koffiejunkie
Executive Member
I just realised that it appears nobody responding to this thread (thus far) actually has a D40
Why do you think we're cheering for it? Need to get one of those amongst us
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Which is the most hair-raising South African mountain pass you've driven?
Photography lessons
- Thread starter Genius.
- Start date
Why do you think we're cheering for it? Need to get one of those amongst us
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
LOL great! bwana is right, none of us actually have one. I have a Canon 40D but very almost bought the D40 - it was just to small for my hands. Did spend a day shooting with it, and based on what I saw that day I'm happy to recommend it.
If you're worried about 6MP, check out this image. Taken with another 6MP DSLR and kit lens.
Buy this book with the difference - you won't be sorry.
mercurial
MyBB Legend
I have the PDF of this book, but haven't read it yet.
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
Sweet dude - we want a first pic, OK?
For sure man.
ldmelsa
Executive Member
Remember, the D40 overexposes by default, like most digital cams. Use exposure compensation and colour histogram to make sure you're not blowing out the colours in your shot. You can't shoot like you use to on print film. Not to worry. Just take a shot and look at the screen. (the d40 has an excellent screen). If it's blown out, adjust exposure compensation. Try -2/3 of a stop. Take it again and look at your screen. Remember to set your white balance. (actually, the D40 does a great job in auto WB)
Oh, one more thing: Use auto ISO!
Want your shots to look colourful and punchy?
Firstly, make sure your camera is set to jpeg.
Menu > Shooting Menu > Optimize Image > Custom
Tone Compensation: Leave it at "Auto". (Nikons automatically adjust the contrast of every shot.)
Colour Mode: Set it to "IIIa" (lovely colours) Use it! (Don't use IIa - that's AdobeRGB and will give your crap colours. Always use sRGB. AdobeRGB is for press and only to be used when you're printing your own work and have everything calibrated to AdobeRGB. Don't even waste a second thinking about this!)
Saturation: Use what looks right to you. When I used the D40 I set this to "+". Looked great!
If you use raw, none of this applies and you can't take advantage of Nikon's wonderful in-camera jpeg processing.
Oh, one more thing: Use auto ISO!
Want your shots to look colourful and punchy?
Firstly, make sure your camera is set to jpeg.
Menu > Shooting Menu > Optimize Image > Custom
Tone Compensation: Leave it at "Auto". (Nikons automatically adjust the contrast of every shot.)
Colour Mode: Set it to "IIIa" (lovely colours) Use it! (Don't use IIa - that's AdobeRGB and will give your crap colours. Always use sRGB. AdobeRGB is for press and only to be used when you're printing your own work and have everything calibrated to AdobeRGB. Don't even waste a second thinking about this!)
Saturation: Use what looks right to you. When I used the D40 I set this to "+". Looked great!
If you use raw, none of this applies and you can't take advantage of Nikon's wonderful in-camera jpeg processing.
Let me rephrase - If you use raw you needn't dont worry about all that crud. You can make adjustments in post as you see fit rather than Nikon interpreting things for you.
mercurial
MyBB Legend
In any case, I can't understand why anyone would spend so much money on a SLR and shoot JPEGs 
Then you might as well spend R1000 on a point-and-shoot.
Then you might as well spend R1000 on a point-and-shoot.
ldmelsa
Executive Member
Let me rephrase - If you use raw you needn't dont worry about all that crud. You can make adjustments in post as you see fit rather than Nikon interpreting things for you.
In any case, I can't understand why anyone would spend so much money on a SLR and shoot JPEGs
Then you might as well spend R1000 on a point-and-shoot.
Please don't start this pointless raw vs jpeg thing with me.
After shooting both jpeg & raw on:
Canon 10D
Nikon D100
Canon 300D
Canon 5D
Nikon D40
Canon 40D
Canon 450D
Nikon D60
Nikon D300
I can tell you that jpeg is the way to go.
