Photography 101 - Q&A is welcomed.

It's about time to write a guide on photography. Please take note that some points may be taken from my PPOV. So certain inaccuracy will appear in this guide.

 

Author note: This guide is to be updated with PICTURESSSSSS and some finishing touch, do check back sometimes.

 

1) Basic

2) What camera and lens?

3) Camera settings (Nikon)

4) -To be updated-

_____________________________________________________

 

Photography is all about light. Without light, you will only get black picture.

 

But what factors affect the amount of light going into the camera?

 

Aperture

ISO

Shutter Speed

 

1) Aperture

 

Everyone knows that light goes into the camera through the lens, so in this case aperture is something that is controlled in the lens to allow the amount of light entering the camera through the lens.

 

The following pictures I used a NIKKOR AiS 50mm f/1.4 to show the aperture. Notice how the hole narrows/widens for different F-stops.

 

f/5.6

 

f/16

 

f/1.4

 

Notice how there's no aperture blade? It's because that's the WIDEST aperture the lens can go that is f/1.4. So the aperture blade don't close up when you take a picture in f/1.4, only the mirror in your camera moves. (SLT is a different technology, have to explain a bit longer in the future)

 

Now the rules of Aperture is that, bigger numbering i.e. f/16 = smaller aperture = less light going into the camera = slower shutter speed (Ignoring ISO) = shallow/none depth of field (Distance of subject from background is ignored).

 

smaller numbering i.e f/1.4 = bigger aperture = more light going into the camera = higher shutter speed (Ignoring ISO) = DEEEEEEEP depth of field a.k.a. Bokeh (Distance of subject from background is ignored)

 

Ideal aperture to shoot DD portrait is often f/5.6 ~ f/8.

The biggest aperture i.e. f/16 ~ f/32 is for landscape/architecture photography.

 

Any bigger aperture = Blurring the other details on DD other than the focused area.

Any smaller aperture = distracting background because you will get everything in focus.

 

2) ISO

 

ISO determines how sensitive your camera sensor will be towards light. The higher the ISO = Your image will be grainier. But certain pro-bodies DSLR like the D3, D3S, D4 are made to go up to ISO HI2.0 which is 25,000 ~ 64,000 without causing any problem to the image quality. I will talk about camera sensor later.

 

Depends on condition you will need to adjust your ISO in respect to it. For example: Controlled lighting will allow you to use ISO100 (Non-auto) without compromising your shutter speed and aperture.

 

3) Shutter speed

 

Shutter speed determines how fast your mirror in your camera close up (Doesn't apply to SLT apparently). So the longer the mirror closes up, the longer the time the sensor in the camera get exposed to light, hence brighter exposure.

__________________________________________________________________________

 

What camera to choose?

 

Arguably, any camera is ideal for me as long as I am able to perform manual control over the camera such as manipulating the Aperture, ISO, and Shutter Speed.

 

How many cameras you know can be spotted above?

 

People nowadays have SOOOOOOOO many choices. SLT, DSLR, m4/3, compact, SLR, MF, LF.....

 

But what is ideal? Actually all cameras is ideal to be used no matter what sensor it is using like CCD or CMOS, or how many megapixels it consists of, and etc etc etc.

 

But of course, advantages are there if you are using something the bigger the better, for example the advantage of a bigger sensor, also bigger megapixels.

 

When using film, there was a great quality in using a larger format as it required less magnification than smaller formats to reproduce any given given size image. Simply put, film grain was enlarged less and was therefore less visible in the final image. THIS HOWEVER, is still relevant for digital capture, and for exact reasons. Modern professional format lens design is based on the same requirements. Also meaning that the same advantages of larger format lens design remain. Example: Larger format lenses use smaller apertures to produce the same depth of field as compared to smaller formats, you can get optimum quality at such settings much more often. Basically, larger format enables easier design of extremely high quality lenses.

 

What matter most is the lens. Why there are cheap lens, and expensive lens? In this case I give a point as a Hasselblad user. One of these lens cost minimum 5 grands! Why is it so expensive?

 

HC 80mm, HC 50mm

 

WARNING: TECHNICAL TALK AHEAD

 

Why are lens expensive?

