>>3979962>and you can't shoot in low light with easeAs in, primes are better in low light?
Anyways I do want as good photo quality as possible but I just do not have money. And frankly I am pretty satisfied with the quality of some of my existing photos I've taken, the main issue is just that so much of what i'm capturing is out of focus, pic related.
I know things being out of focus is a physics problem and short of depth stacking/splicing it's always gonna be a thing, but minimizing it I think is the number 1 thing I can do to improve. Learning how to do full manual iso, exposure, apeture, fstop, etc might help too but I think sticking with auto and then just doing manual iso and fstop tweaks worked out pretty well?
depth stacking tips would be nice, I guess? I don't really get how it's possible without a tripod tho or else each photo you're splicing content from will be slightly differenbt and non combinable anyways, surely?
>>3979969I'm in museums, unless I can arrange a special exception, tripods or anything similar are a no go.
> to maximize the depth of fieldI'm wanting to minimize that, though, no?
>use lowest ISO to reduce noiseWhat I've been doing is using 400 ISO as a base, and then going down to 200 or even 100 if I can lean against the case glass to steady my hands (or up if low light is an issue) but even with this there's often visible shake. I'm a camera brainlet but even I know that lower ISO's means longer exposure times which means shakier hands will be more an issue.
>offer better performance in low light or wide aperture. Because you are going to use narrow aperture and have a tripodAs I said, no tripod, and the current exhibit I an photographing at over the next few days is very low light (not pic related,this was from the last one). The most important one I'll be at in a week or two which is the most important will be well let, but it will be mostly paintings and I can't lean on case glass to steady my hands.