I know pro photographers here in EL that shoot jpeg on Canon 5D, Canon 1DsMKIII, Nikon D3.
Their shots look great, and the clients just keep coming back.
If you know how to drive your cam and don't want to waste time, shoot jpeg.
Last edited:
It's conclusive then and I stand corrected. Jpeg must be the way to go.
ldmelsa
Executive Member
Everybody must shoot what he/she prefers.
It's all subjective, bwana.
BTW, I shoot raw for long exposures, because CameraRAW is goos at taking out hot pixels.
It's just this dude is talking about a Nikon D40, and Nikons are great at jpeg.
mercurial
MyBB Legend
Idmelsa, you are entitled to your opinion. My take is that RAW is obviously better, as is the same with WAV files when it comes to audio or VOB files when it comes to video - the simple reason that the data is uncompressed means that more data/details are available.
Just my 2c.
Just my 2c.
ldmelsa
Executive Member
I agree with you 100%, technically speaking.
It makes sense that RAW holds more info than jpeg, however people must not think that it is a "digital negative". It's by no means a negative. Print film has a huge latitude and amazing highlight handling. What I'm trying to say is that you have to get it right, in-camera, just like slide film. Raw is not going to save you. It's lighting, timing and composition that make a shot. Not whether it's shot on digital(raw/jepg), print film or slide film. Each medium is different and you have to know how to use you chosen medium. Once you understand the limitations of your camera, medium and lens, you can make great shots using lighting, timing and composition. Arguing about jpeg/raw is missing the point. It's about photography.
Look at these examples:
Sigma SD14: better raw than jpeg
You have to use that camera in raw to get the best from it. It's not very good at jpeg.
Nikon D300: amazing jpegs
See what I mean? It's about the specific camera.
For example, my Canon 300D was better in raw. (old camera)
It's just that I love the way that Nikon processes their jpegs, but you're right, it's subjective.
mercurial
MyBB Legend
I understand and I think we both agree with each other to some point 
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
In any case, I can't understand why anyone would spend so much money on a SLR and shoot JPEGs
Then you might as well spend R1000 on a point-and-shoot.
How about incentive for getting it right? RAW is really cool, and I use it, but bloody hell it takes a lot of time to process all the images. I strive to get it right with the camera. If I nail it in the camera, I don't need RAW. I would still shoot in raw, on the off chance that there's something I *want* to do with it afterwards, but I would be happy if I can apply the same settings (contrast, saturation, sharpening, etc) on all my images and it looks good.
Compression has nothing to do with it. The RAW files coming out of most cameras are compressed. RAW is not an image format[/d] - it's simply a dump of everything that came in through the sensor. That has to be interpreted and processed to become an image. Now, if you're a wizz at post processing, and have the time to dedicate to it, sure, then RAW is the best for you. But if you nail the exposure chances are the camera will do a pretty decent job making a good looking image out of it. I have my camera set to shoot JPEG+RAW, and I compare every image coming out of it. When I do get the exposure just right, there's usually no way I can make it look better from the RAW, in fact, I mostly just try to replicate the same result. RAW is useful to me when I get it wrong with the camera. So RAW for me is dealing with the symptom and ignoring the problem.
Of course, RAW opens up slightly broader creative possibilities, but again, this is dependant on your post processing skills.
ldmelsa
Executive Member
Okay, I'm off to dpreview to go and post my thoughts on jpeg. (kidding)
It was nice knowing you guys!
(kidding)It was nice knowing you guys!
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
But you can in aperture.
Of course I can, but I mean one set of settings across all pictures, or maybe a few presets - like the "pictures styles" in the camera. Unless I nail it every time, I still have to do some extra work on each image.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against that, but most of what I end up doing is correcting something or other I did wrong while shooting. That's unnecessary.
ldmelsa
Executive Member
You guys make as if one can't adjust jpegs:
______________________________Click for larger view.
______________________________Click for larger view.