Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
What Aperture should you use?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 июн 2014
- It is not as simple as 'wide open for portraits' and closed down for landscapes' - give it some thought and make sure you get the best results.
Get Your Gear Out!
Workshops: mattgranger.com...
Freaking brilliant. I’ve been an amateur for so many years and this never really clicked for me. Mostly because I’m not a landscape photographer. Thank you so much Matt for really increasing the quality of my photos just from this. Love your videos. New subscriber!
Great instruction on basics that I keep forgetting! I'm sure I'm not alone. Good job , thanks.
great to hear, thanks Bill
The sweet spot for most lenses for landscapes is F5.6 - at this point, the lens is mostly at its sharpest point and has the least amount of vignetting nor diffraction. Shooting landscapes with F1.4 is definitely not recommended.
This surely depends on the focal length of the lens? Longer lenses you can shoot more open and shorter ones the aperture can be smaller.
Am I the only one fixated on the wifi antenna on his forehead?
Can't unsee. Couldn't even watch the video. Fucking dead.
Why would you point this out... Now I'll never be able to watch the rest of his videos. You're a monster lol.
bro! LOL
I was just going to say that lol
hahaha, i just noticed it
Every photography tutorial should include this lesson. Very, very useful. Thank you.
Take your tripod when shooting landscapes anyway ...you can always use it as a walking stick or to fight off wild animals!
Good idea
or pervert...if you a girl : )
Genius!
@@arturwachowski6827 thanks dude,now i have weekend plans
@@mejbishow5297 lol
why shoot landscape @ F/1.4 ? in landscape shooting, we need corner to corner sharpness and contrast picture. They say F8 to F16 is good F number for landscape shooter. Portrait is around F4 to F5.6. And F/1.4 to F/2.8 when you have busy background and you need to blow it away
+David Duong I'd also like to know the answer to this
+David Duong More light for handheld shots probably? You don't always have the time or energy to carry around a tripod. If he's using the high-res 800 series from Nikon, I'd imagine he'd be keeping the shutter speed and ISO as low as possible in order to minimize blurring and noise, in which case he'd need to compensate by using f/1.4 or f/2.8. Even through RUclips, the landscape that he took at f/1.4 looked extremely clean, perhaps not as sharp as with f/4 and above (which I like better) but still bloody sharp.
Phan Anh Nguyen 1/100 is more enough to shoot landscape handheld. Agree this 1.4 picture is clean and sharp, but its require a very good len
+David Duong Like he said in the video, it is all a matter of your own gear and what you're using. If you don't have the great lenses that just means you will be more likely to have to use a tripod for the longer exposure
When I first got my 50mm 1.8 I went overboard. Went to an event and shot everything as wide as could because ERMAHGAWD I LOVE BOKEH! Got home, booted up lightroom and like 90% of the photos were unusable due to bad focus. *facepalm*
I got into cameras with mirorless, the OM-D E-M5, and some people look down on m4/3 because you get twice as wide depth of field for the same aperture (i.e., if you shoot at 1.8 the DOF is like 3.6 on a fullframe). But even despite that, on a 45mm f1.8 I made that mistake all the time--I shot a whole lot of images with not enough in focus. Took me a lot of practice to realize when I needed to pull out the f1.8 and when a higher number was more appropriate.
Unfortunately I got 50 mm 1.8/D and its manual focus on D5600, now I am dissatisfied as lot of struggle is done on focussing and not getting advantage of autofocus.
@@drdcjoshi my favorite technique is to open live view, zoom in 10x, try to get as good focus as I can get, then spray and praying, while moving the focus ring very lightly
Made this mistake
I bought a 50mm f/1.2gm and 100% of photos from my first shoot were more unusable than yours.
Ah finally, this makes sense. A lot of explanations of aperture seem to miss this and it can get confusing for a beginner very quickly when we try it out.
I once messed a series of portraits of my Dobermann because I shot at f2.8 with a 200mm lens. His eyes where in focus but his nose. ( Its about 10cm from a Dobermann's nose to the eyes.) i think I should have used at least f5.6 or maybe f8 to get a good result! Thank you for the video!
Once again, I come across one of your older videos, and in just over 4 minutes, you dispel decades of what we "thought we knew!" Thank you for sharing your vast experience and equally vast wisdom!