 

Through out the years Hasselblad has produced the best medium format cameras in the world by applying meticulous attention to detail from the start to the end covering all aspects of design and production. When Hasselblad design the HD lenses, they had been using all the knowledge they know when they work with the world's top lens manufacturer such as Carl Zeiss, Fuji, Kodak, Rodenstock and Schneider to produce such top notch lens that is the best of this world. These lenses have been engineered to ensure optimal performance and image quality no matter shooting digital for film. These lenses have very accurate electronic shutter mechanisms that deliver sync flash at all speeds and a multi-coating treatment that results in efficient stray light elimination. Integrating focus driven motor, ability to access manual focusing without switching between manual and autofocus, and the most important thing of all these lenses are made from metal.

 

Now to compare lenses, it's useless to compare between lenses if the measurement isn't the same type. It's like comparing apples with oranges. In this case I will simplify my point with MTF which determines image quality of any lens.

 

Several subjective aspects had been taken into account such as the bokeh. Subjective aspects are a matter of personal taste, but objective measurements are not, therefore in this case I will present you image quality through MTF diagram.

 

That's what the basic is to compare lenses when you disregard all the practical and mechanical advantages and aspects of lenses, and the proof comes down to the technical data.

 

Comparing larger format lenses with Full Frame lenses demands a common measurement system, and that is MTF curve. This measurement applied according to established laws of physics that is taken into account the reality of a given situation. Still not always the way such measurements are carried out and until there is a universal agreement regarding standard and praxis. Such MTF comparisons still can be confusing and extremely misleading.

________________________________________________________________

 

It just simply means, better MTF, better lens quality.

 

So choose the best lens you can buy!

 

Camera wise I would just suggest a simple Sony NEX will do. The advantages of Sony NEX is because of the sensor that is found in it. A DSLR CMOS sensor.

 

LENS TOO EXPENSIVE?

 

No big deal. Always buy an adapter and you are good to go with A-mount (Sony Alpha DSLR Lens mount) or even F-mount (Nikon DSLR Lens mount). AF supported. This is considered an easy way because the camera is lightweight.

 

I would highly recommend Nikon DSLR because of the flexibility of the lens supporting system. Nikon cares about their camera and often keep their value intact for more than a year because Nikon always has the same lens mounting for it's camera. Along all these decades Nikon has been using the same mounting (F-Mount) for the camera. Also unlike Canon which simply releases camera on like very 6 months basis, Nikon always have their camera prepared for future proofing, so it don't get outdated so easily.

 

Sony Alpha DSLR camera is also one good way because of the Carl Zeiss lens supports. Also Minolta because Sony bought off their Imaging Department. Therefore Sony's quality has been improving through out the years for their imaging supports. They have the best image processor compared to Canon and Nikon which produce a very nice colour. Also Sony provides sensor for Nikon as well.

 

Differences between SLR and SLT cameras:

 

There are a fair few differences in both form and function between SLR and SLT cameras. The aim of this post is to explain the differences. To explain this, one must look at how light travels within the camera, the effects of the mirror on this light path, and the effects on both the viewfinder and auto-focus mechanisms within the camera.

 

SLR:

First up, we have the SLR, which stands for "Single Lens, Reflex Mirror" camera. The Reflex Mirror moniker refers to the movement of the mirror when shooting images or video. The below diagram shows the light path within a traditional SLR before shooting an image.

 

 

With the mirror in the down position, the user is able to look into the viewfinder in order to see through the lens (usually at less than a 100% view, except on only the most expensive models, as a 100% optical viewfinder is incredibly expensive to manufacture and calibrate), and the Phase Detection Auto-Focus Sensor (from here on referred to as the PDAF sensor) is able to function. Once the shutter button is pressed, the "Reflex Mirror" moves up out of the light path, completely blacking out not only the viewfinder, but also removing light from the PDAF sensor. This is portrayed in the following image.

 

 

Once the mirror is up out of the light path, the shutter actuates and the image is recorded, followed by the mirror returning to the down position. Some SLR models have a "Live View" mode which allows the user to see what the sensor sees on the camera's back LCD panel. In order to utilize this function however, the mirror must be locked into the up position, preventing the camera from utilizing the PDAF sensor. If the camera has the capability, it will revert to an on-sensor "Contrast Detection Auto-Focus" sensor (further referred to as CDAF sensor), which is considered by most to be inferior to the PDAF sensor due to focusing speed and other issues which I will explain at the end of this post.

