Which SLR for HDR photos?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by MarkC426, May 14, 2008.

  1. MarkC426 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #1
    I am trying to decide which camera to buy, either the Nikon D60 or the Canon EOS 400D.
    Because I am new to HDR photography, some of the technical stuff baffles me a bit.
    For example
    400D - has Auto Exposure Bracketing (+/- 2EV 0.5 or 0.3 increments)
    Exposure Compensation (+/- 2EV 0.5 or 0.3 increments)
    D60 - has no AEB but Exposure Compensation (+/- 5EV 0.3 increments)
    1.Exactly how many exposure levels do these produce?
    (400D - 8/12; D60 - 30?)
    2.Does AEB take multiple exposures automatically (as the name would suggest) and how many?
    3.If there is no AEB, do you have to manually alter exposure and retake photo?

    HELP
     
  2. robbieduncan Moderator emeritus

    robbieduncan

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    London
    #2
    Yes you hold down the shutter (iirc) and it takes 3 images, one at +, one middle and one at -.

    Yes. On a tripod!
     
  3. TimJim macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    #3
    1. Do the math.

    2. You need to hold it in one place (tripod is best) and shoot in continuos mode and the 3 separate pictures are + , 0 , - [The + and - are set in EV steps by you]

    3. Yeah, you just change exposure compensation after each shot, you need a tripod of stationary object.
     
  4. MarkC426 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #4
    Thanks for the comments.
    So I guess the D60 would give me a greater range of exposures but I really need a tripod and more setup time, and the 400D would let me take the three levels as long as the camera is steady.
     
  5. iBookG4user macrumors 604

    iBookG4user

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #5
    I think you are mistaken there, exposure compensation is when the camera is on auto or aperture/program/shutter priority and it goes up that amount from what the light metre says is the correct exposure. You can do that just as easily on manual by adjusting the shutter speed, thus exposure compensation would not make much of a difference if you use it on manual. That said, the 400D becomes the better buy for you.
     
  6. AxisOfBeagles macrumors 6502

    AxisOfBeagles

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Location:
    East of Shangrila
    #6
    the Canon (and, presumably, the Nikon) also has a timed auto exposure button. For HDR, or other bracketing needs, I set the Auto Exposure Bracketing to my desired gaps; compose my image; then set the timer for auto exposure - press the shutter release, and the three AEB exposures are fired off in succession. That way, I'm not disturbing the camera in between exposures.

    Obviously, this is done on a tripod.
     
  7. MarkC426 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    Ah, thanks.......I am new to DSLR cameras.
    I was leaning more towards the 400D.
     
  8. form macrumors regular

    form

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2003
    Location:
    in a country
    #8
    I understand the D300 handles up to 9 bracketed images.
     
  9. nyquist11 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2008
    #9
    I was thinking about purchasing a DSLR myself for HDR stuff, and I was wondering what you are planning to use (software) to combine the images:confused:
     
  10. MarkC426 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Location:
    UK
  11. SonicChronicler macrumors member

    SonicChronicler

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Location:
    In the Wilds....Northumberland, UK
    #11
    Photomatix is commonly used. It's easy to get used to and can give great results - check the HDR thread if you haven't already


    Sonic
     
  12. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #12
    No. Either camera will do the job. The difference is how easy or not HDR might be is so small it should not be a factor in selecting a camera. It is "way easy" with either of them.

    Also when it comes down to it I doubt you will really want to use "exposure compensation" and "P Mode" you would allmost certainly want the f-stop to remain fixed while you vary the shutter speed as changes to the f-stop effect the DOF. But don't worry it is dead easy with either camera.

    What you should be looking at are the sets of lenses you mght want. Pick a few out think of the set of lenses you would like to have in twoo and in five years. Buy the brand of camera that will let you get that set of lenses.
     
  13. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #13
    If you are at all serious about photography you will already own a copy of photoshop. Use that.
     
  14. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #14
    Photoshop's HDR sucks compared to Photomatix. Manual HDR in Photoshop takes a long time and sucks compared to Photoshop.
     
  15. AlaskaMoose macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2008
    Location:
    Alaska
    #15
    As others said, it does not matter with of the two cameras you buy. The camera itself is no going to produce HDR photos for you. All it does it to take photos. The XT-series include automatic bracketing, but you can also do that manually if you want. The AEB saves you a lot of time, however. For HRD photography, three identical but differently exposed images (not nine, nor ten, etc.) are used.