Artistically it's also good to consider just how much detail you want in your background. When shooting environmental portraiture for example, it's important to give context, but without distracting from the main subject. So some blur is good, but totally blown out is not. If your camera has an aperture preview button, it's great for the purpose of dialing-in the desired blur quickly (on my a99, can be done through the EVF).
Brilliant! Thanks for that. I was beginning to think that one of my grandson's eyes was naturally blurry. This saves me on doctor's fees and improves my photography.
Very useful reminder. I have ruined many a head and shoulders or face portrait for having too wide an aperture in use. Where possible, I try to have the background a long way distant and this deals with the issue of rendering it nicely softened.
Great advice! I have learned that tip as well.
I shoot landscape, most of the time i go for f/8 - f/11 but one time, i was shooting moving waves, i didnt have an ND filter on, just a polarizing filter and because i wanted to show movements, i had to go to f/22 with the lowest ISO possible to get a shutter speed slow enough to get the photo i wanted, it was around sunset and well, the photos turned out quite well, no all of them but i was happy with the result, but yeah usually, i just go with f8 or f/11
At f/22 you get diffraction. Try multiple shorter exposures and then "mean stack" then in Photoshop to get the same effect while being sharp
I take into account the sweet spot on my lens- rarely do I use the fastest aperture on my lens , especially not the kit lens that came with my camera - also , bracketing your exposures gives you ( exposure )options , although it does eat up room on the memory card .
Using the depth of field preview button ( what's that ?!!!) , will help you gauge what is in , or out of focus
Thank you Matt for the great video! This made me rethink how I compose my photos whenever I look through the view finder. Before, I would always turn the Aperture as large as possible. But now, I will definitely think about what I want in focus and what I want blurred out. Thank you for the time and effort you put into making this video!
You could always press the depth of field preview button or use live view to check.
Definitely agree that we stop down too much but sometimes we're just pushing for longer exposures and it's harder to get that sweet 2min exposure during golden hour at 1.4 without some heavy nd
short video and to the point, thanks Matt !!
I am starting to experiment with shooting stopped down a little (F4) for portraits instead of 1.4
great advice I never considered shooting more open for landscapes I'm usually between f8 and f16 and always carrying a tripod with me!
does a tripod help you get good shots cant you bump the iso to get a higher shutter speed with say f11 and go handheld with image stabilization at iso 100
I don`t need aperture. Aperture needs me.
mybluebelly ahh I see you are Chuck Norris or a soviet Russian
U made my day..
I have 18-55 and 50mm f/1.8. When taking landscape, I usually think using the kit lens is better option because first it has wide angle at 18 to 24mm and second I dont need the wide aperture of my 50mm lens. Third, I don't need more light like indoor situations because I've got the natural light doors, which means I'm okay with small aperture. I can get somewhere between f/3.5 to f/5.6 between 18-24mm, so I think I can get away with the kit lens in landscape/nature shoots.
My question is, am I missing something? Should I still take the 50mm glass, lower the aperture to f/5.6 instead of using the kit lens at the same aperture? I guess my question actually is does it make a difference (except for composition unless I use 50mm focal length in both) if I use the same aperture and shutter speed on both lenses?
Well that has to do with the inherent optical qualities of the lenses. A general rule is that primes are sharper than zooms at the same aperture. That said, many companies do produce high-performance zooms that rival or better the performances of the primes at their respective focal lengths (Nikon/Canon 24-70, etc.) Shooting the landscapes with the kit lens at f/3.5 is undesirable because that's the fastest the lens will go, and generally lenses perform worst at their widest apertures. Stopping down not only yields more DoF, which, as Matt suggested, may not matter, but it also gives you greater sharpness. IMO the kit lens is perfectly capable for some great landscapes when stopped down. As for the 50, if you can properly compose a landscape shot at 80mm equivalent (since you probably have a crop-sensored camera), I don't see why you shouldn't use it.
It really all depends on the lens, so, as Matt says, get your gear out and just find out.
