Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum
At The Back => The Dressing Room => Topic started by: _tom_ on December 20, 2007, 04:07:49 PM
-
I've just started getting into photography so yesterday and today I took my sisters camera (Canon EOS 350D) around the village I live in to see if it was worth pursuing. I've uploaded the best ones onto a deviant art page, let me know what you think for my first few attempts :)
http://tomr61.deviantart.com
Also for people who know about this, is there any other camera in the same price range as the EOS 350D that I should consider getting? At the minute I want to buy myself the 350D as I know how to use it now and it seems to produce good quality pics.
Cheers :)
-
PM Johnny Mac; he's a great photogrif!
-
Your stuff is good so far, you should definitely pursue it.
I don't know much about cameras though, the bassist in my band is the manager of a big Jessops store though. If you have anything in mind I'll ask his opinion.
Personally I bought an old film camera off eBay, an Olympus OM-10, and I love it. Really makes you think about ISO, shutter speed, aperture etc and making every shot count. Also a bargain at £20.
-
Yeah I've used a film camera in the past and was ok with it but much prefer the speed of a digital. It does have a manual mode but auto makes life a lot easier :P
-
Buy the 400D which is the newer version of the 350D and my weapon of choice. Very similar in its user friendliness to the 350D, but it's a 10megapixel camera rather than 8, and it's got a bigger rear screen. I find it a tad simpler to play with too.
-
Its also a lot more expensive by the looks of things :( £350 for just the body.
-
i hope i'm not the only one that read pornography in the title... where's dave? lol
-
The canon EOS range is good.
I was always a Minolta user and splashed out for the Dynax7D before they withdrew from the digital camera market.
Canon seems to be the best bet.
There is nothing wrong with the 350 although I always feel that spending on good lenses is more important.
With photography it is more about the skill of the user as long as their kit is ok
Digital has been the great leveller and lets amuteurs get great results, but getting to know your camera is a must do to get best results
Your first shots look good
General advice given to hopeful photographers:
Get to know all the ins and outs about depth of field and composition
and you wont go far wrong.
An artistic eye will let you get great results with a point and click whilst lack of thought and an all bells and whistles camera wont get the best results
-
where's dave? lol
The Afghan Hound is currently in Ireland on a beer tasting trip
He'll be back by the end of the week
BTW - Tom - I like the Misty road shot
Nice how the fog and the out of focus distant road (caused by being outside range of depth of field for the settings used) create even more of an atmosphere - nice stuff!
Same with the "posts view" and similar pictures
-
Pretty good Tom. My brother is a professional photographer and has a great life photographing the rich and famous (as clients). He is currently shooting in St Moritz otherwise I'd ask him to take a look. I think he would make some helpful suggestions about composition. He and I are both very keen on photography and learned on film cameras. BTW if anyone is looking for photos for their band, he has a studio in the West end of London and he is bloody excellent.
-
Haven't looked at cameras since the D40 and 400D.
But basically - The canon cameras at the same price are better - but... They need canon lenses.
Which is why you might want to go with Nikon.
-
I was looking at the D40 but one website I was reading on said that it has a noticeably slower focusing time than the 350D, also is only 6mp whilst the 350D is 8 I think. Also the D40 dosent have a focus motor built in so the lenses need to have their own motor for auto-focus. Not sure how much of a problem that is as I'm fairly unknowledgable - are good lenses with their own motors hard to come by in comparison to regular ones?
As I said before I'm leaning toward the Canon because I'm allready familiar with it, and I think the quality of the stock lens is fine for me at the minute. Also because my sister has one we can pay half each for new lenses which wont be quite so bad :)
Cheers for all the help and feedback on the photos.
-
My dad has a 350D+ and I've won a couple of awards with it; it's a nice camera. Your pictures look cool too!
-
Evening Tom!
Don't worry about camera models for now just take pictures, what you have is great to learn on.
I had a look at your pics. You have to get it off auto Tom and use manual as they are under exposed
So you need to read up on how the light meter works in the camera. Basically it it measures reflected light, so will be affected by different tones and colours as they are calibrated to 'see' everything as 18% grey.
