Advice on upgrading DLSR

[dphjr]

Hey all, I'm very new to photography, and currently use my dad's old nikon d70 with a 18-70 1.3-4.5g lens. I primarily want to shoot cars, maybe some nature but mostly cars. I want something that can produce sharper images and show more color without having to enhance as much with photoshop. I've heard getting a prime lens might be the best idea, as I figured the body probably isn't as important to upgrade as the lens. What would y'all recommend? Or do you think that I should consider getting a new body as well? Keep in mind it's only a hobby, so i dont want to drop a lot on new hardware, but I will still pay up for quality.

[The Wind Breezes]

Don't. Use that old camera, and educate yourself on everything photography. Until you make pictures that don't suck there's absolutely no point at all in getting a blinged out camera or even lenses. For you, the lens really only matters as far as what kind of field of view you want (wide lenses let you get close in to your subject, but have distortion, zoom can get you good crop shots / shots from a distance and portrait will give you a medium crop with great potential for bokeh (blur behind your subject) at a low f stop.

[The Wind Breezes]

Also, and I hate to double post, but it's probably better than an edit: really the only point of getting a prime in the range of your zoom is to force yourself to compose to the specification of your lens instead of relying on the zoom to adjust your composition. The other advantage is a prime might be faster, that is have a lower f-stop and let in more light which could be advantageous if you really need it (you probably don't) or you wanted less depth of field. Anyway, a D70 w/ kit lens will by no means hold you back. Basically any SLR / DSLR is a Ferrari for someone getting started in photography because the images they make are good enough for 99% of applications and taking good pictures is 99% skill based 1% equipment based and there's a shitton to learn / practice before you can even get remotely decent. Don't fall into the bling game unless you're rich, it will make you a worse photographer overall unless your camera is defective / missing features you NEED (it probably isn't).

[dphjr]

Originally Posted by The Wind Breezes

Don't. Use that old camera, and educate yourself on everything photography.

Not trying to sound rude or dumb, but is there really a way to improve the sharpness of an image without changing either of these? I can understand changing settings for exposure, color, etc but my pictures can get rather grainy fast.

[WoohooSoCal]

I'm not an expert photographer, barely an amatuer even, but I know that perceptions of sharpness are completely different from one person to the next. Grainy-ness (is that a word) could actually be a good thing and caused by several factors.

Please post an example photo of what you think is un-sharp and or grainy, with exif data, and lets us take a look at it. Constructive criticism makes everyone a better photographer, in my opinion.

[JustAnothaM4]

If I were you, I would sell the D70 on ebay and pickup a D7200. Its another DX format DSLR and can produce amazing pictures! I will say this time and time again...GLASS GLASS GLASS! Always invest in good glass that will last for years. I would pickup a 50mm 1.4 (almost like a 70mm on an FX body) or a 35mm (like a 50mm on a FX body).

Get a really good 35mm or 50mm prime. Either Nikon or the Sigma art series.

Thank me later!

[08njSTEP]

Graininess can be cause by high ISO. Also might be jpeg based. If you shoot ISO 100 and RAW data file and still aren't satisfied then maybe a new camera is needed.

[dphjr]

Originally Posted by WoohooSoCal

I'm not an expert photographer, barely an amatuer even, but I know that perceptions of sharpness are completely different from one person to the next. Grainy-ness (is that a word) could actually be a good thing and caused by several factors.

Please post an example photo of what you think is un-sharp and or grainy, with exif data, and lets us take a look at it. Constructive criticism makes everyone a better photographer, in my opinion.

Here are a couple uneditied photos.

View post on imgur.com

Definitely not bad by any means. At least on my computer I found that zooming to 100% I could already start to see some pixelation. Also the colors look really washed out to me, which is odd since it was a bright and sunny day. For comparison here is my friend's d5100 shot using mostly the same settings as mine. The colors look much sharper and it isn't nearly as pixelated.

View post on imgur.com

[08njSTEP]

The jaggies in your pic are probably jpeg effects. I noticed it on some of my pics and after review I found the bad pics were shot in fine, went to extra fine and a whole lot better.

[dphjr]

Originally Posted by 08njSTEP

The jaggies in your pic are probably jpeg effects. I noticed it on some of my pics and after review I found the bad pics were shot in fine, went to extra fine and a whole lot better.

I actually took a couple in raw nef format, couldn't really notice a difference upon close inspection. I'd upload them but imgur doesn't seem to like that format lol

[08njSTEP]

Yup no computers like RAW. Currently working on getting a converter so I can see my RAW files. I thought jpeg because you also mentioned color saturation and that can be jpeg also.

[FRRYY]

The wind breezes pretty Much nailed it.



But also maybe it would help if you posted samples of the kind of shots you want to take?

[dphjr]

Originally Posted by RYΛN

The wind breezes pretty Much nailed it.



But also maybe it would help if you posted samples of the kind of shots you want to take?

If you take a look at my friend's picture above, you will see the difference that I'm looking for. I'm more looking to get that kind of sharpness and saturation that he has.

[WoohooSoCal]

Originally Posted by dphjr

Here are a couple uneditied photos.

View post on imgur.com

Definitely not bad by any means. At least on my computer I found that zooming to 100% I could already start to see some pixelation. Also the colors look really washed out to me, which is odd since it was a bright and sunny day. For comparison here is my friend's d5100 shot using mostly the same settings as mine. The colors look much sharper and it isn't nearly as pixelated.