I've been shooting landscapes with my Canon kit lens for years now. And quite often I just keep it wide open - I've tested it a few times and found the difference in sharpness to be quite negligible for my purposes, really. Never really had any real problems with sharpness. Could the photos be sharper? Sure. But I'd need a different lens for that, which I don't have. As far as my kit lens is concerned, stopping it down doesn't really change much. So I only step it down when I have lots of light to guarantee a fast enough exposure for what I'm trying to achieve - which doesn't happen all that often, since I shoot a large portion of my landscape shots around dawn and/or dusk, meaning I'm usually thankful for any light I can get to shorten my exposure to still be able to handhold as much as possible. And even if I step it down, I hardly ever go over f/8 (unless, again, it's for creative purposes) - there's really no point as far as sharpness is concerned. And I almost never go over f/11 - diffraction creeps in at that point and the sharpness actually starts to decline from there. Not dramatically (so I still go there if I really need to and feel like it's worth it), but it can be noticable.
But that's my gear. Your gear can (and most likely will, since you seem to shoot Nikon) be different. So just take your camera, go and find out what's best for you :)
Thanks guys!
I tend to shoot my landscapes no further stopped down than f8. Generally this gives me plenty of depth of field t 17mm and I don't run into the diffraction issues presents when stopping the lens down too far.
As for portraits, that comes down to an artistic decision of what I actually want in the shot.
Great video. This is something I've tried to explain to people several times about shooting some landscape I've shot at f/2.8. Definitely "get your gear out" and learn the ins and outs of focal length and focus distance. You can't learn it in a video or with an app. It takes years of working behind the camera.
Is 2.8 quite good for landscape? I want overall sharpness in the landscape pic... I am a bit confused whether wide aperture will discriminate elements within composition (i.e. focus too much on certain elements while blurring others)
Its always pleasing when somebody explains things in an interesting and clear way, talking about experience-related facts. These are the most educational ones. Congrats, very nice speech.
Yesss, needed this. Tryna learn about all this, just learnt about Aperture and it seemed there was only point in using the extremes but I knew I probably shouldnt be. Thanks!
You should also mention diffraction.
Another great video!! This is why I never understand why people go gaga for the widest apertures. Yes, I understand the camera performs better stepped down and if you are already starting at a real wide aperture (it will be sharper at a wider aperture than a different lens - let's say f4 compared to f2.8) and yes, I know it allows more light in the camera, but really, whats the point if you are taking pictures and the person is 10 feet away? As you said, I find that most of my shots are either f4, 5.6 or 8, depending on the subject.
Thank you so much Matt. You have just declutterred all our minds from all these mystified information we’ve been getting that we barely can seem to process.
So true ! Dof doesn't only depend on the f-number but also the distance to the subject and the focal length
Good points Matt....I have my Sigma ART 50mm 1.4 and usually like shooting at f/2.0-f/2.8 depending on the distance and situation...
gosh Matt you're really really know your stuff. your understanding of the details and art and Science of photography is amazing to me. thank you so much for the contribution you make to all of us beginners and I'm sure seasoned professionals as well keep doing what you do inspires me to get better every time
I use f/1.4 for all my landscapes. Cinematic af.
I use auto focus. Not sure how this came up for me it is so beyond my scope let alone my camera. I don't even remember the last time I had it out but I'm sure it was cinematic af tho.
heiðinn this just made me laugh. Thanks.
heiðinn lol that's hilarious
+John Wynne +J'zargo -- I'm glad I could put a smile on your faces, now if only I could find that camera to take a picture to remember the moment by.
how to change aperture ? and what u guys use for landscapes ? P ? em im new
My last analogue SLR had an “A-DEP” setting. You would first focus on the nearest part of the subject and press the trigger, then focus on the farthest part of the subject and press the trigger, then compose the image and press the trigger a third time, and only then a picture would actually be taken, and the camera would have selected an aperture that would give you the right depth of field (if possible - otherwise you'd get a warning). Not something I used often, but sometimes quite practical.
Matt, one missing thing in this issue is, to be given equal weightage, which is the focal length of the LENS.
This ultimately guides the sharpness. 24 mm V 200 mm lens @ f4 will work differently for faraway objects with equal sharpness. A longer focal length needs a higher STOP number.
Rest it is good info.
Nice video Matt. Thanks for taking your time to help us that are learning on the run about our cameras and photography. Its people like you that have helped me along the way the last 5 years or so to get where I am today. I have always thought that to get the photos completely in focus I needed to use the Highest F/Stop possible and I had a gent telling me that that's not always the case. So I am on a mission to see where my lens are at their best.Thanks again, great video and I am now a subscriber as well.Dave
this will actually be very helpful for my portraits thanks a lot!