So use the spot meter function, the icon looks a bit like this (.) The back of your hand nr the thumb will give you a reading very close to 18% grey as does grass. If your going for fine resolution then iso 400 250/1 f11 with a 30mm lens, which is what your camera set the exposure at, isn't going to get that. Try a iso 100 60/1 f5.6, which is the same exposure but moving the whole thing -2 stops.
As for composition, try 'The Rule Of Thirds'. So the view finder has four imaginary lines two vertical and two horizontal that produce boxs up and across ( a bit like a grid reference) Compacts have this grid option on the screens. Then you can put one feature in one third and balance it with something else in another.
Dept of field as Jonathon pointed out is a good thing to read up on. As are shutter speeds and lens perspective.
Hope this helps Tom.
-
All that exposure stuff is just confusing me now :lol: The only thing I can find on my camera that you've described there is the iso settings, where I can choose between 100, 200, 400, 800 and 1600. Theres also white balance with presets for auto, daylight, night etc and a custom option.
edit - just realised how to adjust the stops, though I dont think it displays what its on, you can just see the focus changing as you adjust the thumbwheel for it. Now I've adjusted this stuff and got the indicator on the light meter centred, the shutter speed (is that the iso?) has gone really slow even on the highest setting, so the photos are turning out blurry =\
another edit - was just playing around in macro mode with manual focusing etc trying to get the depth of field stuff worked out and got this with a quick shutter speed and flash.
(http://i17.tinypic.com/87btv0k.jpg)
(great beer btw :))
-
A stop is a shift + or - with the iso, the shutter or the f stop. The shutter speeds increase or decrease by twice as fast or twice as slow at each stop. EG, 1 second, 1/2 a second, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, 1/30, 1/60, 1/125, 1/250 ect
F stops control the aperture the numbers don't really make much sense but the bigger the hole the smaller the number. So f 4, f 5.6, f 8, f 11, f 16, f 22.
Most shutters and f stops can be shifted + or - by a 1/3rd of a stop too.
Iso controls 'film speed' the lower the number the less sensitive to light, the higher the number the more sensitive to light but at the expense of resolution.
Not sure exactly how you selected different iso settings on your camera Tom but try holding the iso button down and clicking one of the dials on the camera.
All these things can be a bit confusing at first! They all control the EV (exposure value) So say you have iso 100, 1/125 @ f 5.6 by selecting iso 200 you have moved the exposure - 1 stop. The same if you move the shutter to 1/250 or the f stop to f 8. So to stop an under exposure when you select iso 200 choose 1/60 or f 4.
Have a play with the camera and look at the results of different exposures.
-
Cheers Johnny I think I'm sort of getting the hang of it now. Was just playing around but the batterys run out now so wont be able to have another go until tomorrow :(
-
Cheers Johnny I think I'm sort of getting the hang of it now. Was just playing around but the batterys run out now so wont be able to have another go until tomorrow :(
:lol: Typical eh! You'll pick it up ok.
-
Just been playing around a bit today on macro mode again, slowly getting the hang of manual focus and depth of field now I think. One thing I noticed is that for most macro shots it wouldnt focus properly no matter how I tried to set it up, is this just because the lens isnt suited for macro shots? Anyway these were the only two that really came out ok.
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2270/2126171613_84e66eccde_o.jpg)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2326/2126944284_0c9ec3630a_o.jpg)
-
I like that bridge. Photos are looking good, keep it up! Practice makes perfect.
Also check out the Camerapedia (http://www.camerapedia.org/wiki/Main_Page), the glossary is really good, also the articles on the different camera models are a big help. And interesting too.
-
Cheers Mark looks like a good site. Just got this using macro mode, for some reason when I have it on fully manual it always gives me a really long shutter speed which makes the images blurry, washed out and sometimes just white :? Any ideas? Its obviously user error somewhere down the line :P
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2010/2126996480_5b982d0625.jpg)
-
Long shutter speed usually means there isn't enough light getting to the sensor, so it needs longer to develop the image. Try more light, a larger aperture (smaller number remember) or see if you can adjust the shutter speed.
