Digital SLR Camera advice

[Lavabe]

Give it a try. I find photography zen like. I always go shooting alone (although having an big camera around your neck is a conversation piece for sure!) and when you are out just looking for shots you start to really 'see' things that you wouldn't notice normally...light, shadow, the bend of branch the reflection on the water. Ohhhhmmmmm

It is DEFINITELY zen like. It's hard to beat the feeling of getting THE SHOT.

[lawgrad91]

Give it a try. I find photography zen like. I always go shooting alone (although having an big camera around your neck is a conversation piece for sure!) and when you are out just looking for shots you start to really 'see' things that you wouldn't notice normally...light, shadow, the bend of branch the reflection on the water. Ohhhhmmmmm

It is DEFINITELY zen like. It's hard to beat the feeling of getting THE SHOT.

It's also hard to beat the feeling of Hayward MISSING THE SHOT.

Oh, wrong thread....

[Lavabe]

Give it a try. I find photography zen like. I always go shooting alone (although having an big camera around your neck is a conversation piece for sure!) and when you are out just looking for shots you start to really 'see' things that you wouldn't notice normally...light, shadow, the bend of branch the reflection on the water. Ohhhhmmmmm

It is DEFINITELY zen like. It's hard to beat the feeling of getting THE SHOT.

It's also hard to beat the feeling of Hayward MISSING THE SHOT.

Oh, wrong thread....

Too bad ILJ didn't take a shot of him missing the shot.

[windsor]

Give it a try. I find photography zen like. I always go shooting alone (although having an big camera around your neck is a conversation piece for sure!) and when you are out just looking for shots you start to really 'see' things that you wouldn't notice normally...light, shadow, the bend of branch the reflection on the water. Ohhhhmmmmm

It is DEFINITELY zen like. It's hard to beat the feeling of getting THE SHOT.

It's also hard to beat the feeling of Hayward MISSING THE SHOT.

Oh, wrong thread....

But Laettner and Dockery GOT THE SHOT

[Lavabe]

But Laettner and Dockery GOT THE SHOT

Only difference is that ILJ was there to watch Hayward miss THE SHOT.

[ArkieDukie]

Give it a try. I find photography zen like. I always go shooting alone (although having an big camera around your neck is a conversation piece for sure!) and when you are out just looking for shots you start to really 'see' things that you wouldn't notice normally...light, shadow, the bend of branch the reflection on the water. Ohhhhmmmmm

It is DEFINITELY zen like. It's hard to beat the feeling of getting THE SHOT.

And it often takes a lot of shots to get THE SHOT. Exhibit A: Lavabe's lemur shot (avatar). One good piece of advice I was given back in my 35mm film camera days (a Pentax K1000) was to take LOTS of shots. That has definitely proven to be the case. Fortunately that's far cheaper with DSLR than with a film camera. It takes lots of practice to get exactly the shot you're envisioning, and it sometimes takes tweaks in camera settings and/or shooting angle to get what you're looking for. And sometimes you surprise yourself by finding THE SHOT in one that was not intended to be the great one.

I'm brave (crazy?) and don't do much editing of my pictures in Photoshop. I try to fix it as I go when shooting. The only set of photos I did any serious editing on was my zoo photos with my new (at the time) zoom lens. Other zoo patrons' elbows kept getting in the way of my shots.

[ArkieDukie]

Give it a try. I find photography zen like. I always go shooting alone (although having an big camera around your neck is a conversation piece for sure!) and when you are out just looking for shots you start to really 'see' things that you wouldn't notice normally...light, shadow, the bend of branch the reflection on the water. Ohhhhmmmmm

It is DEFINITELY zen like. It's hard to beat the feeling of getting THE SHOT.

It's also hard to beat the feeling of Hayward MISSING THE SHOT.

Oh, wrong thread....

[ArkieDukie]

Still trying to get a feel for the camera, but already am in love with Tamron 18-270 lens. It is going to be a great walk around lens. All shots were with that lens.

Constructive criticism is welcome!

<SNIP>
Aw gee...thank you.

I really like a couple of the sunset ones. What did I do? I moved to Florida where mother natures supplies spectacular sunsets on a regular basis . Seriously...I didn't do anything special. The lens was cranked out all the way...every bit of the 270 I had to play with...I forced the ISO down to 200 to get the rich color (the camera wanted about 400) I don't have I try pod, but I was sitting down and used my knees to steady the camera.