Excellent instruction. That made a lot of sense.
I'm new to photography (for an old guy) so this kind of intro to the basics is right on target. THX.
03:56 That is a very good tips their "take the time to know your gear". Thanks
Making sure, wouldn't stopping down the aperture result in softer images? That's what diffraction is, correct?
Hi,
Something that the video does not talk about is diffraction limit. The point of more resolution is not necessary when the lens is fully closed.
So you may be loosing resolution to gain nothing (landscape).
Matt have other video were he mention the difraction limit and we have good explanations on the web.
Best regards,
Wonderful Summary & busting of myth of having always a high number of aperture for landscape shots & low number aperture for portraits. Very well explained Matt Granger. Loved this one. :)
You know I kinda figured that out with trial and error. I notice I wanted more of the portraits I was shooting to be sharper. So on my 50mm1.8 (Apsc) I stop down to f4 to get the results I want. Great video and thanks.
great that you did the test and got to know your gear. Thumbs up
If I only need f4 then is it a good idea to buy the 90-40mm f4.0-5.6 for portraits than a prime 85mm f1.7?
You'll probably want shallow DOF down the road. Also, a lens perform better closed down a little bit than wide open. So, an f4 at f4 lens probably won't be as sharp as an f1.8 lens at f4. Of course, that depends on other factors as well, but it's usually the case.
Opposite Lock no get the prime
Brilliant... Thanks so much... I have been messing up so many shots trying to stick to the rules rigidly... Got a crop sensor with a full frame Tamron 24 - 70mm 2.8 lens which already hinders my novice knowledge but really thanks!
thanks....felt like throwing my camera away today...started taking photos 'properly' earlier this year with an old DSLR. I'm getting better with portraits but landscapes are hard. looks like In was stopping down too much. Thanks.
I'd like to point out that stopping down too much (apperture-wise) will hurt the sharpness of the image. For example, the best sharpness you can get from your lens may be at f8, so going all the way down to f22 may have a negative impact. Plus, it's really not necessarygoing all the way down to f22.
I agree with you, but pixel density also plays a role. You can get away with shooting f/22 easier on a full frame camera than on a crop camera. I shoot with a 1.5 crop camera and try to limit myself to f/16.
chilehead craig
Yes, the effect is less on a full frame, but even at f/16 you're dropping full frame camera down to maybe 2-3 MP equivalent. On a crop I wouldn't go any smaller than f/8. That gets you again about a 2-4 MP image. A lot of the compact cameras with very small sensors don't even have a setting smaller than f/8 and phone cameras won't go smaller than f/2.8 or so. With a D810 you're losing MP if you go any smaller than 2.8. Check out the (advanced) calculator on this website. www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm
Same as you!
I using f1.4 lens, f4 for people shoot and f2-2.8 for lands
and then using wide lens for people and tele for lands, many fd said I’m wrong.😔
Great advice, in these times when most people shoot wide open and often get soft shots or miss the focus
I use a depth of field calculator (free phone AP) and it also has hyperfocal distance... it's simple and fast to use... Give good results and saves time.
Fantastic video, greatly needed clarifications. Thank you Matt! I really appreciate this.
I really appreciate the manner in which you explain the information you're looking to convey. . Great suggestion to test out the lenses and familiarize oneself with their gear. . Thanks Matt. .
the image at 1:51 that was shot at 1.4 - the sky is blown out but theres not much sky - if you have a lot of foreground n sky i don't think you'll shoot wide open
For landscapes, the obvious situation where it's beneficial to shoot with a large focal ratio (f/16 or thereabouts) is when composing your shot with a foreground subject. Think, desert landscape with a blooming prickly pear 3-feet in front of you. Of course, another option is to take multiple exposures of the same scene with one being focused on the foreground subject and the other(s) being focused on more distant elements. Personally, I always try to capture at least one good frame at f/16 just in case the multi-exposure blend doesn't work out.
F4 for close ups/ short depth of field and F8 and above for group portraits up to landscapes and it does not matter whether you have an L lens or any other lens that goes for any digital or film camera it always been the fact and digital does not change the fact.
It cheaper to use a kit Lens at F 8 than it is to use L glass they both at the same aperture will give you basically the same image quality.