-
I dont even know how to adjust the aperture and shutter speed, or if I am allready adjusting it I dont know what it is I'm adjusting :lol: Guess I should try and find the manual if she still has it..
-
Sometimes the aperture controls are on the lens. Y'know where you focus? Have a feel around for something to twist, it will lock into the different positions. should also have stuff marked on it. See the picture, taken with a horrible phone camera. The numbers close to the body are focus, the 50mm stuff is for aperture size.
-
Ahh I see. No my lens doesnt seem to have that on it. Anyway took the camera into my garden and had a go at doing it all manually, didnt seem quite so bad once I got to grips with it, uploaded the ones that came out best here http://www.flickr.com/photos/22023945@N06/sets/72157603512458764/
My favourite is this one
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2143/2126385665_099f688eca_o.jpg)
An improvement?
-
Tom those pictures are terrific!
I particularly like the 'Church Spire mist' picture. It creates a feeling of subtle detachment and isolation for me.
Either that or I've been listening to too much Joy Division lately ... :)
Seriously though, very nice stuff.
-
The camera doesnt really make alot of difference, they are fairly comparable nowadays, at least the digi ones.
I have been taking pictures for so long i cant even remember it, i now do occasional snapshots with a digi camera, which hasnt got alot to do with photography. Like with playing a guitar the effort is in learning to express yourself. Photography is a multitude of media, digital but also film, like when playing trough PC versus playing trough a tube amp.
If your serious about learning about photography i can give you a couple of tips.
Read about photography a bit so you know the basic features and their effects, try to play with those, take pictures at MANUAL setting, dont let the camera do anything for you. But also try to make mental notes what you did and learn from those. Dont delete everything that seems to be less then another picture you took but study it all.
The usefull thing about digi cameras is that you can try endlessly without the hassle and cost coming with using film. Ive spend soooooo many hours in a darkroom i really felt cheated when all this digital stuff came on the market.
When practicing to focus it is usefull to have a film camera around, their viewsceens are much brighter. Especially for portraits playing with focus is essential, you can make or break a good portrait with a good feeling for focus. Do not shoot portaits from hand at first, but take your time.
For dramatic environment shots try converting in black and white and add film grain like Kodak Tri-X, or just use that in a film camera offcourse. If you want to go that extra mile, develop it yourself in rodinal, its just such a spectacular look youll love it.
Ok, that will keep you busy some time, photography is a very rewarding hobby to me, i have captured so much important and interesting moments in my life.
Good luck, Henk
-
Thanks for that Henk, big post but some usefull stuff there :)
I've stopped using auto mode now, manual feels so much more rewarding when you manage to get a good/ok shot.
-
For years I had a totally manual SLR camera and learned the relationships between the aperture ( and the effect upon depth of field), film speed and shutter speed although I used to keep an ancient Russian light meter to hand for those awkward moments.It stood me in good stead and I used the knowledge in latter days to manipulate my digital cameras when those around are stuck on auto. Johnny's advice is bloody good and I would just say to look at the composition and think about that before you press the shutter. Having said that, with digital cameras you have far more flexibility to be creative back in the studio.
-
Is it just something I'll pick up through experience or should I read up on what the various adjustments will do to my photos?
I still dont really know what I'm adjusting on the camera, all I know is that the light meter is centred and I have the objects I want in focus in focus :lol: Will have a look for the manual later so I can see what I'm actually doing.
-
I would say, just learn the basics, inventing the wheel again IS rather a waste of time IMO.
Youll soon enough notice if you need more detailed info or not.
-
Just bought a 400D!!!!
Been playing with it a bit and have to say, been super impressed!
