lens help v.imanoob

gino85

recently bought a fujifilm finepix s5800 and im just wondering is there any lenses out there to buy or should i just not bother with them at all, will be amuture stuff that ill be taking pictures off

ive never owned a previous camera before this one so and hints or tips would be helpfull with this camera

rymus

Only lenses you'd be buying for that camera are the wide or tele adaptors... Wouldnt bother tbh. Use and get comfortable with what you've got at the moment before spending more money.

Spend a few quid on a couple of books to get you started maybe

gino85

is there any lenes i can get to reduce the pale look to pics like this.

i took it last sunday and i like the look of it except for the fact its abit pale and dull looking

Ballyman

A lens won't fix this. Get yourself "Understanding Exposure" book.

AnimalRights

Just give it to him for jaysus sake!

duffman85

Eh...

How do I say this?

Sorry OP:(, but that's a fixed lens camera you have there. You can't change lenses on it.

AnimalRights

OP don't take a photograph into the sun.
Thats why the washed out look.

Thirdfox

Indirect flare reduces overall contrast - a lens hood (or your hand) may help.

Picasa 3 is out - if you don't want to buy PS2-4, it has some basic tools to touch up your images too.

gino85

tnx for the replies and tips, i thought i might be able to buy some sort of lens because its threaded next to the main lens

ill have to pick up some litature on the subject and read about it

charybdis

If you'll forgive the liberties I took with regard to manipulating your photgraph:

The image is overexposed.

gino85 wrote: »

Look at the histogram for your image:





The large spike of data on the right hand side means there is a lot of information in the image that is very bright (most likely the blown-out sky).

The hump of data in the middle represents most of the information in the image, this is normal.

The left hand side, however, is devoid of any information, this means no part of the image is considered dark or black.




When Photoshop's "Auto Levels" feature is applied to the image the result is this:





and the resultant image's histogram is this:





Notice how the graph is now spread more evenly across the breadth of the histogram. The information gathered by the sensor is now being used across all brightnesses, giving you a wider range of contrast.




Auto Levels is a quick and dirty fix for this and more extensive play with levels and curves may improve it further but here's only so much that can be recovered in post processing. Any data that would potentially exist beyond the left or right hand side of the histogram is recorded as black or white, respectively. For example: the spike on the right hand side seems to extend beyond the boundaries of the histogram, if you were to reduce your exposure you'd most likely see that data moving to the left of the histogram and becoming useful, this would probably cause much of the foreground to darken and give the sky more detail.

Histograms are useful tools for checking you have exposed correctly. As a rule of thumb: histograms should have bell shaped graphs, indicating the majority of recorded information is present in the midtones and only a small portion present in the very dark or very bright areas. Unfortunately this is not always possible due to the limited dynamic range of digital cameras and you will often have to make creative choices about what data to sacrifice, e.g.: in your photograph, you probably would rather the sky was blown-out and detail-less rather than the foreground be too dark.

According to this your camera can show you histograms of images you've taken. I suggest you review these to tell if your image has been correctly exposed and re-take as necessary.

Histograms are an incredibly useful tool for learning and thinking about exposure and knowledge of one will most likely preclude the other. I suggest you learn about both.

gino85

charybdis wrote: »

If you'll forgive the liberties I took with regard to manipulating your photgraph:

The image is overexposed.
.......

that explains alot to me thank you, and that little fix you done to the pic made it look 10 times better in my opinion lol

p.s. i removed most of what you said to shorten the quote lol

Thirdfox

Picasa can do this for free by the way

gino85

Thirdfox wrote: »

Picasa can do this for free by the way

downloading now, been up for the last 26 hours so i wont really be able to mess around with it untill tomorrow but ill give it a try now with a couple of pics to see how they turn out

just using the im feeling lucky option on it has made my pics alot better looking lol

gino85

me messing about with that program

original:



redone image: