^this is good advice.
Also read this: [url]http://www.picturecorrect.com/tips/photography-exposure-basics/[/url]
If you want you can also Google some more info on "exposure" in photography, which will help you learn how to operate the camera. After that, look up the basics of "composition," which will help you take better-looking photos.
I feel insignificant, My camera is a shitty, old point-and-shoot [url=http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-cameras/polaroid-pdc-5070-black/4505-6501_7-31383148.html]Polaroid PDC-5070[/url]. I've been meaning to get at least a simple DSLR, but they're so pricey. Either way, the battery life on the Polaroid is shit, the video recording quality is shit, and [url=http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs38/f/2008/314/f/e/fe4953319aed1ee60ef77072a4bf48e0.jpg]here[/url] [url=http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs38/f/2008/314/9/c/Building_In_Quebec_City_by_F_TangKrazee.jpg]are[/url] [url=http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs41/i/2009/028/5/7/Kakabeka_Falls_by_F_TangKrazee.jpg]some[/url] [url=http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs40/i/2009/027/f/4/Amethyst_Mines_by_F_TangKrazee.jpg]photo[/url] [url=http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs45/i/2009/073/e/4/Boldt_Castle_Tower_by_F_TangKrazee.jpg]examples[/url] from the camera, they're not too crap (aside from the datestamp) IMO, and also unedited. It's got a 2GB SD card in it, I have an 8GB lying around, but I have that in a [url=http://store.kodak.com/store/ekconsus/en_US/pd/PLAYSPORT_Video_Camera__Zx3/productID.169976100]Kodak PlaySport[/url] compact HD camera. As for other things, the tripod I have is partially jammed and from the 1970's, my dad got it when he was like 16 alongside an old super8 camera he still has lying around. I have a couple of film SLRs we found after my grandfather died, but we haven't tested any of them, don't have film for them, and they're pretty dirty. One of the old cameras is some Russian camera from the '30's - '50s, after some searching I found out it's from the FED series, and likely a FED-1.
Camera quality is not nearly as important as composition - a good photographer can produce some spectacular shots on his mobile phone if he cared to do so.
[QUOTE=Jo The Shmo;30503068]Read the whole manual, that's what I always do with any new electronics.
[editline]16th June 2011[/editline]
(That is, the things with many features and buttons that aren't standard to other devices)[/QUOTE]
The annoying thing is that the manual is in Swedish so all the terms such as shutter and whatnot are also translated. Which I find very annoying.
Same issue with my programming books where everything gets messed up when I try to talk about it. Term wise at least.
Still, I'll keep going and I read the link Skyhawk suggested.
don't leave it in auto mode, turn it to 'P' ("Program Automatic"). it's like auto, but you control the sensitivity of your sensor (ISO) and a few other things like when exactly you want to pop up your flash, or the color mode (SD "standard" is default, the mode names are self explanatory). It shouldn't override your shooting mode unless [i]maybe[/i] you turn your camera off or something. I know my 5000 wouldn't stay on infra-red remote mode for long regardless of what I did.
in regards to ISO, lower numbers are more accurate (200 ISO), high numbers take light in faster so you can get better shutter speeds in darker lighting conditions and such, but the problem is you start getting grain and color noise/distortion, so balance wisely. You'll figure it out as ya go.
[QUOTE=Skyhawk;30508428]Camera quality is not nearly as important as composition - a good photographer can produce some spectacular shots on his mobile phone if he cared to do so.[/QUOTE]
Spectacular. No. Decent/good. Yes.
The advice of 'better a shitty camera than no camera' is good because any camera will make you think about composition. But that doesn't mean you can get great shots out of your shitty mobile phone just because you have a good composition.
ah HAH, figured out something that's been bothering me, this'll save me on needing to get wireless triggers!