I'm the most amateur of amateur photographers but so far really like it =)
Here's a few shots - Resized obviously:
(http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v204/noodleplugerine/IMG_0041.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v204/noodleplugerine/IMG_0036.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v204/noodleplugerine/IMG_0014.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v204/noodleplugerine/IMG_0046.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v204/noodleplugerine/IMG_0057.jpg)
-
Those look great :) Nice and clear, seems to do better macro shots better than what I'm using but then again that may be down to user error again :lol:
Whilst on the guitar theme, I took this one earlier which I quite like :)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2215/2128114295_fb463d558f.jpg)
Someone on flickr also commented on the photos being a bit under-saturated so its clear I need to sort that out. When I lower the iso to 800 or 400 it improves the saturation but makes the image much less sharp than a quicker speed. Dont suppose that'd be a problem if I was always shooting with a tripod, but I'm not :P
-
Very nice shot!
-
Thanks :) May have found out why I was getting the underexposed shots, just needed to adjust the aperture a bit. You can see the difference below (though I allready cant remember if it was on 10 on the 2nd one or a higher number :?) I think I changed the iso from 1600 down to 100 as well.
(http://i4.tinypic.com/6keipsl.jpg)
edit - I decided to use my flickr page instead of deviantart as its a dedicated photo website and you get better feedback than on deviantart :) So if anyone wants to see my flickr profile/add me etc its here - http://www.flickr.com/people/22023945@N06/
-
See you're picking it up already Tom!
A lower iso setting will give you a better quality picture than something around 1600. The transparency film i used to use was iso 50, on a light box it looked like you could literally walk into it.
It's all about finding a happy medium. If your using a long lens then you will need a shutter speed that is quite fast to eliminate camera shake, so that has to take a priority. On Canons there is a shutter or aperture priority setting (Tv and Av) BUT the camera meter is still just reading light from the center of the view finder. That could be anything and on evaluated metering it just uses an average based on the brightest and darkest areas, so the whole thing just looks wrong. So say your using a 70/200 MM Zoom, put the camera on manual select a shutter speed around 250/1- 320/1 Sec, try and stop down the aperture at least a bit so your not wide open, then adjust the iso to suit based on a spot meter reading from a mid tone, grass is best.
Again you should have a read on how light meters work, it will really help. There are two types Reflective, which is the type that are built into cameras and Incedent (Not sure of the spelling) which measure light falling on to the subject, like the ones you see studio photographers holding in front of peoples faces when they test the flash. They usually have a opaque white dome on them. The advantage these have over the meters in cameras is they can't be fooled into giving incorrect readings by colour or very bright tones like snow. All light meters see everything in 18% grey so you have to help them by taking readings that are mid tones like grass or skin.
-
Will definitely have a read so I understand it better. I dont know how to get the spot meter up on this camera will have to have a look through the manual to find it. Does the mid tone on that just have to be set once, or each time you take a photo, so that you're getting the mid tone set to work with the lighting you're in? Guess its similar to setting gray point etc for the curves adjustment in photoshop.
-
Will definitely have a read so I understand it better. I dont know how to get the spot meter up on this camera will have to have a look through the manual to find it. Does the mid tone on that just have to be set once, or each time you take a photo, so that you're getting the mid tone set to work with the lighting you're in? Guess its similar to setting gray point etc for the curves adjustment in photoshop.
Once you have decided what your going to shoot, you look for a mid tone in the view finder and take a reading from it using the spot meter. It depends on the light where you take one from. Overcast, then the light is the same all over so anywhere will do. In sunlight with fast moving clouds it's always changing so from somewhere in shot. Always check your meter before taking a picture. Then just adjust it acording to how it looks on screen, but spoting from a mid tone should put you right on it.
-
I learned a lot from a book called Understanding Exposure (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Understanding-Exposure-Photographs-Digital-Camera/dp/0817463003/ref=sr_1_17?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1198511355&sr=1-17). Sets out stuff in a nice numpty fashion.
Another book worth the money is Basic Photography (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Basic-Photography-Michael-Langford/dp/0240515927/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1198511855&sr=8-2), this one is a lot more technical.
I tend to look at other peoples photographs and try and understand how they've achieved the picture. Study how they compose the picture and how it's lit.
