Only other thing that comes to mind is ISO, but can that be set to 400ish and left whilst i'm learning?
No, set it to auto iso. Fixing iso at a random number will screw up everything else you're doing.
Chat Forum
[closed]
Good starter SLR?
-
No, set it to auto iso. Fixing iso at a random number will screw up everything else you're doing.Posted 1 year ago # -
Not knowing too much about photography am I right in thinking that its really just shutter speed and aperture that you have to mess around with
You don't NEED to mess about with them - the defaults will give you fine pictures. First thing to try might be choosing the 'correct' scene mode for what you are doing ie flick to the little running man for taking action shots.
But if you want to know what's actually happening to your pics when you choose the scene modes, then a bit of basic photography theory will help lots.
Changing aperture will have a certain effect, as will changing shutter speed. You may or may not want those effects, or they may not be relevant. If you are taking scenery shots, for example, then they won't really matter. With a digital camera there are other things you can change like contrast and metering.
The best technique to learn first I'd say (that'll have most benefit to your pictures) is the button half-press technique. Which incidentally usually works on compacts too.
Posted 1 year ago # -
If you are taking scenery shots, for example, then they won't really matter.
Oh yes it will...
You'll want to look up hyperfocal distances too.
Posted 1 year ago # -
It won't matter as much as overall exposure... Remember we are talking about beginners here.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Aperture = depth of field. It matters.
But, yes, the mountainy icon thing does exactly the same thing as setting it manually.
As a beginner it's worth reading about hyperfocal distances though. It's not intuitive to focus on nearby things when taking photos of stuff in the far distance.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Better to master one or two simple techniques first tho..? Hence shutter half press.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Understanding depth-of-field is one of those simple techniques isn't it? You'll get better results out of a p&s in a lot of cases if you don't understand it.
Although sticking to scene modes as you suggest is a good alternative.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Yeah, DoF is page 2 of the manual I suppose.
Posted 1 year ago # -
like an SLR, but withut the
faffflexibility of changeing lenses
FTFY.
My other camera has 28 and 50mm lenses, maybe I don't know what I'm missing out on
Posted 1 year ago # -
Whatever you buy, read the manual properly.
You can set DSLR's up to suit almost any shooting situation, but you will be much better off if you learn the basics:
Learn how shutter speed, apeture and ISO influence each other first (it's not as difficult as people make out, a camera is just a box with a hole in it).
Plenty of great books out there that cover the basics in less time than it's just taken me to read this thread!Once you've got that sorted, learn how the light meter and autofocus systems work on your camera, so it does what you want, when you want it to.
It's pretty difficult to buy a bad camera these days, TBH, but the future of the four thirds system is by no means certain, unfortunately.
Just pick the one that feels best when you pick it up and play with it.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Learn how shutter speed, apeture and ISO influence each other first
That holds true for all cameras not just SLRs.
Posted 1 year ago # -
That holds true for all cameras not just SLRs.
Most compacts are very limited in what you can do with the aperture and thanks to sensor size has a limited effect on depth-of-field. ISO range is limited too.Posted 1 year ago # -
I don't know about most cameras. Most of the comapcts I've used have full manual controls. However you are of course quite correct about the effects of these changes being limited.
However deep DoF is not always a bad thing - hand-held macro on my old compact was way easier than on my SLR with the macro lens, because you got much greater DoF. Also made the pictures better too. To get the same results I'm going to need a ring flash as well as the macro lens, which on their own cost more than the original compact did...
Posted 1 year ago # -
Yeah, absolutely. Shallow DOF from dslrs takes some managing.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Which compacts molgrips?
Am looking for something with a proper viewfiinder, full manual control and reasonable weather protection at the mo, nothing seems to fit the bill.Posted 1 year ago # -
Olympus C-5050Z was my old compact until last year. We've also got an Oly mju (I think, not sure) that also has full manual control.
There are things I miss about the 5050 actually - in MF mode it had a distance scale on the LCD which was quite useful. It also had an optical viewfinder.
Next purchase perhaps for me:
Posted 1 year ago # -
Addictive, isn't it?
Did you get a decent tripod BTW? Seem to remember you were after one.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Nah, no tripod yet. Have to allocate the funds, but I really want a wide angle lens for the up coming summertime trips in the Alps. 350 quid seems to be the bargain bin price for US/Hong Kong stuff, or used here.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Sigma 10-20 is never off the camera these days, plenty about s/h at the mo.
Tripods make such a difference to macro with an slr though, opens up a whole new world!Posted 1 year ago # -
Compared to the Olympus Zuiko Digital 9-18mm F4-5.6, the Sigma [10-20mm] is simply outclassed in practically every regard, with only its excellent control of chromatic aberration to boast about. In contrast the Olympus is significantly sharper, especially wide open, and has much lower distortion and falloff, making it the clear winner in this contest)
I reckon I can get the Oly for a similar price.
This is the tripod I want for macro - dunno if the moving parts will make it not stable enough for telephoto:
Posted 1 year ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
