>>3327910Man this is so fuggen useful to me buddy
is video comparible to the still provided?
It looks a lot better than the 40D i worked with. The noise on that would get ass ugly.
Here's a pic from my time as a concert photographer. I could have framed this one a bit better, but this is what i got 8^)
>>3327883>I like your photo of the cat. Do this more.Funny story with this one, it was one of my first pics as a photographer and remains to this day my best work yet.
>>3327910>Videos to follow.Awesome!!!
>This is on a D3400 which is slightly worse at night than a D3300.Would a used D3300 be suitable? I'm guessing to expect sooner mechanical failures etc. Does video wear out the shutter faster? Or does that only count as 1 shutter ''activation''?.
>>3327911>This shows the moon and brightest stars/planets in the sky tonight. Pretty terrible really.Hmmmm.... Were you recording anything that wasn't picked up by the sensor? I'm most afraid of having equipment that fails to record the entire scene of what my eyes are seeing.
Or does it pick up everything you were pointing it at?
>>3327915Oh this looks far more promising. It managed to capture them all???
Cause trust me man, there are such things as fake stars and fake constellations and the stuff they do is awesome. I've stared at one for an hour and it just decided to call it a day and fly off lol.
Sometimes they'll show constellations that are unknown to astrology. I've literally seen them have 1 constellation, i turn around, i turn back, and a new constellation appears in place of it. These are faint stars and these constellations are not regular constellations that we have mapped in astrology. So, obviously ufo stuff.
And i'd love to record even just a tenth of the stuff i've been shown.
That's a beautiful webm dude!
So yeah, do you think this will pick up the whole scene?
Will tripod will give a boost to the shutter speed or does the fps make anything slower than 1/60th or 1/30th mess with the frames?