 

Normally, the loss of PDAF in an SLR while shooting still photos or single shots is a non-issue. It only becomes an issue when rapidly shooting a fast moving target as neither focus sensor has time to obtain a lock during the extremely short periods in which either sensor has light fall upon it. This issue becomes far more prominent during video shooting, where the camera is only able to use the CDAF sensor, which results in "focus seeking" being recorded in the video. Since video is not important for DD photography, I will stop there.

 

SLT:

"Single Lens, Translucent Mirror" refers to a camera technology currently in use by Sony in which the mirror in the camera is semi-transparent, allowing light to constantly fall onto both the image sensor and the PDAF sensor without moving the mirror. The only true "disadvantage" of this is an approximate 1/3 f/stop of light loss at the image sensor, which is negligible to anyone other than internet trolls, and is already taken into account by the sensor when metering the image, which means that the user doesn't notice it. When the shutter button is pressed, the shutter actuates and the image is recorded, while the mirror never moves. The below image illustrates the light path within the SLT camera.

 

 

The primary advantage of this system is the true "Full Time PDAF", in that the camera always has use of the PDAF sensor, never having to revert to an inferior CDAF sensor. This also means that the camera does not have a traditional pentaprism optical viewfinder (some SLR purists and internet trolls view this as a disadvantage, but in reality it is far from it). The viewfinder instead being a "Live Viewfinder" which allows the shooter the option of a full 100% view of what the image sensor sees and is doing (albeit at a lower resolution) which allows for a close to true "What You See Is What You Get" picture taking experience.

 

When rapidly shooting pictures of fast moving targets, or when shooting video, the SLT design retains the use of the PDAF sensor, allowing for far more usable in-focus shots and vastly reduced "focus seeking" in the video.

 

 

Phase Detection vs. Contrast Detection Auto-Focus Systems:

 

A simple explanation for the difference between how these sensors obtain a focus lock would be to refer to their respective methods as PDAF being a "3D" and the CDAF being a "2D" sensor.

 

A PDAF sensor uses light from the lens that is reflected by the mirror onto the AF sensor. When the refracted light beams coming in from the lens meet, the focus sensor "locks" and the image is in focus. Based on how the refracted light beams fall onto the PDAF sensor, it is able to determine the shortest movement of the lens' focus mechanism required to achieve an accurate lock, and then moves the lens only as much as required in order to focus.

 

A CDAF sensor on the other hand moves the lens' focus mechanism through its full focal range, seeking the "point of sharpest contrast", then moves the lens back to that point in the focal range. Because of the amount of movement involved in finding focus, CDAF is often unable to focus on somewhat fast moving objects, even if the moving object is kept in the same spot in frame. This is the reason CDAF is considered to be inferior to PDAF for everything outside of still shooting, even though PDAF is still faster even in this situation, and also considered vastly inferior for sports photography or videography.

 

Hopefully this post is helpful and detailed enough.

 

 

-To be updated-

 

Forummers can post questions below.

Edited June 23, 2012 by Guest

Agreed that this should be moved to the photography section, but thanks for this. I've skimmed through it for now before work, and I'll read it in more detail later. Once my camera actually arrives, I'm sure I'll have lots of questions, too!

Agreed that this should be moved to the photography section, but thanks for this. I've skimmed through it for now before work, and I'll read it in more detail later. Once my camera actually arrives, I'm sure I'll have lots of questions, too!

Orz I just realized I was in the General Discussion after I posted this.

 

Feel free to ask! For now I need to prepare pictures

Awesome thread setup.

 

Mind if I elaborate on the SLT to DSLR shutter comparison? It may take me a bit to find pictures in order to explain it though.

Awesome thread setup.

 

Mind if I elaborate on the SLT to DSLR shutter comparison? It may take me a bit to find pictures in order to explain it though.

 

Sure sure go ahead. I will compile it into my thread.

huuusss... just made this thread to tell everyone you have a Hasselblad

 

harharhar jk~

huuusss... just made this thread to tell everyone you have a Hasselblad

 

harharhar jk~

 

wut

 

Never know this thread gives such strong impression

My camera arrived!

 

 

But it seems so complicated . . .

 

EVERY camera can be reduced to the basic parts and controls used fifty years ago and earlier by our grandparents.

Light-meter, aperture, shutter, distance scale and ISO speed. More or less

 

(and white balance, but long time ago it was spectral sensitivity and the use of filters)

 

Don't give up

My camera arrived!

