 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Seems to be many people on here at the moment (myself included) who have recently indulged in a new shiny camera to play with (perhaps inspired by some of the amazing pictures people put up on here) but I would guess don't really know that much about it all!
I know that much of this could be found by reading the magazines and searching through the net- but thought it'd be nice to get lots of advice in one place, from the fountain of knowledge that is singletrack world! (after all, its a bit like mountain biking - can have all the gear but have no idea 😛 )
So I'm throwing out the question...what do we need to know? (how do we work out what a lens is good for? what do some of the settings and adjustments do? some photography terms? basically anything that you think my be useful to someone starting out!)
Have a look here:
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=62
IMO the main thing to learn is the relationship between Aperture, Shutter Speed and ISO, and what effect they have on photographs.
Try this one - http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=158332 or maybe this one - http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=154225
The Scott Kelby series of books is really good for what you want to know. if you buy all 3 then you can move forwards and back quite easily. He avoids too much of the technical stuff and just tels you how to take good pics
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Scott-Kelbys-Digital-Photography-Boxed/dp/0321678737/
Well, that's like saying 'dummies' guide to cycling'.
If you want the basics of aperture, shutter speed, depth of field, ISO and all that, then you really need a book or at least wikipedia. It'd take hours to type it all out here! Not wishing to be mean but it really is textbook material.
You could try a night class or a weekend course or something - many are very good I'm told.
then you really need a book or at least wikipedia
wikipedia? What is that? Could you explain the basics of it, how it works and if it might be useful?
Ta
If you want the basics of aperture, shutter speed, depth of field, ISO and all that, then you really need a book or at least wikipedia.
Or just read the links I posted above maybe? 🙂
Have a look here:http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=62
Cheers Grum - might keep my occupied for a while! 😛 And its free advice!
I've got some .pdf's on composition (i've not looked at them yet, but apparently quite good), I'll PM them to you Becky.
Didn't really rate Scott Kelby's books.
I kept expecting to turn the page saying 'Don't forget to turn it on and take the lens cap off dudes'
In the books I was given I'm quite sure he dedicates a few pages to 'Which tripod' only to end up saying buy what you can afford.
There's a lot in there about photographing weddings too (yawn) and only take landscape photos at sunrise/set, everything else is just amature crap. I'll sell you my copies if you like
Just my two p. Not technical enough for my liking. It's hard to find a book that will explain the relationship between aperture, shutter speed, ISO, etc without reading like a chemistry textbook.
It's a very, very technical hobby. Unless you buy a Canon and put it on full auto
Your camera has a sensor that records a picture. How sensitive you set it (ISO) determines how much light it needs. You can let more or less light onto it by changing the size of the hole (aperture) or how long the light is falling on it (shutter speed). Those three things determine your 'exposure' or how dark or light the picture is. Measuring how much light you need is called 'metering'. You can fix one or more of these three things and the camera will adjust the ones you haven't fixed to make it look reasonable. Fixing a fast shutter speed (calle shutter priority and marked S on your dial) means your subject won't have moved much whilst you are exposing the image, and it won't be blurred (ideal for fast moving stuff). Fixing a particular aperture (called aperture priority and marked A on your dial) determines how far behind or infront of your subject things will still be in focus. There is a general setting called Program (marked as P) which guesses reasonable values for aperture and shutter. You should use as low an ISO as possible whilst keeping the other two numbers the way you want, cos high ISO gives worse image quality. You can use any of P, S or A and also make the overall image lighter or darker with a dial, this is called exposure compensation and is usually marked +/-. Exposure is measured in EV, commonly called 'stops'. 1EV difference in shutter speed is a doubling or halving of the actual time. In aperture terms 1EV is called an F-stop but it has a funny scale like f1.4, f1.8, f2.0, f2.8, f3.6 and so on - larger numbers are smaller holes and hence let in less light - half as much each f-stop. In ISO terms 1EV is a doubling or halving of sensitivity which is expressed in ISO numbers - typical is ISO100 or ISO200 and cameras usually go up to ISO6400 these days. So halve the shutter speed and you need to correspondingly go to a smaller aperture OR a lower ISO to get the image exposed the same.
There. That help?