I bought a 24-70 F2.8 L lens and found out it was no better than a 30 year old EF 28-7O MK 1 LENS
Is great you’re experimenting but you aren’t there yet. Keep testing
Thank you for this! I'm a photography student and for some reason it's taken me ages to get my head around aperture
Thank you for explaining the aperture so well
Recently I shot a landscape scene with a a few rocks in the foreground and beyond the rocks was a large view looking downhill. I setup on a tripod used a shutter release, set the camera to bracket 3 images +-2 stops, used live view and focused a third of the way into the frame, and used f11. But for some reason only the foreground came up tack sharp, should I have focused further into the scene? or used say f16? Or just sell all my camera gear? Nikon d7100 with 18-200mm vrII at 27mm.
Depth of field does not only depend on Fstop! Focal length matters a lot more - and is not even mentioned here. With my 550mm tele even F6.3 needs a very careful focus adjustment. With low F vignetting is usually a problem, bad for panoramas.
If the subject is same size roughly same part of the subject is in focus at the same aperture regardless of the focal length. If you shoot with 500 mm at 50 meters using f/4 the depth of field is 2.38 m. If you shoot with 50 mm at 5 meters, it is 2.52 m. Sure in the latter the DoF is divided almost equally to front and back while in the latter it is more behind the focal plane (1.5 m vs. 1 m).
It is often said that 1/3 is in in front of the subject and 2/3 behind it. This is just an estimate for typical situations. In reality anything between 0 to 50% can be in front. (0% when the DoF reaches infinity)
Thats one of the good things about using just one prime lens. You can make your own custom DOF chart at every aperture and distance in meters. Then use a laser rangefinder to know the distance and you will know the exact DOF in front and behind the subject at any aperture. Obviously its only if you have the time but you get the idea
Some lenses gives sharper image on F/11 or F/14 than on F/2.
I have a Pentax K-50. I will go out and try this out some more.
Really great info regarding the aperture for landscapes.
Let's say I'm shooting for street photography. What aperture is the best to use? I always use my aperture to adjust the exposure and not taking the depth of field into consideration because I'm not shooting potraits and I don't really have any particular subject in my photos.
If you don’t care about depth of field, choose what works with your chosen shutter speed (movement) and ISO
Great work on this vid. Clear, concise, and to the point. Excellent reminder of the basic principles of photography!
I know from personal experience and looking at other photos when I can find it the settings max settings rarely are best. Max zoom, max aperture, max iso
Your giving us just enough depth of field in this video to know I want to be at that beach... Hope your having a good trip!
haha - Venice beach in LA
Ahh so helpful. I was always under the impression that blurry portrait backgrounds uses 1.2 and i wpuld always have trouble focusing the whole body
Right on Matt! Thank you for this video. I was a long time FRO viewer, but have lost interest in what he puts out lately. This was concise valuable information that is great to learn and be reminded of regardless of skill level. It's easy to settle into a routine and forget that we have options... Thanks again.
Great video, thanks for the info.
I had been using a low f-stop for landscapes because they seemed to look good that way, I usually use about a 5.6 or at most an 8, but now I understand a little more why that is and how it works. Thanks, Matt
Good tips. Using Canon 80D w/ Sigma 18-35 1.8. Loving the 1.8 and am overusing it....need to remember to bump that to 4 and try that. Appreciate the info and reminder.
Thanks for the tips, Matt! I love photography and am just starting out. I appreciate the help!
So besides in portraits (which I figured that keeping the widest aperture may not be optimal depending on what you're looking for), isn't it better to simply keep the aperture as wide as possible and compensate with low ISO and high shutter speeds instead? (Being that high ISO may bring noise, and low shutter speeds may be inconvenient for motion -unless you're looking for that-).
I mean, basically just run M mode with the widest aperture and go from there, or am I missing something? I cannot actually prove any of this since I don't have my camera with me, so any insights on the matter are welcome.
Definitely.. it is smart to know WHAT effects DOF and where to use it. Great video
good info here. not sure if you can provide the same info with more examples but it be great to SEE the differences your pointing out for us newbies
I never thought of the distance allowing for a lower F Stop. Something I would have never thought of.
Great advice, great delivery Matt.
this basically comes down to understanding hyperfocal distance, specific lens characteristics, and camera properties.
use an app to get idea of hyperfocal distance for focal length/camera combos leaving some room for error on what 'sharp' will mean to your eye.
