talked about is if he's shooting jpg instead of raw. If that's the case then you will start to see noise earlier (lower ISO) than with raw.


----------



## ORourkeK (Jun 23, 2014)

TreeofLifeStairs said:


> The op mentioned ISO and noise but one thing I don't think has been talked about is if he's shooting jpg instead of raw. If that's the case then you will start to see noise earlier (lower ISO) than with raw.



I shoot RAW.


----------



## TreeofLifeStairs (Jun 23, 2014)

ORourkeK said:


> I shoot RAW.



That rules that out then.


----------



## coffeefilter (Jun 23, 2014)

ORourkeK said:


> TreeofLifeStairs said:
> 
> 
> > The op mentioned ISO and noise but one thing I don't think has been talked about is if he's shooting jpg instead of raw. If that's the case then you will start to see noise earlier (lower ISO) than with raw.
> ...



FYI, Nikon D3100 Specs says you can push your ISO to 919 with low levels of noise, and useable at 3200.


----------



## ORourkeK (Jun 23, 2014)

TreeofLifeStairs said:


> ORourkeK said:
> 
> 
> > I shoot RAW.
> ...



Haha. It was a good thought though.


----------



## DanielPhotog (Jun 23, 2014)

Some solid advice here. For sharpness, know your lenses' peak resolution and peak contrast apertures. SLR lens review has some nice charts that give lines/mm at different apertures for many lenses, and you can see how the resolution scores create a bell curve from wide open iris to pinhole size. Rule of thumb for me, whatever your wide open aperture is, add 3 to it and you'll maximize sharpness. a 1.4 does well at f4-f5.6, 2.8 does well at 5.6-6.3, a 5.6 does well at f8-f16. My 35mm flektogon 2.4 apparently gets some solid border sharpness at f11, but center is pretty maxed out between 5.6-f8 already.

If I'm shooting with my 20mm 2.8 nikkor for example, I would want to shoot at 5.6 to get maximum diffraction free sharpness. Shutter speed no lower than 1/125, ISO just enough to allow that shutter speed to happen. (sometimes I go auto iso in Manual mode and adjust aperture and shutter so that the iso will help compensate to make that happen, otherwise i live in Av mode and keep an eye on shutter speed, dropping f stop number if the shutter is falling too slow, and trying to stick as close as possible to the peak resolution aperture).

Pretty much, stop down a few stops from wide open (if it's a 2.8, then 5.6-8 are money zones, if it's a 5.6 kit lens or tele zoom, stop it down to f8-14 range) and fix everything else up to make the shot work. Stopping down further than 5.6 on my nikkor 20mm, for example, starts to introduce diffraction which dulls the image despite making the DOF larger (so you get a big DOF, but the quality of sharpness within that DOF begins to degrade. So stopping down too aggressively can also ruin your shot. My canon 50 1.4 for example maxes out at 5.6 at the corners and center, then starts to drop off. I'm not fond of f22 shots with that particular lens, whereas a 70-300 f5.6 zoom would get some nice results between f16-f22

For stationary targets, VR or IS is nice, but nothing beats a tripod for architecture shots, etc. VR and IS is a waste for shooting people and even plants that sway in the wind IME, because the portraits will lose tons of detail and start to blur below 1/125 with or without VR/IS. If your target moves, the only solution is to use faster shutter speeds, unless they invent 'subject stabilization'.....


----------



## ORourkeK (Jun 23, 2014)

coffeefilter said:


> ORourkeK said:
> 
> 
> > TreeofLifeStairs said:
> ...



Thanks. I have been using higher ISO and to my surprise the quality isn't bad. I also picked up Topaz DeNoise. That program is amazing.


----------



## DanielPhotog (Jun 23, 2014)

Pump up that ISO! Shoot RAW! And turn up the luminance noise redux.

For fun, get your tamron 24-70 2.8 on a tripod and set it to Av mode at f5.6 or 6.3. Literally shoot anything at ISO 100 on the tripod with 2 second timer on the drive settings and everything will be tack sharp (for stationary targets). Your 50-200mm probably maxes out at f11. Shooting handheld, do the same, just pump the ISO up to let these  peak apertures happen.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 23, 2014)

coffeefilter said:


> ORourkeK said:
> 
> 
> > TreeofLifeStairs said:
> ...