I've been itching to use my speedlite flash wirelessly with my camera in conjunction with my Alienbees flash, [i]wirelessly[/i]. The AB unit can sync up alongside any flash it sees, but the issue is that the IR/flash syncing system with my camera uses the pop-up flash, and will pre-flash to meter light then flash again to tell the speedlite (sb-600) to fire. unless I cup my hand around the popup so it only fires directly at the speedlite, the AB unit will catch the pre-flash and fire prematurely, then not cycle enough energy to flash with the real picture.
long story short, it means it goes off at the right time and my picture is only lit by the speedlite, which is usually just a rim light if I'm doing this setup.
I tried experimenting today with the setup again for the first time in a while, and came across the realization that the quiet and mirror up shooting modes probably meter then hold, so I gave them a shot and it works most of the time, yay. M-up is obviously retarded since you go blind then have to take the shot again, but Q seems to be fast enough to not really care but slow enough to let the AB cycle power (at least at lower values; haven't played with high power but I don't really care that much about super-high power stuff right this instant)
so, expect a few new studio setup portraits sooner or later, can't wait to give shots a little more depth than what a single umbrella and some crafty reflectors have provided thus far.
[QUOTE=bopie;30490079][url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_ABUTO3vx0][img]http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Pic/Nikon-AH-4-Leather-Hand-Grip.jpg[/img][/url]
:v:[/QUOTE]
I've got a similar strap, though mine just kind of loops from the normal loophole to a bracket that fits to the tripod mount, so it just sits over the back of your hand instead of what appears to be strapping you in. it SAYS nikon on it, but I doubt it's sanction :v:
still good for crowd-control, I don't let go of it in tight situations anyways and it's pretty solid.
[QUOTE=DoubleDD;30516076]Spectacular. No. Decent/good. Yes.
The advice of 'better a shitty camera than no camera' is good because any camera will make you think about composition. But that doesn't mean you can get great shots out of your shitty mobile phone just because you have a good composition.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, you're right. Perhaps I should have said "relatively spectacular." Much better-looking than a typical snapshot, anyway.
Key part with shit gear is understanding the limitations.
Just about anything can do decent facebook-sized photos. Especially if your photo isn't the regular dull landscape, but rather something interesting. As long as you understand that if the camera has bad low-light performance, dof, and dynamic range, you don't go to extreme.
[QUOTE=evilking1;30528478]Key part with shit gear is understanding the limitations..[/QUOTE]
You mean 'any' gear. Unless you pay £5000 for a camera, you'll have limitations. Just less of them.
I want one of these.
[img]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4097/5413594019_e943877592.jpg[/img]
Zenza Bronica 6x6 with 'Zenzanon PS' 65mm f/4.
:allears:
I want a D700 :smith:
[editline]18th June 2011[/editline]
Might turn my lifestyle into supersaver mode and hopefully afford one.
I'm thinking my next purchase will be some sort of MF SLR system camera, maybe a Mamiya RB67
[img]http://photos.jonathangazeley.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/mamiyafb67pros.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Roll_Program;30534663]Might turn my lifestyle into supersaver mode and hopefully afford one.[/QUOTE]
That's how I afforded my 5D2.
It's actually kinda fun to get 'jewish' with your money. I was saving every penny.
[editline]18th June 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=H4Z3Y;30534738]I'm thinking my next purchase will be some sort of MF SLR system camera, maybe a Mamiya RB67
[img]http://photos.jonathangazeley.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/mamiyafb67pros.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
It's a beast of a camera.
[img]http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l2234tXsIM1qz8vizo1_500.jpg[/img]
Eh, not sure if this is the right thread but I am planning to buy a 70-200mm F2.8 L lens for my 7D, the non-IS version.
Does any one here owns it and can give me some hands on feedback on it?
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;30540588]Eh, not sure if this is the right thread but I am planning to buy a 70-200mm F2.8 L lens for my 7D, the non-IS version.
Does any one here owns it and can give me some hands on feedback on it?[/QUOTE]
I don't own it but I hear the F4 IS is sharper. And it's a shit load lighter.
[QUOTE=Xera;30545652]I don't own it but I hear the F4 IS is sharper. And it's a shit load lighter.[/QUOTE]
consider stopping down to f/4 for that sharpness. it's not like the f/2.8 is a blurry piece of shit.
sometimes getting the lower f/ lens is a good idea, because once it gets to the same f/ as the other lens it's much sharper by comparison. If it weren't so much more expensive, I'd have gotten a 50mm 1.4 instead of the 1.8, because it's about as sharp at 1.8 as the 1.8 is between 2.0 and 2.8
I know it's nitpicking-extreme, but still a consideration.