I've played with a 300D and a 350D but I prefer Nikons as I find the 300 series Canons a bit small for my clumpy hands. I plumped for a D70s last year and it does what I need it to do.
Ignore Auto and stick to manual mode, that's how I'm learning.
One thing I've also picked up is trash the shite pics as you'll soon be running out of space for storing them all.
Oh and if you thought guitars are an expensive hobby...
Plus if you like landscape photography then get used to getting up at stupid o'clock to catch the light! Good luck!
-
Yeah I can see allready that photography is going to be expensive :lol: I think I'll stick to the 350D for now, I know now how to adjust the shutter speed, aperture and iso and that took me long enough, dont fancy learning how to use another for a while :D
I just realised that I labeled the picture above wrong, the underexposed one should be 10 and the one that looks brighter/more colourful should be 5.6 I think!
Cheers for all the info guys, have a good christmas :)
-
I just realised that I labeled the picture above wrong, the underexposed one should be 10 and the one that looks brighter/more colourful should be 5.6 I think!
Definetly - The F Number is inverse to the aperture - High aperture = lower F number = sharper focus. Low aperture = high F number = huge focal depth.
-
Well its been almost a month after I ordered and still havent received my camera, starting to think I've been scammed out of my money :\ Ordered it from www.mycameras2006.com luckily just used paypal so they dont have my bank details or anything, so I've opened up a case in paypal. Lets see what happens from here, I just wanna get a camera and start taking photos again!
-
Well my 350D actually arrived yesterday finally. My advice - never order from mycameras2006.com, ever! The prices are fine but the service is POOR. Took some new photos today let me know what you think! http://www.flickr.com/photos/22023945@N06/
They still looked a bit underexposed so I had to edit most of them in photoshop - the aperture was wide open and I adjusted shutter speed so that the light meter was in the middle but still turned out a bit underexposed.
-
Hi Tom, glad to hear your camera turned up, I'm sure you will get a lot out of it.
Just looking at 'Freddie again' on flickr. If you have used photoshop to correct it it then it's hard to say much about it. The lawn in the middle is bang on exposure wise whilst young freddie is under exposed and cropped too much. If he is your main subject then I would have composed with him in the 'bottom right 3rd' and taken a light reading on the light in the shade where freddie is not on the middle of the lawn. So that would have been camera on manual, shutter around 30/s or 60/s, spot meter in on grass by freddie in the shade. Using the iso and the aperture work on getting the meter in the middle. Then pre focus on his head, re compose, then a little call from you, just as freddie looks towards you press the shutter.
-
Cheers Johnny, I still need to find out how to do the spot meter readings, will have a flick through the manual later. The newer pics definitely look more colourful than the last lot, to me at least :)
The trouble I'm finding now is that if I want a longer shutter speed to increase the exposure then I lose all the clarity due to movement. Guess its time to buy a tripod?
Also, freddie is a little git and wouldnt look at me when I called him :lol:
-
Now you need to get a 50! the 50 1.8, cost about 80 quid and that'll really teach you photography.
It's kinda funny, all my favourite band shots have been with the 50 1.8 on my Canon 1D MK II, can't wait until i have a 35 and a 85!
Begone, zoom lenses!
If anyone wants to check out my mugraphy, http://lugerman.deviantart.com/gallery/ there ya go!
P.S, i find that a +20 to +30 on hue/saturation before exporting to jpeg really works with canon images, at least with my 1D. Though this camera is meant for press work and thus by it's nature creates quite flat images, not sure how the 350's handle it.
-
I take it you're talking about lenses? I have no idea what the difference is between them all hence why I just got a kit :lol: Johnny, still cant find the light meter function, the only thing I can find that seems similar to what you mean is the custom white balance which allows you to set a custom shadow, highlight and mid tone I think.
Had a go at taking some night photos today, a lot of them came out pretty cr@p due to not having a tripod and needing a longer exposure, meaning the photos were really blurry. I think this one turned out allright though
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2053/2252714445_5eb9f2e3e4_o.jpg)
-
Tom here is a pdf file of the manual for your camera, the 350d.
http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/pdf/EOSDRXT350DIM-EN.pdf
Page 77 covers metering modes.