Or just read the links I posted above maybe?
"You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page."
If you want to buy one book get this [url= http://www.amazon.co.uk/New-Manual-Photography-John-Hedgecoe/dp/1405334762/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1305039294&sr=1-1 ]New Manual of Photography[/url]
I think it was first published in the 80's, if you can find an old copy in a charity shop it will still be of value - the concepts are the same between film and digital.
IMO many 'digital photography' books waste the first 30% telling you about computers.
Tom Ang books are also good for the beginner.
If you want to get into more advanced concepts try anything by Michael Freeman.
It's hard to find a book that will explain the relationship between aperture, shutter speed, ISO
How?
The aperture is the hole that lets light in. The shutter speed determines how long light is let in for. ISO is how much the camera amplifies the total light it receives.
That is all there is to the relationship.
Measuring how much light you need is called 'metering'.
Metering is what threw me for far too long.
The abridged version is, unless you specifically tell it otherwise, the camera is "clever"(*) and will try to take the best picture it can with the information it has available. This information is a combination of settings you've dialed in and what it's worked out for itself from looking out through the lens.
When you set, for example, the aperture, it'll juggle the other settings to take what it thinks is a reasonable picture. Swapping between the different semi-manual modes (what Canon calls the "creative zone") changes which bits you have direct control over and which bits you're leaving to the camera. This is useful as different parameters are more or less important depending on what you're shooting.
(* - technical term)
Wow, thats a broad question(s)
Some key things to learn are:
Aperture and Shutter speed. these two values are intertwined with eachother and dictate just about everything to do with a photograph.
Shutter speed is easy, its just how long the shutter opens for to reveal the sensor to the outside world. So fast shutter speed (1/1000) lets in little light and freezes motion. A long shutter speed (1" or above) lets in a lot of light and blurs motion. You can control shutter speed using S or Tv setting on your camera.
Aperture is a bit more complex. The aperture is the size of the hole in the lens that lets in light. Its measured in f stops and goes from small f numbers (large holes) down to high f numbers (small holes). So f1.8 is a large aperture, large hole, that lets in a lot of light, but it gives you a narrow focus plane (depth of field). f22 is a tiny aperture, small hole, and it lets in less light but it gives you more depth of field.
So you can see that a large aperture acts like a slow shutter speed in terms of light getting in, and a small aperture act like a fast shutter speed. So they must work in harmony, large aperture with fast shutter speeds, or small aperture with long shutter speeds.
My best advice is to think of a correctly exposed photograph as a full bucket of water. Water being like light.
You have a pipe and a tap. The pipe is the aperture and the tap is the shutter speed.
To fill the bucket with a large pipe (large aperture f2.8) you need only to turn the tap on and off quickly (fast shutter speed).
To fill the bucket using a small pipe (f22 small aperture) you must have the tap turned for longer to fill the bucket to the same level.
Landscape photographers want as much focus as possible so we use apertures such as f22, but that means the shutter speeds can often be long, so we use tripods to keep everything steady. To a novice its easy to wonder why theyre always carrying tripods around when it isnt dark!
If you shoot free hand then my sugestion would be to ensure that your shutter speed is nver slower than 1 divided by your focal length. So if you shooting at 50mm you slowest shutter speed should be 1/50th of a second. At 300mm it would be 1/300th of a second or faster. Wide angles gather more light so they can use longer speeds. This will ensure your pictures arent blurred.
I'd say these tips would be the most important for getting you started. I'll add more when I remember them!! 😀
Oh and play around with metering in auto and see what happens. Point your camera at a light bulb so it fills 30% of the middle of your frame. Take a photo with the metering mode as matrix or evaluative, look at the picture. Now take the same photo using spot metering and see what happens. By adjusting the metering you're telling the camera what part of the photograph you want to be correctly exposed. So for portraits you should use spot metering on their face and not worry about the backgrounds.
If you shoot free hand then my sugestion would be to ensure that your shutter speed is nver slower than 1 divided by your focal length
Your focal length being how 'zoomed in' you are.
Small focal length numbers eg 20mm lens means a very wide field of view. So you can get lots of stuff in the picture but it's all small.