You can use the formula of the hyperfocal distance to calculate some simple values to remember. Lets say you have 18 mm lens on crop. You calculate 52 * 18^2 / N. You can reduce this to 16.8 m / N. If you use Micro 4/3 and 14 mm then calculate 67 * 14^2 = 13.1 m / N. If you member the value for your commonly used focal lengths then it is easy to estimate the distance and make adjustments if you need more sharpness. If you need double as sharp you need to double the distance or stop down two fstops.
Note that when you go from 18 mm to 55 mm the hyperfocal distance increases by almost a factor of 10.
I always learn something new watching your videos. I'm an old fart with old film gear. My old Canon FD lenses from the 1980s have depth of field scales which I use. Keep up the good work!
Fantastic tutorial Matt definitely something to try out as I have been struggling with some not so sharp images and realizing when am done shooting haha
Great video, just what I needed as a novice photographer!
This this so helpful because I do exactly what you were saying not to do. Thanks great info always.
I have only 7 lenses, and I've already memorized their sharpness (from dxomark) in various aperture. I suggest people should also do the same to maximize the performance on their lens. Also, it is good to install a DOF calculator app on your phone. I will help you determine what aperture to use when shooting landscapes. After trying a dozen of times, maybe the DOF can be memorized as well.
Aperture, Shutter Speed, ISO, & Light Explained-Understanding Exposure & Camera Settings can u expel with D3200 nikon. plz
Never thought of that, thanks for the advice.
Cool Tip matt! Never really thought it that way! Thanks alot..
I am curious to know at what Aperture this video is shot?
Where do you generally focus on a landscape picture for maximum depth of field? I'm assuming with a tripod= live view and manual focus , but what about with situations without a tripod?
Focus a third into the scene you want in focus.
A genuinely helpful and informative piece. Many thanks.
Does this mean say, if i am forced at 50mm focal, iso400, f/2, 1/60sec, for a portrait, i can pretty much move backwards and get more in focus? similar to using a shorter focal length, but instead i just step backwards?
Just did a couple of test shots. theoretically correct, but then i'm loosing composition. But what if I have a very high megapixel camera then cropping in post to get what I want, wouldn't I be able to get more in focus under low iso yet having a 50mm perspective (with lower distortion)?
Very well done! Clear explaination.
Good video, thanks!
It's interesting to learn the extremes, and then move onto knowing the balance.
Although I used to shoot wide open because of low light, I always try to close it just a bit, because I am aware my lenses (samyang cine) aren't that great wide open, and I have to pick an eyeball often!
Thanks Matt
Thanks a lot especially for the advice on landscape photography. ☺👍
nice video. but more sample image please.
Aperture Priority. F8. Auto ISO. Auto White Balance. Bracket your exposures. Shoot in RAW mode. Simples. You will get very usable exposures for around 80% of the time.
Excellent food for thought there Matt.
One thing with depth of field that I find difficult.... if I'm using a 45mm prime lens shooting wide open and my subject is let's say 500 mtrs away and i have some grass as foreground interest directly in front of me I want to blur the grass but keep everything after that pin sharp what should or can I do to achieve this. I thought If I focus on the subject in the background and I'm close enough to the foreground it would be blurred but this doesn't seem to be the case. Does this mean I need to move my focal point closer and focus on something just a little further away than the foreground or do I need to be further away from my foreground if possible which is not always possible because of the composition.. any help appreciated. Thanks
I have found the old M42 lenses from the SLR of my father. They are from the "Auto Revuenon" series. I found a 50 mm F1.4, a 135 mm F2.8 and a 35 mm F2.8 (i think, the 35mm came with the camera). I think, i will buy my first DSLR in a few months (maybe a D5300 with the 18-55 mm). Should i use those lenses with an adapter or should i buy new lenses? A cheap 50 mm F 1.8 lens isn't that expensive, but telezoom lenses cost more than 200€.
***** I hate small cameras. I want a big grip and good ergonomics.
Nikon F mount has flange focal distance 46.5 mm and M42 45.5 mm so adapting would be hard. One needs an optical element in the adapter and that reduces quality. Another alternative is to use them for macro shooting. A Nikon DSLR is the worst choice if you want to use other lenses.