Thread: dSLR Cameras

My camera does not do RAW files, but when I get a dSLR camera I will. I will have to get a 4 gig card just to make up for the difference in file sizes.

I did ask my professor what he suggested for a beginner RAW file taker and he did suggest to use RAW+JPEG if the camera allows it. He said that until you really get good at RAW editing you will not be too good at it, so by also taking that JPEG photo you will have a finished product just in case.

He did make the comment that once you do get good with RAW editing, you will never shoot any other way again. He said that because you can make a crappy picture an awesome picture with RAW, but with a crappy jpeg you might only be able to make it okay.

Went to the NY Metropolitan Museum of History today, practiced taking photos with large depth of view and narrow depth of view. Most did not come out so good because it was indoors, but some of the dinosaur stuff with the larger depth of view did do an interesting thing with the lights above it.... I am guessing because less light was allowed in? See my next post.

All a learning curve right?

Both pictures have been shrunk to 72 PPI (Pixels Per Inch) as a resolution and 640 x 480. Also, both pictures were taken indoors no flash using AV mode (Aperture Priority) The camera guessed the shutter speed for the Aperture I picked...

First one is F/2.8 with shutter of 1/50 focal length 6MM. The second picture is F/8 with shutter of 1/8 and focal length of 6MM.

I am thinking the slow shutter is what blurred the lights...

What a fun project!
I was surprised to learn in photography class that most of learning photography is just playing around with your equipment. I assumed these great photographers just always know exactly what to do at every moment to get every pictures and while that may be occasionally true to some extent, for the most part it's just playing around taking several shots until you get the one you want.

That made me feel good about learning. Like we're all always learning.

Yes, as I read the chapters for homework, I come to find out that most of the time a photographer will take a picture several times before finally getting close to what he/she wants then using photoshop or elements to really clean up the picture.

As I said before I like that 50mm 1.4 with USM, I just found out that the price range for the 1.8 without USM is 1/2.. So, I might get that lens... I have been doing some reading about what to get as far as lens is concerned.. The few "blogs" I have read all say do not really get that "all purpose" lens (like a long range zoom - 18-200mm is one example) because you might as well get a really fancy point and shoot. They were saying that even though technology is getting better it is still hard to make a good quality piece of glass (I think that is photographer lingo ) with that long range of a focal point.

Of course the ideal set up would be to have nothing but fixed lenses but I am not that rich, and do not want to change the lens every 2 seconds, but anyway, I have been thinking about 2 tele lenses, or one cheap long focal lens then when I get better 2 shorter ranges with a 2x converter or a shorter range with a 2x converter..

Buying lenses is more confusing then buying the body...

Lenses are so complicated, especially when I don't fully understand the concept. I mean, I know the technical meaning of f.stop and DOV and all that and what each of my lenses are going to do for me. But I'm not so educated as to know what I really want. I have a good idea. So it takes so much research to be sure you are making the right choice.

I did find a really great telephoto lens to dream about. It's the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L. But it's SO much money!

I am not even going to look at it - well yes I will after I post this but seeing the L in the name OMG it must be well over a grand.

I got pretty good with the F numbers pretty quick.. I mean I have not grasped it 100% but I can maybe answer a question or two.

Just remember the lower the F number the larger the aperture is open but the less depth of field. The higher the F number the smaller the aperture is open and the greater depth of field. Also, the higher the number the less light can enter the lens, and the smaller the number the greater the amount of light that can be let in.

With less depth of field you are limiting what the lens sees, causing a "blury" effect in the background. With greater depth of field the lens sees more making the background sharp. So you are on a cruise vacation and you want to take a picture of your beautiful family with the cruise ship in the background, you want to use a higher F number. If you used a lower F number the ship would come out blurry...

If your camera as an AV mode, take a picture of a flower with the F number all the way down, then take the same picture with the F number all the way up, pop the card into the PC and check out the results... Remember to really get close to the flower or it might not work out and you will see the same picture...

Here is an example, the first picture had an F stop of 2 the second had an F stop of 8.

You have really grasped the concept well! I can understand that even though f stop is a larger number,so lens is actually closed more, so less light can come through. What I have trouble with is the fact that you have a GREATER DOF. That seems so strange. Why is the hole smaller but you can actually see more?

Your pictures of the battery are a really great example. I play with my macro button all the time but haven't spent time adjusting aperature. Maybe that can be my fun project for this week?

DO IT!! Best way to learn!! Plus not sure where you are from, but us NY'ers are quickly losing flowers and flowers make great DOF/DOV examples...And make pretty subjects...

I totally see what you are saying about the aperture. I wanted to ask my professor last week, but did not get a chance, next week I will...That too seems weird to me also, I did not even put the light into the thought. I just figured common sense says small hole cant see as much, large hole can see more... ?

Maybe it is one of those things we will never know...

Originally Posted by sk8erguy1978

That too seems weird to me also, I did not even put the light into the thought. I just figured common sense says small hole cant see as much, large hole can see more... ?

Maybe it is one of those things we will never know...

It's the photo gods, trying to keep us on our toes.