Big focal length number eg 300mm means you are zoomed in a lot. Things look big but obviously you can't get as much in the frame.
When people talk about a 50mm lens that is what they mean. On your camera about 35mm is basically not zoomed in or out - things look about the same size through the camera as with the naked eye. Lower than that = wide angle, higher = zoom in or telephoto. Cameras often come with general purpose lenses known as 'kit' lenses, you probably have 18-55mm.
By adjusting the metering you're telling the camera what part of the photograph you want to be correctly exposed
Yes. By default your camera on any of the auto modes looks at the whole picture and decides how much light it wants during metering. However you might be more interested in a certain part of it (ie a person's face) so you can use what's called 'spot metering' which only worries about the middle of the picture. So if a person is standing in shade in front of a sunny landscape, and you meter on their face, you will see their face fine but the landscape will be washed out.
Almost all cameras allow you to meter pointing at something, then move the camera to change the shot, and then take the picture. You do the initial metering by half-pressing the button. So say you want a person's face exposed correctly but you don't want it in the middle of the picture, you select spot metering (or a similar setting), aim at their face, half-press the button, keep it half pressed then move the camera, and push it home. As long as you keep the button half pressed it'll keep the same settings.
It's hard to find a book that will explain the relationship between aperture, shutter speed, ISO
An good analogy would be filling a glass of water...
If you open the tap slightly (aperture) only a little water is let through, this means that you need to keep it open for longer (shutter speed) to fill the glass. The wider you open the tap, the quicker the glass with fill i.e. the less time you'll need to run the tap for.
ISO affect the sensitivity of the sensor (or film) so the higher the ISO setting the less light it would need to record the image. Not entirely sure how to apply that to the glass of water analogy...maybe smaller glasses.
Increasing the ISO setting means you're more susceptible to noise (digital) or grain (film)...you could use this to your benefit in black and white images for example.
Not a bucket?
I didn't realise it was this complicated 😉
ah I see Olympus beat me to it...although he uses a bucket in his analogy.
I'll throw in a couple of composition tips that I always try and remind myself of.
1) [b]Fill the frame[/b] - For example, with a portrait make sure the person is large in the frame. Even if it means cutting the tops of people's heads off. The emotion is in the eyes/face, not the top of the head.
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3227/2653739736_d020ac8c92_m.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/tryingtimes/2653739736/ ]Staring competition[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/tryingtimes/ ]tryingtimes[/url], on Flickr
2) [b]Avoid distractions in the image.[/b] Keep an eye on the background to see if there are any ways to recompose to avoid distractions - things like posts coming behind someone's head.
[url= http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2238/2396103514_89191302ba_m.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/tryingtimes/2396103514/ ]Icicles 1[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/tryingtimes/ ]tryingtimes[/url], on Flickr
This is where Depth of Field can be vital. A bird in a tree is often going to be surrounded by detail, so photographers reduce the in-focus portions of the image so that the background becomes blurred and distracting hard edges are removed.
[url= http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2106/2396101036_c8920ee532_m.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/tryingtimes/2396101036/ ]Nature's Lollipop[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/tryingtimes/ ]tryingtimes[/url], on Flickr
Same for lots of subjects. For example panning with a mountain biker, so that the background has motion blur conveys the sense of speed but also isolates the rider from the background.
[url= http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2436/3829830429_b066d317f0_m.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/tryingtimes/3829830429/ ]fast[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/tryingtimes/ ]tryingtimes[/url], on Flickr
3) [b]Don't put everything in the centre.[/b] If someone is looking in a particular direction, or moving in a direction, showing slightly where they are looking or moving [b]towards[/b] will balance the image nicely. Look up the "rule of thirds" for further reading.
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3077/2904632715_20b673f24d_m.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/tryingtimes/2904632715/ ]Do I have to[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/tryingtimes/ ]tryingtimes[/url], on Flickr
An exception to this is when there is symmetry in the image, then centering makes sense.
[url= http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2668/5702934422_05ae2f7b1d_m.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/tryingtimes/5702934422/ ]Humber Bridge[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/tryingtimes/ ]tryingtimes[/url], on Flickr
"You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page."