    You can achieve HDR with CS2 or CS3 much easier than manual/software work on your computer by buying the relatively cheap (around $14.00) Fred Miranda's DRI Photoshop action. But Photomatix Pro (around $99.00) as well Photomatix standard version (around $39.00), achieve the same at a fraction of the time required by an action for Photoshop.

    And then there is HDR Tools for the Mac. I haven't used this application, so I can't tell you how easy to use it it. But with the high value of the Euro, it costs about the same as PhotoMatix Pro, or around the same for the cheaper version with an educational discount.
     
  16. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #16
    I find that I get the best results from between six and twelve images for HDR, depending on the dynamic range of the original scene and the tonal variation I want in the final print. I've done it from as few as one and as many as twenty, and would consider three to be skimping at a bare minimum unless it was a pretty low overall range image. Indoors with whatever ambient light there is an possibly some fill flash, I find that about a dozen images gives me what I want no matter which way I want to go with an image. I do 13x19 prints myself.
     
  17. AlaskaMoose macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2008
    Location:
    Alaska
    #17
    Well, that's news to me. Of all the instructions I have been able to dig on the subject of HDR, these point to three images for HDR, and at least two for blending photos which can be taken by the use of three filters . Thank you for the clarification.

    By the way, I found some easy to understand article about HDR photography. Well, since it seems that you already know more than enough about HDR. perhaps the article would be of benefit to others (and Me:), of course:):
    http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/high-dynamic-range.htm
     
  18. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #18
    Michael Riechman actually praised the D2x for having a 9-shot autobracket, it looks like seven shots is his norm:

    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/hdr.shtml

    AFAIR, that was one of the earliest HDR articles on the 'Net, but it's still pretty valid- even if "Merge to HDR" does mostly suck ;)

    The Cambridge Colour folks have a lot of good articles.

    If you're not using Photomatix, I can't recommend it enough, the tone mapping function is really good, and even better than a lot of the techniques other folks worked out with PS and layer masks.
     
  19. stillshooting macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    #19
    Aint this the damn truth! I bought a pentax k10d with the idea that HDR would be easy and make all photos cool; i was so wrong. In the beggining, dont expect to be busting out hdr photos like solracselbor and valdore, if you do youll be sadly disappointed. Theres so much more to photos than just the processing that you will need to learn before you consider doing HDR, IMHO. Hope all works out for ya!

    Oh an one more thing, the Pentax K10D does 5 AEB images in either +/-1.5 or +/-2.0 exposures. What you can do then is set the AEB to 5 shots +/-1.5 and then after you take that series of 5 shots you can adjust it to 5 shots in +/-2.0 and get a total of 10 bracketed shots.
     
  20. leighonigar macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    #20
    Of course, if you just want a bit more dynamic range the fuji S3/5 really does add something.
     
  21. nburwell macrumors 68040

    nburwell

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Location:
    PHL
    #21
    Photoshop improved their HDR feature in CS3. I personally don't use it because of the way many people over do their HDR photos. I would rather take the time to manually blend two exposures together to give a much more realistic look.
     
  22. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #22
    I have CS3, in my opinion, it still sucks- there are at least a dozen good ways to do it manually- but they're all very time-consuming, especially if you're working with an image that needs six or eight exposures. In contrast, going into Photomatix, "tone mapping" and adjusting a few options is considerably easier and produces really good results- in general, most of my "adjustments" are actually removing exposures.
     
  23. adjuster macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2007
    #23
    Braketeer

    There is a terrific little program called Bracketeer that makes blending photos a piece of cake. Costs about $30. Cheaper and better than Photomatix, which I also bought.

    Digital Outback recommends bracketing everything that does not involve photographing movement, even by hand held. Bracketeer will first align the photos, then blend them.

    Some techniques result is exaggerated images that do not look real. Bracketeer just blends the photos as is. It doesn't try to stretch the range.
     
  24. termina3 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Location:
    TX
    #24
    That doesn't sound like HDR
     
  25. onomatopoeia macrumors 6502

    onomatopoeia

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2007
    #25
    It's not. It simply merges bracketed shots. I guess it's handy if you can't seem to get the exposure quite right but it's not HDR.
     

Share This Page