Three dolphins came along and were playing just at sunset...but I just didn't have enough lens for that. 200 yrds away in low light it just wasn't happening. I didn't post those. They look like blurry sharks

Good first attempts. Several constructive criticisms:
1) What software are you using or not using? The reason I say this is there seems to be a haze/purplish tinge on many of your shots. Even the sunsets have the same sort of haze. You have two options: a) use a haze or UV filter on your lens (you should ALWAYS have a filter on your lens, even for protection); and/or b) use some software on Photoshop or Corel to correct the haze. In high sunlight conditions, I'd suggest buying a polarizer filter.
2) The downside to using the zoom in lower light levels is that you wind up sacrificing depth of field in your photos. This is NOT a problem with the sunset photos. On the other hand, you may want more depth of field in human shots. In that case, I'd get the shots when there is more light outside. If you can't do that, then use more flash on the human shots. I also say this because I CAN NOT WAIT to see what you do with the dog photos. Shooting them is all about maximizing the depth of field.

But really, you're framing things nicely. I'd like to see you bring out more color.
Good work!!

Good tips, Lavabe! Do you see anything in my macro shots that needs to be fixed, aside from the obvious focus problems?

[Lavabe]

Good tips, Lavabe! Do you see anything in my macro shots that needs to be fixed, aside from the obvious focus problems?

I really like some aspects of the photos. It's hard not to point out the colors in the flowers, and you were able to catch some nice contrasts with the sunlight hitting them.

I don't think you have so much of a focus issue, so much as a depth of field issue. In your first shots (yellow/white lillies?), Pushing the f stop to like 16 or so would have brought the stamens/pollen into the picture, and would have even helped out some of the petals as well. In most of your flower photos, I personally would love to see all of the parts of the flower (sorry... it's that biology in me).

The beginning of your water lily sequence is very nice, as is one of your photos of a leaf. The opening flower is well-framed, and the color speaks for itself. But WHAT are you trying to do with the photo? You're not allowed to go into the pool and get a close-up, I know, but what are you trying to do? Catch the sunlight on the flower petals? Emphasize contrast?

I like the dragonfly shots A LOT. I wonder... have you tried using an extension tube? That might make the shot even better. The one question I would ask you is which of these insect shots do you like the most, and WHY? Your answer might be useful in addressing what you want to do better in your flower shots. What are you doing in these shots that you are NOT doing in your flower shots?

Just some initial thoughts.
Cheers,
Lavabe

[ArkieDukie]

Good tips, Lavabe! Do you see anything in my macro shots that needs to be fixed, aside from the obvious focus problems?

I really like some aspects of the photos. It's hard not to point out the colors in the flowers, and you were able to catch some nice contrasts with the sunlight hitting them.

I don't think you have so much of a focus issue, so much as a depth of field issue. In your first shots (yellow/white lillies?), Pushing the f stop to like 16 or so would have brought the stamens/pollen into the picture, and would have even helped out some of the petals as well. In most of your flower photos, I personally would love to see all of the parts of the flower (sorry... it's that biology in me).

The beginning of your water lily sequence is very nice, as is one of your photos of a leaf. The opening flower is well-framed, and the color speaks for itself. But WHAT are you trying to do with the photo? You're not allowed to go into the pool and get a close-up, I know, but what are you trying to do? Catch the sunlight on the flower petals? Emphasize contrast?

I like the dragonfly shots A LOT. I wonder... have you tried using an extension tube? That might make the shot even better. The one question I would ask you is which of these insect shots do you like the most, and WHY? Your answer might be useful in addressing what you want to do better in your flower shots. What are you doing in these shots that you are NOT doing in your flower shots?

Just some initial thoughts.
Cheers,
Lavabe

Thanks Lavabe! Actually, I was intentionally altering f-stops in most of the pics in order to get the final effect. It's a great idea to think about what I was trying to do in my shots. I'm not sure I've ever really done that consciously when going through my shots. It would definitely help my evolution as a photographer, though.

Ironically, I've decided I really like the soft focus in the very first of the yellow flower shots (as an aside, that one was at f/3.5 - what the heck was I thinking!). Usually I'm all about having everything in focus. That, and getting sunlight reflecting off the petals. For that reason I like the pink lily shots (5, 6, and 27)- unfortunately a bit too shadowed for my taste, but I love the pearlescent quality of the petals. Some of my iris shots in one of my other macro sets turned out a bit better in that regard. There's one shot where I was aiming for an ant inside the flower, so the rest of the flower was just there, so to speak.

My favorite dragonfly shots are the ones where the wings are a bit iridescent. Again, I was playing with f/stops to see what I could get. That, and I was moving around to get the best angle for the iridescent wings. The best of the shots were at f/18 (#11) and f/20 (#13) - background is blurry; dragonfly is in focus. There's one at f/10 (#12) where the background is wonderfully blurred. Unfortunately so is much of the dragonfly. Shot #10 has good detail on the dragonfly (f/18) but it seems like a boring, colorless shot in comparison to 11 and 13. YMMV. Would love to have an extension tube; that's another item that was added to my wish list after this class. Definitely more affordable than a bigger macro lens (mine is 60mm).