I'll leave you to work out how you might be able to get around that problem, Sherlock. 🙂
[b]molgrips [/b] cheers for filling in some of my blanks, its rather hard to cover even a small amount of stuff comprehensively when someone asks isnt it?
[b]McHamish[/b] yeah your right, I'd say as you up the ISO the glass gets smaller.
Depth of Field gets mentioned a lot.
A large depth of field is where most of the picture, foreground and background, is in sharp focus (eg, landscape shots).
A shallow DoF is when you've got the subject in focus and the background blurred for artistic effect or to avoid diverting interest from the subject (eg, portraits, 'macro' shots of small objects like insects or flowers).
As Olympus says, a large aperture (small F-number) gives a shallow depth of field.
Lenses are rated by their largest aperture size; my camera came with an 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 lens, which has a largest aperture of between 3.5 and 5.6 depending on which end of the zoom I'm at. That's a decidedly average aperture.
On my shopping list is a 50mm f1.8 lens (what's called a 'prime' because it's fixed rather than zoom); why would I want another 50mm lens when I already have an 18-55mm zoom lens? Because the larger aperture allows me to take pictures with a much shallower DoF, so it makes (for instance) a fantastic lens for taking portraits. This larger aperture lens is known as a "faster" lens than the 18-55 (wider aperture = shorter exposure time for a given shot).
I started off with the intention of typing a super condensed summary for comedy effect, then I got a bit carried away 🙂
Because the larger aperture allows me to take pictures with a much shallower DoF
Not only that - it also allows more light in. If there's not enough light (ie in a dark pub say) you can only let the shutter open for so long (people move about, your hands are not rock steady etc), usually about 1/30s or so; you can only set the ISO so high because your pictures look all speckled; so you need as large an aperture as possible.
With the kit lens you probably need a flash indoors in the evening. With a lens that can do f1.8 or f1.4 you probably won't. Flashes are hard to work with because they are so bright and the light comes from the camera so you get loads of harsh shadows, and that lovely softly lit scene you are experiencing ends up looking like the freezer section in Tesco.
Lenses with big apertures can be cheap if they don't zoom in and out - less space is taken up with mechanical gubbins so there's more room for light to come in. You can get zoom lenses (ie variable ones) with large apertures but they are expensive. Long zoom lenses (ie those that magnify a lot) with wide apertures are extreeeeemly expensive, and have to be very large. That's what you see photographers using on the side of the pitch at football matches. They need a lot of light so they can use fast shutter speeds and freeze the motion, and they have to zoom in a lot because they can't run about on the pitch near the players 🙂
[url= http://www.dofmaster.com/ ]Depth of field calculator / tables[/url]
I refer to the above a lot.
Have a read about hyperfocal distance as well.
I'll leave you to work out how you might be able to get around that problem, Sherlock.
Hush. (-:
Apparently it is a bucket afterall...
[img] 
[/img]
Maybe by iso6400 it's a glass?
HAHA those last two post made me laugh! 😆
Best bet is to have a read on the web, get out there, click buttons and twist knobs (fnar) and see what effect they have on the photos and then it will eventually click in your head. If you know the very basics of ISO, aperture, focal length etc then applying it to a scene becomes easy with time and practice. You will take LOTS of duffers for a while and only a few good ones, but Im happy if I get back from a day of snapping with 10% good pics.
My taps that came with the house, would take ages to fill a bucket.
I had to use a pressure hose to fill buckets, which is inconvenient and not as neat as using taps.
I had to upgrade to a new, more expensive, faster tap to get enough water out.
Before long I realised that I never used the other taps, so I had to upgrade all my taps to fast ones.
Now I need a new bucket.
I spend far too much money on taps and buckets.
I think we've scared off the OP...
Also, take loads and loads of pictures - using all the different modes, different apertures, shutter speeds etc - use an editing program on the computer that will let you see the exif info (which records all this stuff) so you can see what effect it's having properly.
I think we've scared off the OP...
Maybe you're right...we got a little too helpful then, at what point did it get creepy.
Maybe someone should indulge in some bigotry in the thread then we'll attract the STW big guns to the thread for a good argument.
I think we've scared off the OP...
