Quote:
Originally Posted by tcphoto
The article essentially said to shoot at F2.8 at 1.3 seconds and ISO400 with a 70-200/2.8.
|
Interesting, and makes sense.
2.8 is pretty wide, lets in a lot of light. It's a short depth of field but if you're focused at infinity anyhow I suppose it doesn't matter. I tend to start at 5.6, it's around where most lenses tend to be sharpest but of course that varies and might not be best since it extends the shutter speed to make up for the smaller aperture / lens opening and allow the same amount of light in.
1.3 seconds is basically what is right for a 2.8 / ISO 400. It all balances out - well it needs to, each change to one setting can be made up for with another. I expect 1.3 sec would still give good blackness to the sky, if you extend it to the extreme i.e. 30 seconds it begins to turn blue again. It's a neat effect to experiment with but not necessarily what one is looking for here.
ISO 400 is probably fine as well. It's probably a good balance for speed / noise. If one is aiming for a fast shutter speed, the higher ISO (higher sensitivity) will help enable that. Most cameras today can probably do that without any noise which is the graininess that can ruin a picture of this type. It's an effect you might sometimes want but not here. You can experiment with this, some cameras might be best at 200 or even 100 to remove noise, some might handle 800 or higher.
70/200 sounds like a Canon lens, one of the white L lenses, but other manufacturers have that range too. One just has to choose their own preference, higher (i.e. to 300) might be even better, TBD by one's own preference. Always try to zoom with glass as opposed to "digitally" which is really just cropping the picture which you can do later on your own. Most economical zoom lenses will not be able to do 2.8 wide it'll be more like 4 or 5.6. A zoom lens that can do 2.8 is $$$.
Just general thoughts not aimed at anyone in particular. There should be a lot of combinations that work.