As for the water lily shots, I was aiming for either reflections or dragonflies. The first one was reflections, and I liked the color of the lily. Unfortunately I had a bit of difficulty focusing on the dragonflies when they were perched on the water lilies. I like to work on composition in those shots, but I also have to shoot around the markers that indicate the flower type.

[Lavabe]

Thanks Lavabe! Actually, I was intentionally altering f-stops in most of the pics in order to get the final effect. It's a great idea to think about what I was trying to do in my shots. I'm not sure I've ever really done that consciously when going through my shots. It would definitely help my evolution as a photographer, though.

Ironically, I've decided I really like the soft focus in the very first of the yellow flower shots (as an aside, that one was at f/3.5 - what the heck was I thinking!). Usually I'm all about having everything in focus. That, and getting sunlight reflecting off the petals. For that reason I like the pink lily shots (5, 6, and 27)- unfortunately a bit too shadowed for my taste, but I love the pearlescent quality of the petals. Some of my iris shots in one of my other macro sets turned out a bit better in that regard. There's one shot where I was aiming for an ant inside the flower, so the rest of the flower was just there, so to speak.

My favorite dragonfly shots are the ones where the wings are a bit iridescent. Again, I was playing with f/stops to see what I could get. That, and I was moving around to get the best angle for the iridescent wings. The best of the shots were at f/18 (#11) and f/20 (#13) - background is blurry; dragonfly is in focus. There's one at f/10 (#12) where the background is wonderfully blurred. Unfortunately so is much of the dragonfly. Shot #10 has good detail on the dragonfly (f/18) but it seems like a boring, colorless shot in comparison to 11 and 13. YMMV. Would love to have an extension tube; that's another item that was added to my wish list after this class. Definitely more affordable than a bigger macro lens (mine is 60mm).

As for the water lily shots, I was aiming for either reflections or dragonflies. The first one was reflections, and I liked the color of the lily. Unfortunately I had a bit of difficulty focusing on the dragonflies when they were perched on the water lilies. I like to work on composition in those shots, but I also have to shoot around the markers that indicate the flower type.

Thinking about what you want from a flower shot is something that would help you a lot. WHAT precisely fascinates you about flowers in terms of their beauty... the form, the color, the contrast, the texture? Each of these would require a slightly different approach. The contrasts and textures in the white lily capture my attention, which is why I really didn't go for the first three photos. In contrast, the #11 dragonfly has gorgeous focus, with just enough blur in background. I'd probably use some software to eliminate the light shine on the eyes.

[ArkieDukie]

Here are some of my most recent pics from the MoBot. I used the 18-105mm VR lens that came with my camera and shot in raw rather than jpg format. Made some minor alterations in exposure and white balance for a few of the shots (believe it or not, not the butterfly shots) to correct some experimentation I was doing with exposure locking. As always, constructive criticism is welcome.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/17449158@N ... 4713627602

Editorial comment: my favorite shot is one that didn't turn out exactly as planned. Anyone care to guess which one?

[YmoBeThere]

The bee on the flower?

[ArkieDukie]

The bee on the flower?

Nope! (cool iridescent wings though!)

[CathyCA]

I love the dragonfly and the butterfly pics!

[bjornolf]

Dude, Lavabe (and others), go to my website and critique some of my photos of the kids. I'd love to make them better. With the kids, they move around so much, I tend to just shoot as much as possible and hope for a few good ones. It usually seems to work out. Much better than with film camera, when it cost so much to develop a whole roll just for two shots. Now I only print the great ones.

Also, I have a photo situation I'd LOVE advice on...my kids' school performances. They are always too far away for a flash to help (it just blacks everything out), but they're always moving, so it gets blurry. Do I get a long lens and use a sports mode? Something else? Thanks.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bjornolf

[ArkieDukie]

Dude, Lavabe (and others), go to my website and critique some of my photos of the kids. I'd love to make them better. With the kids, they move around so much, I tend to just shoot as much as possible and hope for a few good ones. It usually seems to work out. Much better than with film camera, when it cost so much to develop a whole roll just for two shots. Now I only print the great ones.

Also, I have a photo situation I'd LOVE advice on...my kids' school performances. They are always too far away for a flash to help (it just blacks everything out), but they're always moving, so it gets blurry. Do I get a long lens and use a sports mode? Something else? Thanks.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bjornolf

Bjornolf, there's nothing wrong with getting lots of pics - that's really one of the big secrets to getting THE good shot.

One thing I noticed on a few of your shots is that a flash would've helped a bit. the shot was outdoors and bright, but the kids were dark. Assuming you were close enough, a flash would've brought them out of the shadows. It's completely counterintuitive to use a flash outdoors, but sometimes it helps when you're shooting people. It also might have helped in the picture of Michael in the slide, but I'm not sure what the flash would do inside the tunnel.