View post on imgur.com

The colors WILL look washed out in a bright sunny day. You have some noise in your photos but without the exif data it is impossible to tell what your settings were when the photos were taken. Looking at the histogram, you were exposed far to the left whereas the histogram in your friend's photo shows a balanced exposure. Are your photos raw format in this link and did you resize them or anything? Processing the raw format photos with a raw editor (lightroom is one example) will bring out the tones and colors to your liking. Try shooting an hour before sunset instead of the harsh, flat light in the middle of the day. Google "golden hour".

[The Wind Breezes]

Originally Posted by dphjr

If you take a look at my friend's picture above, you will see the difference that I'm looking for. I'm more looking to get that kind of sharpness and saturation that he has.

The images you shot indicate that your camera is working perfectly. You'll need to increase your skills to get what you want from it. You won't get the things you mention straight from a camera, you'll get them from taking properly exposed images and editing them in post. Look into taking some HDRs too, as those will help properly expose more parts of the scene you're shooting. I dunno if your D70 has auto HDR or not but you can shoot them yourself by taking multiple shots with different exposures and combining in post. Post processing is super important.

Also, a lot of DSLRs have auto adjust settings to slightly post process the pic after you've taken it. Your friend might be using some settings like this but I don't recommend it. Shoot RAW+JPEG and get comfortable in photoshop. You do have photoshop, right? If not you need it 10000x more than another camera.

[dphjr]

Originally Posted by The Wind Breezes

You do have photoshop, right? If not you need it 10000x more than another camera.

Yes I do have photoshop, although this is where my main concern is as my photos become extremely pixelated quickly. How do I go about hiding the pixels without new hardware?

[dphjr]

Originally Posted by WoohooSoCal

Are your photos raw format in this link and did you resize them or anything? Processing the raw format photos with a raw editor (lightroom is one example) will bring out the tones and colors to your liking. Try shooting an hour before sunset instead of the harsh, flat light in the middle of the day. Google "golden hour".

My photos are original size (large setting on my camera) and in Jpeg fine setting. I imported a few raws into lightroom and ps but couldn't tell the difference between the fine and raw, maybe it's just me

[Pixel8ed]

At the end of the day glass is king. A lesser lens will hurt the image quality of every camera it gets attached to. Does not matter how much you spend on the body. A good lens will only help the image quality of any camera it is used on.

Bodies come and go. But glass is forever.

[Zing]

Nearly every post in this thread has merit. All input and insight offered is valuable. Chief among them is the one that said develop skills first. An old saying has had a profound effect on me over the years and that it "90% of all the cameras in the world today are better than 95% of all the photographers in the world today".

In my opinion, there are 3 key factors for achieving sharp, crisp photos:
1. Prime lens
2. Low ISO (i.e., 100)
3. Shutter speed (the fater the better) And using burst mode will help quite a bit too.

Also, and this is largely subjective, using a smaller aperture seems to lend a certain sharpness to the image. Try using f/8-f/16 instead of anything larger.

[The Wind Breezes]

Originally Posted by dphjr

Yes I do have photoshop, although this is where my main concern is as my photos become extremely pixelated quickly. How do I go about hiding the pixels without new hardware?

The D70 sensor captures 6 megapixels. That's not going to win you a dick size contest but it's plenty UNLESS.....

...you're blowing your photos up HUGE or doing insane crops. Really, unless you're maxing like 6 foot banners out of your photos or doing super small crops you DO NOT NEED more resolution. Since you're a novice you won't be making any banners. Consider photos that need a lot of crop work to be a mistake in composition. BTW, 11x17 printouts w/ 6MP look great.

You don't seem to be understanding the main point here: you're a novice, learn to use your camera and if you're even still interested in the hobby in a year (most drop it cuz photog requires a lot of patience, learning, and practice) you could get a better camera. Until then, don't even consider it or you'll just be that retard who doesn't know anything about photos but has $2k hanging around his neck. lolol Put another way, the better camera will be 100% wasted on you until you get to the point where you're at least slightly aware of how much you DON'T know.

[The Wind Breezes]

Originally Posted by Zing

Also, and this is largely subjective, using a smaller aperture seems to lend a certain sharpness to the image. Try using f/8-f/16 instead of anything larger.

Completely incorrect, smaller aperture increases depth of field but actually DECREASES the sharpness of what would have been in focus with a larger aperture. Most lenses shoot their sharpest (capture most resolution) wide open or a stop or two down, you just may not have the depth of field you need unless you get a tilt camera like a large format.

[WoohooSoCal]

Originally Posted by The Wind Breezes

Completely incorrect, smaller aperture increases depth of field but actually DECREASES the sharpness of what would have been in focus with a larger aperture. Most lenses shoot their sharpest (capture most resolution) wide open or a stop or two down, you just may not have the depth of field you need unless you get a tilt camera like a large format.

You are incorrect.

A smaller aperture does not decrease the sharpness, it increases the depth of field so that you may have more of the subject in focus.

Secondly, most lenses do not resolve the most at the largest aperture but stopped down 2, 3, maybe four stops, e.g. f4, f5.6, f8 when using a 1.4, 1.8, 2.0 lens.

Google MTF charts of a certain lens and read the description of the test and results illustrated by the chart.

Sharpness is a bourgeois concept.