 

 

But it seems so complicated . . .

 

Give me more time to update information on Nikon.

These lenses have very accurate electronic shutter mechanisms that deliver sync flash at all speeds and a multi-coating treatment that results in efficient stray light elimination. Integrating focus driven motor, ability to access manual focusing without switching between manual and autofocus, and the most important thing of all these lenses are made from metal.

 

I think this is a great description of mechanically the difference between cheap and expensive lenses, but could you explain how those differences affect the quality of one's photographs? What sort of things would be noticeable in DD photography?

These lenses have very accurate electronic shutter mechanisms that deliver sync flash at all speeds and a multi-coating treatment that results in efficient stray light elimination. Integrating focus driven motor, ability to access manual focusing without switching between manual and autofocus, and the most important thing of all these lenses are made from metal.

 

I think this is a great description of mechanically the difference between cheap and expensive lenses, but could you explain how those differences affect the quality of one's photographs? What sort of things would be noticeable in DD photography?

Most of the descriptions above doesn't affect image quality, but "Multi-coating treatment" does affect, giving less distortion to the image, and deliver sharper image from edge to edge compare to other lens. Overall we are speaking about "Sharpness" of a lens. These sharpness affect the LPM (Lines per Mm) performance, delivering more lines, which means less blurrish, sharper image to the user.

These lenses have very accurate electronic shutter mechanisms that deliver sync flash at all speeds and a multi-coating treatment that results in efficient stray light elimination. Integrating focus driven motor, ability to access manual focusing without switching between manual and autofocus, and the most important thing of all these lenses are made from metal.

 

I think this is a great description of mechanically the difference between cheap and expensive lenses, but could you explain how those differences affect the quality of one's photographs? What sort of things would be noticeable in DD photography?

Most of the descriptions above doesn't affect image quality, but "Multi-coating treatment" does affect, giving less distortion to the image, and deliver sharper image from edge to edge compare to other lens. Overall we are speaking about "Sharpness" of a lens. These sharpness affect the LPM (Lines per Mm) performance, delivering more lines, which means less blurrish, sharper image to the user.

 

Add to this that higher quality lenses also tend to have higher quality glass, on top of the aforementioned coatings, all adding up to finer detail rendition.

 

Lens coatings can also directly have an effect on color rendition as well. Anyone familiar with the phenomenon referred to as the "Legendary Minolta Colors" is familiar with how a lens' coatings effect color reproduction. No matter how good the color reproduction ability of a camera's sensor or film is, the coatings on the lens providing that color to the sensor can make or break the image.

 

As AntElitist can attest, the combination of a sensor with amazing color rendition (Kodak CCD found in Hasselblad cameras) with a high quality lens with great coatings and glass (Hasselblad glass), works together to produce images of both clean, sharp detail and color rendition. Sony sensors combined with Zeiss glass produce amazing color as well.

 

This would also be part of the explanation behind the rendition of color in Nikon cameras... Sony sensors produce amazing color, yet the Nikon lens coatings (and I would venture to guess that their image processors and low pass filters add into this) prevent the Nikon cameras from producing colors on par with their Sony camera counterparts that are using the same sensors.

Add to this that higher quality lenses also tend to have higher quality glass, on top of the aforementioned coatings, all adding up to finer detail rendition.

 

Lens coatings can also directly have an effect on color rendition as well. Anyone familiar with the phenomenon referred to as the "Legendary Minolta Colors" is familiar with how a lens' coatings effect color reproduction. No matter how good the color reproduction ability of a camera's sensor or film is, the coatings on the lens providing that color to the sensor can make or break the image.

 

As AntElitist can attest, the combination of a sensor with amazing color rendition (Kodak CCD found in Hasselblad cameras) with a high quality lens with great coatings and glass (Hasselblad glass), works together to produce images of both clean, sharp detail and color rendition. Sony sensors combined with Zeiss glass produce amazing color as well.

 

This would also be part of the explanation behind the rendition of color in Nikon cameras... Sony sensors produce amazing color, yet the Nikon lens coatings (and I would venture to guess that their image processors and low pass filters add into this) prevent the Nikon cameras from producing colors on par with their Sony camera counterparts that are using the same sensors.

^ What he said.

 

Also, Nikon is actually terrible in producing nice colours I don't know why But nothing Lightroom/Photoshop can't solve.