My dad got me a camera bag as a surprise early birthday gift!
[img]http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/553/dsc002801.jpg[/img]
It's a Case Logic. Pockets on the front and back, room for a lens on each side, and a "hammock suspension system" inside for the camera. Much better than the crappy holster I was using (yes, as my exclusive bag) that felt like if I bumped it against anything it would snap the lens.
Case Logic make nice bags. Wish they had that one for sale when I needed it.
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;30540588]Eh, not sure if this is the right thread but I am planning to buy a 70-200mm F2.8 L lens for my 7D, the non-IS version.
Does any one here owns it and can give me some hands on feedback on it?[/QUOTE]
I have the F4 flavor, and I know for a fact that it's noticeably sharper than the f2.8.
Rather stupid question but what are these thingys good for?
[url]http://www.rajalacamera.se/PublishedService?file=page&pageID=9&itemcode=39JAB73101[/url]
I see a lot of cameras having these on. If not almost all cameras.
think of it as the brim of a hat. It keeps the sun from hitting the glass on your lens (causing lots of haze or glare) unless it's actually in the shot.
Also people keep them on their cameras indoors because having a petal-shaped lens hood on at all times makes you ~pro~ (despite being a tiny but considerable source of vignette in less than optimal lighting). the flower-petal design ones (like the one you linked to) don't vignette the corners as much as a 'bucket' style one with no shaped cut-out, because the cut-out is fit to the shape of the frame so the corners get more light and the top/bottom get more shade, essentially evening out any effect it might have.
a crappy and/or wrongly sized bucket will give you a [url=http://forums.steves-digicams.com/attachments/misc-accessories/35520d1125719065-lens-hood-do-they-serve-purpose-vignetted-vinaigrette.jpg]tunnel effect[/url] (filename "vignetted vinaigrette", do ho ho). I saw this [i]built in[/i] on a kit lens for some tiny sony bridge SLR at best buy once, it was pathetic.
[QUOTE=Jaanus;30553035]I have the F4 flavor, and I know for a fact that it's noticeably sharper than the f2.8.[/QUOTE]
Even against newest version of the f2.8?
I've only used the first one
I'm currently saving up for the Nikon D3100 DSLR + 18-55 VR and then I'll start doing some serious photography. Do you guys recommend certain books etc. for a beginner photographer.
This is a good one: [url]http://www.hasselblad.com/media/2207875/astronauts_manual_singlepage_lr.pdf[/url]
It goes through all the basic and is fun to read.
I WANT A 7D!
im thinking of getting a tamrac backpack
[QUOTE=daijitsu;30559259]think of it as the brim of a hat. It keeps the sun from hitting the glass on your lens (causing lots of haze or glare) unless it's actually in the shot.
Also people keep them on their cameras indoors because having a petal-shaped lens hood on at all times makes you ~pro~ (despite being a tiny but considerable source of vignette in less than optimal lighting). the flower-petal design ones (like the one you linked to) don't vignette the corners as much as a 'bucket' style one with no shaped cut-out, because the cut-out is fit to the shape of the frame so the corners get more light and the top/bottom get more shade, essentially evening out any effect it might have.
a crappy and/or wrongly sized bucket will give you a [url=http://forums.steves-digicams.com/attachments/misc-accessories/35520d1125719065-lens-hood-do-they-serve-purpose-vignetted-vinaigrette.jpg]tunnel effect[/url] (filename "vignetted vinaigrette", do ho ho). I saw this [i]built in[/i] on a kit lens for some tiny sony bridge SLR at best buy once, it was pathetic.[/QUOTE]
Thank you for the info.
Is it not easier to just make your own vignette in photoshop (Black picture, deleted the center in an oval shape, leaving out the corners, then blurring it and finally, turning down the opacity.) and place it on top of your footage? :v:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.