Something that many people forget: there is High ISO in bad, sucky lighting conditions. And there is High ISO in decent light. Outdoors, in full-spectrum, real light from the sun, High ISO during daylight hours can look pretty damned good! INDOORS, in weird spectrum light, which happens to be dim light too, High ISO can look bad.

Noise looks worst in underexposed areas; outdoors during the day, there's usually a MUCH less noticeable quality drop off at the high ISO values compared to say, shooting outdoors at night by the light of a campfire...where there's ZERO fill light. A good number of users first try High ISO when their backs are against the wall, at say, the school play with spotlighting + deep shadows, and the results are bad; but it is NOT the same thing to resort to High ISO in "decent" lighting conditions!


----------



## pgriz (Jun 23, 2014)

OK, Derrel, you're making 'way too much sense.  Knock it off.  :mrgreen:


----------



## Derrel (Jun 23, 2014)

pgriz said:


> OK, Derrel, you're making 'way too much sense.  Knock it off.  :mrgreen:



Oh, come on now. Actually, as I've been reading through this thread, I agreed with a lot that sashbar and braineack wrote, as well as some other posters. I think it was bratkinson who mentioned specifically having adequate depth of field...that does tend to be a BIG factor in perceived sharpness. Just this AM, I found myself clicking through a huuuge Facebook collection site of photos like "Let The Kids Dress Themselves", and "Kids and Their Pets", and some stuff. I blame this 200-pictrure exploratory trip on one of our very own, the talented PaigeW from Texas, who started off my trip because her FB page linked to a shot of her darling daughter and their big slobbery family dog....it allll started with a single arrow-click to bring up the next pic, and before I knew it...BOOM! I was into all these photos taken by family photographers, many of whom showed work done in very soft, dreamy, shallow depth of field styles. Not all of it. The Kids and Water section had a mix of sharp, and impressionistic/blurry/ethereal stuff. Some of the maternity pics were sharp, others were shallow focus and gauzy/dreamy. There was GREAT "sharp stuff" and also some great "blurry stuff".

Wow...sounds like I am advocating non-sharp pics in a sharp pics thread! OMG...time for more coffee. STOP USING f/1.8!!!! Start shooting at f/5.6!!!


----------



## ORourkeK (Jun 23, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Wow...sounds like I am advocating non-sharp pics in a sharp pics thread! OMG...time for more coffee. STOP USING f/1.8!!!! Start shooting at f/5.6!!!



That is exactly what I did. I would say I have improved quite a bit from the suggestions in this thread. Thanks everyone! I have a thread up of pictures I took in the park. I used the suggestions from this post if anyone is interested and hasn't seen it already. 

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/people-photography/362987-trip-park-c-c-welcomed.html


----------



## Braineack (Jun 23, 2014)

Derrel said:


> ...I agreed with a lot that sashbar and braineack wrote...



:goes back and rereads, obviously, stellar advice:


----------



## robbins.photo (Jun 23, 2014)

Derrel said:


> pgriz said:
> 
> 
> > OK, Derrel, you're making 'way too much sense. Knock it off. :mrgreen:
> ...



OMG Derrel - you fell down the adorable kid/slobbery dog rabbit hole?  Are you ok my friend?  Do you need an intervention?

Lol


----------



## pgriz (Jun 23, 2014)

Derrel, my take-away from your comments is to consider using a higher ISO under good light conditions to get higher shutter speeds while keepng the aperture quite small.  Truthfully, I never considered it, and am always setting my ISO at the native (100) level when in good light.  You're opening my eyes to that being, in some ways, a false economy.  So, I need to take a few test shots at higher ISO settings (and good light conditions) and see if my creaking-old T1i will produce decent results.  If my sensor works in the way you imply it should, then you've just enalrged my "performance space" in terms of setting the exposure.  And that, my friend, is a "good thing".


----------