 

I personally love Carl Zeiss lens, I even want to find the Bayonet mount CZ lenses for my Hassy, but boy, it's hell expensive.

Differences between SLR and SLT cameras:

 

There are a fair few differences in both form and function between SLR and SLT cameras. The aim of this post is to explain the differences. To explain this, one must look at how light travels within the camera, the effects of the mirror on this light path, and the effects on both the viewfinder and auto-focus mechanisms within the camera.

 

SLR:

First up, we have the SLR, which stands for "Single Lens, Reflex Mirror" camera. The Reflex Mirror moniker refers to the movement of the mirror when shooting images or video. The below diagram shows the light path within a traditional SLR before shooting an image.

 

 

With the mirror in the down position, the user is able to look into the viewfinder in order to see through the lens (usually at less than a 100% view, except on only the most expensive models, as a 100% optical viewfinder is incredibly expensive to manufacture and calibrate), and the Phase Detection Auto-Focus Sensor (from here on referred to as the PDAF sensor) is able to function. Once the shutter button is pressed, the "Reflex Mirror" moves up out of the light path, completely blacking out not only the viewfinder, but also removing light from the PDAF sensor. This is portrayed in the following image.

 

 

Once the mirror is up out of the light path, the shutter actuates and the image is recorded, followed by the mirror returning to the down position. Some SLR models have a "Live View" mode which allows the user to see what the sensor sees on the camera's back LCD panel. In order to utilize this function however, the mirror must be locked into the up position, preventing the camera from utilizing the PDAF sensor. If the camera has the capability, it will revert to an on-sensor "Contrast Detection Auto-Focus" sensor (further referred to as CDAF sensor), which is considered by most to be inferior to the PDAF sensor due to focusing speed and other issues which I will explain at the end of this post.

 

Normally, the loss of PDAF in an SLR while shooting still photos or single shots is a non-issue. It only becomes an issue when rapidly shooting a fast moving target as neither focus sensor has time to obtain a lock during the extremely short periods in which either sensor has light fall upon it. This issue becomes far more prominent during video shooting, where the camera is only able to use the CDAF sensor, which results in "focus seeking" being recorded in the video. Since video is not important for DD photography, I will stop there.

 

SLT:

"Single Lens, Translucent Mirror" refers to a camera technology currently in use by Sony in which the mirror in the camera is semi-transparent, allowing light to constantly fall onto both the image sensor and the PDAF sensor without moving the mirror. The only true "disadvantage" of this is an approximate 1/3 f/stop of light loss at the image sensor, which is negligible to anyone other than internet trolls, and is already taken into account by the sensor when metering the image, which means that the user doesn't notice it. When the shutter button is pressed, the shutter actuates and the image is recorded, while the mirror never moves. The below image illustrates the light path within the SLT camera.

 

 

The primary advantage of this system is the true "Full Time PDAF", in that the camera always has use of the PDAF sensor, never having to revert to an inferior CDAF sensor. This also means that the camera does not have a traditional pentaprism optical viewfinder (some SLR purists and internet trolls view this as a disadvantage, but in reality it is far from it). The viewfinder instead being a "Live Viewfinder" which allows the shooter the option of a full 100% view of what the image sensor sees and is doing (albeit at a lower resolution) which allows for a close to true "What You See Is What You Get" picture taking experience.

 

When rapidly shooting pictures of fast moving targets, or when shooting video, the SLT design retains the use of the PDAF sensor, allowing for far more usable in-focus shots and vastly reduced "focus seeking" in the video.

 

 

Phase Detection vs. Contrast Detection Auto-Focus Systems:

 

A simple explanation for the difference between how these sensors obtain a focus lock would be to refer to their respective methods as PDAF being a "3D" and the CDAF being a "2D" sensor.

 

A PDAF sensor uses light from the lens that is reflected by the mirror onto the AF sensor. When the refracted light beams coming in from the lens meet, the focus sensor "locks" and the image is in focus. Based on how the refracted light beams fall onto the PDAF sensor, it is able to determine the shortest movement of the lens' focus mechanism required to achieve an accurate lock, and then moves the lens only as much as required in order to focus.