The spot meter is called partial metering, which is basically the same thing as spot metering from what I can tell by reading their gumpf.
So have a go at that in manual mode.
Nice night picture. Motorways at night look good for long exposures. Get a tripod you wont regret it! A carboot sale should be good place to get one as there is tonnes of second hand stuff out there. The screw thread is a 1/4" whitworth thread and is a standard fit for all cameras. If you haven't got a cable shutter release use the self timer.
-
Nice photo's so far Tom!
I took some random ones the other day...i think it's a pity i don't have a good camera or any real talent as the scenery won't be there much longer, and it's pretty interesting! =
Car -
(http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a99/chrisola/alfagta014.jpg)
Flood plain -
(http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a99/chrisola/alfagta005.jpg)
And again -
(http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a99/chrisola/alfagta004.jpg)
-
Spot metering is something you wont have on your camera, but partial metering is the closest you will get, it being 8-10% of the frame while spot being about 3% i belive.
Only pro/higher end canons have spot metering, it's the reason why i went for a 1D MK II, as in concert photography it's very usefull but in the general real world Center Weighted metering is what i use for general shots, though i use it in complete manual mode and judge it myself...
Looks like im going back to college for photography, i need to study _something_ heheh!
-
Ah I see, cheers. I may give it a go, but so far I've been fairly happy with the results (though a lot of the time they do need sprucing up in photoshop a bit for me to be happy).
What improvement would that 50 1.8 lens give me? I see its not a zoom so I guess not quite as versatile but if the quality of the photos will be a vast improvement I'm all for it.
-
Ah I see, cheers. I may give it a go, but so far I've been fairly happy with the results (though a lot of the time they do need sprucing up in photoshop a bit for me to be happy).
What improvement would that 50 1.8 lens give me? I see its not a zoom so I guess not quite as versatile but if the quality of the photos will be a vast improvement I'm all for it.
An aperture of 1.8 will mean much quicker shutter speed to the 3.6 or so that you're probably used to. And fixed lenses generally make much better shots than there zoom equivalents.
Ideally you want fixed lenses of sizes you use most - 50 for the typical snapshots, somewhere between 80 and 120 for portrait shots, and then a bigger one for nature stuff.
Zooms are generally a neccesary evil for their versatility.
-
I'll say this much about zoom's : the cheepest one worth having for me, is £800.
The only zoom lens i've ever used professionally has been the 70-200 2.8 L IS, which is £1300 or so (not what i paid ;) )
With fixed/prime lenses, you gotta take that 1.6x crop factor into account. Basically take the MM, say 50mm and multiply it by 1.6, so that makes a 50mm's effectively and 80mm lens, which is good for portraits as i'd use a 85mm lens on a full frame camera.
The 35mm F/2.0 would be the closest you could get to a '50mm' range, it'd be 56mm. Sigma also do a 30mm lens for digital only camera's but i've never used it.
Of course this is all going a bit advanced and probably more than most people require but anyone who's getting into photography in any semi serious mannor will have a few prime lenses in their kit bag.
-
Ahh I see, cheers. Do you think the 50 1.8 will work for what I usually use my camera for? If you look through my flickr album you can get an idea of what its like at the minute - http://www.flickr.com/photos/22023945@N06/
I'm not exactly specialising in anything yet, I just like taking photos of things that look good to me :lol: Tbh I dont actually use the zoom much on my lens, I usually leave it in the middle on the dot just past 24 on the little dial thing (sorry I dont know what its called :P)
-
Tom I'd stick with your zoom for now. If you want to upgrade to better lenses then go for f2.8 ultrasonic zooms from 16-35mm 35-70mm and 70-200mm. Although these are expensive they are a lot more versatile and cheaper than individual ones and take up a lot less room in a kit bag.
Also shooting a with a wide open aperture isn't such a good idea as focus becomes critical.