I'm still here 😛 was taking pictures of the same thing, from the same place, varying the aperture to see if I noticed a difference in DoF...I don't (but I suspect I'm either too close to it or doing something wrong!)
I'm pleasantly surprised by the helpfulness of all this (I'm not complaining but was expecting the usual sarcasm and a lot less sensible stuff!), but that does mean there is an awful lot to read through now!
buy a dummies guide to your camera, it'll tell you all of the above, plus what the buttons on your actual camera do, and why you'd want to do that. Then get a project book "101 DSLR projects" or whatever, do the projects, learn stuff and enjoy it. Ignore the bitter cynics above.
but that does mean there is an awful lot to read through now!
There will be an exam.
(but I suspect I'm either too close to it or doing something wrong!
Closer the better. Try 3' away, wide open (f3.5 or whatever) and then fully closed (f22 or whatever). Make sure there's stuff in the background that you can see if it's in focus. If you're reviewing on the camera try zooming in to see clearly or upload to your PC.
I'm still here was taking pictures of the same thing, from the same place, varying the aperture to see if I noticed a difference in DoF...I don't (but I suspect I'm either too close to it or doing something wrong!)
Do you have anything like picket fences nearby? Or try putting a vase of flowers or something on a table in the garden, with trees or a bush behind.
Take a picture of that on automatic and make a note of the aperture settings it selected...automatic should try to get as much of the scene in focus as possible so you'll get a deep depth of field. Then switch to aperture priority and take a picture at the largest aperture, and then change to the a small aperture. Take a note of the shutter settings for each.
Regarding distance, try taking a picture as close as you can focus, then take a picture 5 meters away at the same settings. You should notice that you get a narrow depth of field when you're close up.
.
If you really want to baffle yourself, start looking at Depth of Field tables and the 'circle of confusion' (yes really).
And yeah, the aperture effect should be really noticeable if you take a picture of say, some flowers but where you can see a longish way behind - try as zoomed in as you can on the lens and fairly close. At wider apertures (lower f numbers) the background should be totally blurred out, go to smaller apertures and the background should start to reappear.
Maybe someone should indulge in some bigotry in the thread then we'll attract the STW big guns to the thread for a good argument.
I'm not really convinced women should be allowed to take up hobbies like photography. I mean, shouldn't their day be pretty well filled up with cooking and cleaning?
(but I suspect I'm either too close to it or doing something wrong!
Zooming in will also decrease the depth of field (though ironically, zooming in with my kit lens also reduces the max aperture). For my 18-55, I seem to be getting a shallower DoF by cracking up the zoom than by increasing the aperture; I presume(?) that the this is just down to the lens being too slow to give a shallow DoF at wider angles.
I'm not really surprised by this, but only two or three posts so far have mentioned composition. It doesn't matter how technically perfect the picture is if you're pointing the camera in the wrong direction.
I'm not really surprised by this, but only two or three posts so far have mentioned composition. It doesn't matter how technically perfect the picture is if you're pointing the camera in the wrong direction.
I think understanding your camera and being familiar with aperture, shutters speed and ISO etc is more important initially. Once you're happy with these concepts then you can start thinking about what you're taking pictures of.
I mentioned Michael Freeman's books for more advanced concepts...in particular 'A Photographer's Eye' talks about composition rules - when to follow them, and when they can be broken.
A quick tip
Look at the histogram in the image preview screen.
Use it to make sure you haven't clipped extremes of blacks and whites off.
A common mistake (which is really hard to avoid sometimes) is having 'blown' sky or image highlights - where there is no detail recorded in an area of the image. A common example is a shine on someone's face containing no image detail (just all white).
More info in loads of places but here's one.
http://www.michaelfrye.com/tips/histograms.html
One thing I didn't know for a while was that each vertical line equals one 'stop' of light - very handy when shooting manual with flash, etc.
I'm not really surprised by this, but only two or three posts so far have mentioned composition. It doesn't matter how technically perfect the picture is if you're pointing the camera in the wrong direction
[b]It is[/b] important to point the camera in the correct direction.
It is important to point the camera in the correct direction.
True...otherwise you'll only get pictures of your own face.
One thing I thought getting into photography, was that a great picture could be taken of any moment at any time. I thought that I'd learn how to do this.