 

A CDAF sensor on the other hand moves the lens' focus mechanism through its full focal range, seeking the "point of sharpest contrast", then moves the lens back to that point in the focal range. Because of the amount of movement involved in finding focus, CDAF is often unable to focus on somewhat fast moving objects, even if the moving object is kept in the same spot in frame. This is the reason CDAF is considered to be inferior to PDAF for everything outside of still shooting, even though PDAF is still faster even in this situation, and also considered vastly inferior for sports photography or videography.

 

Hopefully this post is helpful and detailed enough.

^Thanks a lot Copied to first post

Okay, here's a question: can you use vintage lenses on the newer DSLRs? Do they have to be the same brand? My dad brought his Minolta SLR up this weekend for me to see how it worked. The lens he has is amazing, but I imagine that it would't work on a DSLR or on a Nikon. It was nice to see the vintage camera (the one I remember taking all the pictures of me from my childhood!) and accessories. That Minolta went up to ISO of 6400!

Okay, here's a question: can you use vintage lenses on the newer DSLRs? Do they have to be the same brand? My dad brought his Minolta SLR up this weekend for me to see how it worked. The lens he has is amazing, but I imagine that it would't work on a DSLR or on a Nikon. It was nice to see the vintage camera (the one I remember taking all the pictures of me from my childhood!) and accessories. That Minolta went up to ISO of 6400!

You need to use an adaptor haha

 

Unless it's a NIKKOR (Nikon) lens, no matter how old it is, still can be used

Depending on when that Minolta and its lens were made, it may work on a modern Sony DSLT without an adapter.

Also, Nikon is actually terrible in producing nice colours I don't know why But nothing Lightroom/Photoshop can't solve.

 

not sure if you have a nikon camera or not, but have you taken a chance to go in and look at your lighting and color settings?

 

Nikon does tend to shoot a bit cooler (bluer) while canon a bit warmer (redder) but going into the color and lighting settings can really help with this

 

I haven't messed with it too much, I moved my saturation around on my camera, but my white balance is still auto.

 

Shooting is RAW format is a life saver with this though! You're offered really simple RAW editing tools for quick fixes to your colors and it looks natural after it's done! so like you were saying - Two slider nudges and my colors are fixed!

Also, Nikon is actually terrible in producing nice colours I don't know why But nothing Lightroom/Photoshop can't solve.

 

not sure if you have a nikon camera or not, but have you taken a chance to go in and look at your lighting and color settings?

 

Nikon does tend to shoot a bit cooler (bluer) while canon a bit warmer (redder) but going into the color and lighting settings can really help with this

 

I haven't messed with it too much, I moved my saturation around on my camera, but my white balance is still auto.

 

Shooting is RAW format is a life saver with this though! You're offered really simple RAW editing tools for quick fixes to your colors and it looks natural after it's done! so like you were saying - Two slider nudges and my colors are fixed!

I started off with D70, then D200, then finally D3. (And I used D90 and D7000 before!) And I had reviewed all my settings. Remember if you ask your camera to shoot in any weird adjustment settings built into the camera, you might lose details which is unwanted. Hence I prefer to shoot within my own preferences and stock adjustment like No D-lighting, normal mode instead of Vivid and PP in my computer later. The most important colour to note is the colour RED. Do not underestimate the colour Red. And yes. You are right. Nikon is cooler, canon is warmer.

 

And yes also, RAW is for masterraces indeed. Can't live without Raw.

and people try to tell me that RAW is just a waste of memory card space. LUL.

and people try to tell me that RAW is just a waste of memory card space. LUL.

Memory card is very cheap nowadays.

and people try to tell me that RAW is just a waste of memory card space. LUL.

Memory card is very cheap nowadays.

 

It's moreso that their camera has one or two slots and they have a choice between however many billion JPG photos or 1K RAW photos. They'd rather have their billion jpg, because they don't understand how to properly abuse the editing abilities of RAW.

 

>_> just get in the habit of moving your files to an external when you go to process them - poof, memory card problem solved.

and people try to tell me that RAW is just a waste of memory card space. LUL.

Memory card is very cheap nowadays.

 

It's moreso that their camera has one or two slots and they have a choice between however many billion JPG photos or 1K RAW photos. They'd rather have their billion jpg, because they don't understand how to properly abuse the editing abilities of RAW.

 

>_> just get in the habit of moving your files to an external when you go to process them - poof, memory card problem solved.

Yeap. That's true. I have a lot of memory cards to go. I prefer to shoot in less quantity but more quality