Well, you raise the ISO when there are low light conditions (and if your camera can handle it (MINE CAN'T)).
So I'd shoot at the lowest ISO, and a tripod. And try to only shoot static objects if there is low light as well, because they won't move haha. It would be hard to take a shot of your dog because he/she obviously won't stay perfectly still.
Or if you buy an external flash, you can do handheld shots just fine, as long as you bounce it off the roof.

I took this right after I figured out how to take "macro" shots with my kit lens:


I'm pretty sure I bounced my flash off the roof.

 

Its better to keep the ISO lowest as possible or the saying, "shoot with what you can get away with." If you shoot at 100-200 at night you will need to use a tripod because an ISO that low isn't sensitive to light. This requires a longer shutter or lower shutter number.

Generally I use 100-200 for both day and night (with tripod or my SB-900) with the D80, but 1600 for the D700.

Just some trial an error to figure your D60 out.

 

When (if) I ever get my 5D, it will be amazing to shoot high ISO.

OORRRRR, you can buy the 50mm f/1.0
FFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

 

You don't have a diffuser?

 

some shots from this weekend.







i don't really love the last one, but I wanted to see how smooth i could get the water, and it's not horribly overexposed, imo.

 

after looking at my b/w one again, I think I should have stopped down--i think the fall off is a little distracting.

 

Well actually I might have taken that shot with my camera flash and a diffuser.
But no, I don't have an ombi bounce or anything.

Bouncing it off the roof is FTMFW.
It's like the whole roof is one big softbox. Perfect even lighting on everything.

We need to buy 10 stop ND filters!!!

 

You wait, it's like another world. The funniest thing I remember with the D3 was testing my new 80-200 f2.8 by shooting no flash indoors at a mall. I was shooting the YardApe running around the play area at full-on 9fps, and it sounded like a machine gun: chaka-chaka-chaka-chaka-chaka! The looks I got from the other parents there were hysterical, but I was getting as high as 1/640@f4@3200, and the pics were still super clear.

 

Some pictures from recent events...

All of these were with Sony Alpha A700 and I believe they were all with my 18-200 Sony lens


from downtown Chicago












Big & Rich concert





And a few from last weekend, it was my best friends bachelor party weekend.

 

Oh man I know, even my brother's 30D handles "high" iso SOOO much better than my D40.
I have never taken shots higher than ISO 200 with my camera, they look grainy at even 400 :/

 

So would a lower f number blurr the background more? Not quite sure how that works yet. From what ive read it seems that the lower the f number the more blurr the back will be. Wouldnt I be better shooting at 70mm f/2.8 for shots like that?

 

What kind of settings do you use to get this effect?

 

Yeah, higher aperture (lower F-Stop number) gives you more depth of field (blurry background look). You'd use a lower aperture when in low light. When it's bright out you'd benefit from using a lower aperture (higher number).

Good basic article Understanding Aperture, Shutter Speed, and ISO - Photography Article

 

Yes, but the focal length also comes in to play. Like, With most kit lenses, shooting at 55mm f/5.6 will give more "background blur" than 18mm f/3.5

Probably f/22 with however long of an exposure he could get.
If you buy like, a 10 stop ND filter you can do shots like these:

 

yeah it was f/22 with like a half sec exposure at iso 200

 

lens flare much? lol

 

Haha sweet!
I love guessing settings.

 

haha, yeah but that one was pretty easy. i wouldnt be shooting at say, f/3.5

 

Yeah you could!
With ISO 10. hahahaha

 

I think the original Kodachrome was ASA 12!

That was before my time, though. The ASA rating was superceded by ISO, and now "ISO Equivalent" in digital sensors.