Then I realised that that's only half true.
You soon learn that a lot of pictures are very dependant on controlling the circumstances.
For example:
Time of day
Weather
Making people pose
Using more 'artificial' things like reflectors/flash/filters.
Post processing (safe to say I wasn't expecting to see just how much goes into many many photos).
etc
etc
etc
This was a big part of the learning for me. It basically decided for me that landscape photography was not for me and that neither were serious portraits. But that's not to say I don't try from time to time.
Yeah, very true. Unless you're very lucky you have to make photos, not take them.
For my 18-55, I seem to be getting a shallower DoF by cracking up the zoom than by increasing the aperture
That's how it works. At high zoom DoF is much shallower, I think.
Not sure I'd bother with the histogram at first. It's one thing knowing that your picture is over exposed, but it's another thing doing something about it. Then there are the pictures that you WANT to over or under expose in places. Only time I've used a histogram is when shooting in bright sunlight and I can't see the screen properly to evaluate the image subjectively.
Yeah, aperture, distance and focal length all come into play. [url= http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html ]Plug some numbers in here to see what to expect...[/url]
Ta da!
[img] 
[/img]
Interesting table that - I had no idea that focal length and distance to subject effected DoF so wildly!
That explains why I sometimes I manage to get bokeh on my very slow 70-300mm lens.
Long lens + close subject = narrower DoF.
Cheers!
Edit: Although that diagram above does nothing to help me - where's the bucket again?
in particular 'A Photographer's Eye' talks about composition rules
Coincidentally, I was looking at this in Waterstones at the weekend. It looks the business, I'll be getting it at some point once my technical proficiency has improved a bit I reckon.
At high zoom DoF is much shallower, I think.
I was told (read?) somewhere that long zoom and wide aperture both reduce DoF, but of the two aperture was more significant. My experiments would bear out the opposite, that zoom makes a bigger difference [i]with that particular lens.[/i]
Yeah, very true. Unless you're very lucky you
have to make photos, not take them.
A very sad state of affairs and the main reason I don't like a lot of photos I see.
Isn't photography something like
30% luck
30% skill
And 30% equipment.
Get out there and click away, find what you're good at and devlop you're own style. Composition will come if you have a good eye. Bin the bad ones and keep the good 'uns and learn from your mistakes. Most of all enjoy.
What about the other 10%?
You can remove a lot of luck from the equation. For example if you want a good landscape photo weather, time of day, where the sun rises and sets are all important. You could, by luck, have them all in you favour, or you could plan in advance.
10% you say? That's for Photochop!
I don't think there's much luck involved, unless of course it's a chance event, but I think it's more perseverance and dedication. It's easy to say it's luck and not bothering getting up at 4:30am and driving for x number of miles to get to a location you've been to loads of times and known that sunrise at a particular tide will nail it for you. I do think you make a photograph rather than take a one, especially with landscapes. Using filters etc to create the exposure you know will look the best.
I think if it was mostly luck then nearly everyone would just give up
Thanks for lots of helpful tips, who knew buckets, owls and taps could mean so much? My Canon is much cleverer than I, but it's time to read the manual, select something other than 'auto' and get busy. Cheers.
Not too sure how 30% equates to mostly, everyday's a schoolday. Equally if you can control the weather, cool. Granted that as greater reliance is being placed on the darkroom then the photographer can be successful with less skill at the camera.
select something other than 'auto'
Once you get out of the "Basic zone" (and I found it helpful to play with those for a few days), then Aperture Priority (Av) is a good place to start.
in particular 'A Photographer's Eye' talks about composition rules
Noo, don't say 'rules', you'll have Barnes up in arms! They are 'suggestions' not rules 🙂
As for luck - well I'd say it's more like getting yourself out there. Some of the best pics I've seen have been people just standing there and pressing the button.
As for auto mode - switching out of it will not simply result in better pictures. It can improve a picture, for sure, but you have to know why you want to over-ride the camera. It's like any of this DSLR business - you have to know why you want it, not just getting it and hoping it'll result in good pictures.
Like bikes - we all queue up on here to make fun of people who walk into a bike shop and drop 3k on an Ibis or whatever, thinking they'll a) be better riders and b) have more fun.
Equally if you can control the weather, cool.
It's not hard. If you want a photo of the sun coming through storm clouds you don't go out if it's clear blues skies. You wait for a storm.
You soon learn that a lot of pictures are very dependant on controlling the circumstances.
For example:
Time of day
Weather
Making people pose
Using more 'artificial' things like reflectors/flash/filters.
Post processing (safe to say I wasn't expecting to see just how much goes into many many photos).
etc
etc
This is what winds me up when you've spent ages looking for a good location, watching the weather, getting somewhere early, hovering about for the right moment and getting the shot you were aiming for.
Then someone looks at the picture and says 'I'd like to take pictures like that, but I don't have an expensive camera'.........
Hmmmmm, yep, that was all it took. An expensive camera.
OK stupid question, I know the numbers are to do with focal lengths, but on a 55-250mm lens, for example, how do you use that to see how much "zoom" the lens actually has?
Umm well, you mean in terms of magnification?
On an old film SLR, 50mm was about 1x magnification, so 100mm is 2x and so on. On your Canon the 'crop factor' is 1.6 I think, so that means that 1x is 50/1.6 or about 30mm. Then 60mm is 2x and so on.
I may be wrong though 🙂
However the magnification numbers aren't terribly useful. Just get a feel for what 50mm or 200mm actually looks like.
Oh and on compact cameras when they say 10x zoom they don't mean you can zoom in to make things look 10x bigger. It means that the focal length range is 10x so say 5mm-50mm or whatever.
Have a play with this:
[url= http://www.tamron.eu/en/lenses/focal-length-comparison.html ]Focal Length Comparison[/url]
Interesting link 5e - shows that the first 200mm of zoom has far more effect on the picture than the last 200mm...
cheers 🙂
this also answers my question 😛 http://www.ehow.com/how_5916091_calculate-magnification-250mm-lens-camera.html
I agree molgrips - it's just meant I never have to lust after a 500mm lens now - a good quality 300mm lens cropped by about 20% would be great.
Also - it shows the huge difference between wide and ultra-wide (say 17mm and 10mm)
Yeah, good point. The difference between 20 and 200 is factor of 10 but 200 to 400 is only a factor of 2. So focal length changes are a lot more noticeable at the short end.
becky_kirk43 - Member
OK stupid question, I know the numbers are to do with focal lengths, but on a 55-250mm lens, for example, how do you use that to see how much "zoom" the lens actually has?
Not a stupid question at all. Here is a good link to a site which tries to explain literally what the numbers mean:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/opinions/digital-photography-tutorial-focal-length
I am not sure that this explanation is of great use in the real world though.
Most compacts tell you they have a 3x, 5x, 10x optical zoom, which is probably more useful.
For your lens above (55-250), that gives you 4.5x zoom. But you have to remember with this, that 55mm is already 'zoomed' in a bit. If you tried to use 55mm indoors to photograph a group of friends for example or outdoors to take a picture of a landscape you would probably struggle to fit it all in, as the more 'zoomed in' you are, the narrower your field of view is.
Most compacts tell you they have a 3x, 5x, 10x optical zoom, which is probably more useful.
I think that terminology is horrendous. Most people assume that those are magnification factors.
What they really do is show the relative difference between "wide" and "zoom" for the lens. As it doesn't tell you what "wide" or "zoom" actually is it's virtually meaningless.
I'm tempted by a 2x converter for my 300mm lens.. giving me an equivalent 1,200mm 🙂
Well if all that didn't confuse a beginner nothing will, best advice I can give is read the camera manual thoroughly and learn where all the controls are and what they do
Go out take some pictures at the same focal length and see the difference it makes from changing the aperture and shuter speed
Even better if you have an experienced photographer friend to show you the ropes, perhaps people on here could volunteer their services to help a novice out for a cuppa and a cake
I think that terminology is horrendous. Most people assume that those are magnification factors.
Yup, I certainly did. I'd go further than "horrendous," I'd say it's deliberately misleading.
best advice I can give is read the camera manual thoroughly and learn where all the controls are and what they do
More than that, you need to learn about what you need to do to get your shots, THEN read the manual and figure out how to work your camera.