One other thing you could've tried, maybe, was spot metering. The default metering mode on the Nikon DSLRs is matrix metering, which means the camera uses the entire frame to decide the correct combination of aperture and shutter speed to get good exposure for the picture you're taking. If you go to spot metering, the settings are determined from the point in the center of the frame. If your subject is not in the center of the frame, you can get the appropriate exposure settings by aiming at them, get everything set, hold down the AE lock button (there's one on the D90 - not sure about the D60), re-compose your picture, and take the shot. That's something I'm trying to practice doing these days - it's a bit tricky. I think it might be easier to get the subject in the center, hold down the button halfway to focus and set exposure, move your camera to re-compose while holding the button down halfway, and then shoot.

Metering might also be key in the shots for your kids' plays. You will probably want to use spot or center-weighted metering so you're getting the correct settings for the stage rather than the room. If you can do it, determine the settings using your child's face with spot metering. The pro photographer who taught all of the classes I've taken uses the same basic strategy for sporting events and plays: take test shots to get the settings you want, then go into manual mode and feed in the settings for aperture and shutter speed that gave the results you want, and leave them alone for the rest of the evening. I'd probably go with aperture or shutter priority mode. You'll probably have to crank up the ISO as high as you can stand it on your camera in order to get a fast enough shutter speed. Highest acceptable ISO for a particular camera is partially an issue of personal taste, and a grainy picture may be better than no picture at all. You would also likely want the aperture to be wide open (lowest number) to let in as much light as possible. Summary for the plays: aperture wide open, ISO as high as it takes to get the correct shutter speed (at least above 1/60, but higher if you're using a zoom).

The bad thing about most zoom lenses is that they're not incredibly "fast" (don't let in a lot of light; lowest aperture setting is 4 or so), so you have to go with a higher ISO setting to get enough light. Fast zoom lenses will set you back several grand. My favorite low light lens is the cheapest lens in my bag: a 35mm lens with f/1.8. Got better pics at my niece's graduation with that lens than I did with my 300mm zoom due to the lighting. Also,if you use a zoom, the lowest shutter speed you want to use in order to avoid fuzzy shots corresponds to the mm setting - if you have a 200mm zoom, the slowest shutter speed you should use use is 1/200 sec at full zoom.

Hope all this helps! I'll be interested to hear what Lavabe has to say. He has more experience at this than I do. I can say all this, but I really need more practice at it.

[ArkieDukie]

I love the dragonfly and the butterfly pics!

Thanks Cathy!

[Lavabe]

Here are some of my most recent pics from the MoBot. I used the 18-105mm VR lens that came with my camera and shot in raw rather than jpg format. Made some minor alterations in exposure and white balance for a few of the shots (believe it or not, not the butterfly shots) to correct some experimentation I was doing with exposure locking. As always, constructive criticism is welcome.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/17449158@N ... 4713627602

Editorial comment: my favorite shot is one that didn't turn out exactly as planned. Anyone care to guess which one?

I enjoyed #39, the stream shot, with fuzzy water flowing by. Setting the shutter speed slow, one part of the stream looks like cotton. In addition, the greens were warm and not faded. It almost looked like Fuji color slide film.

I like your landscape shots, although I wish the bridge shots had been taken directly perpendicular to the bridge. It looks like both shots were taken on angles.

Having said that, the greens are a bit washed out. On hazy days, I would be careful if I was taking those sorts of landscape shots.

I also like the trail shot. Trails are always difficult to shoot, because you have shade, but you are also photographing forested areas that have somewhat more light. So for me, these shots become more complex to photograph.

Butterflies are always pretty. Are the photographs pretty? I think they're good, but if you're not using your macro, it means two things:
1) Why aren't you using your macro?
2) What are you doing shooting butterflies without your macro?

Going for a side shot of the full butterfly might tell more of a story.

[Lavabe]

Dude, Lavabe (and others), go to my website and critique some of my photos of the kids. I'd love to make them better. With the kids, they move around so much, I tend to just shoot as much as possible and hope for a few good ones. It usually seems to work out. Much better than with film camera, when it cost so much to develop a whole roll just for two shots. Now I only print the great ones.

Also, I have a photo situation I'd LOVE advice on...my kids' school performances. They are always too far away for a flash to help (it just blacks everything out), but they're always moving, so it gets blurry. Do I get a long lens and use a sports mode? Something else? Thanks.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bjornolf

Bjornolf, there's nothing wrong with getting lots of pics - that's really one of the big secrets to getting THE good shot.

One thing I noticed on a few of your shots is that a flash would've helped a bit. the shot was outdoors and bright, but the kids were dark. Assuming you were close enough, a flash would've brought them out of the shadows. It's completely counterintuitive to use a flash outdoors, but sometimes it helps when you're shooting people. It also might have helped in the picture of Michael in the slide, but I'm not sure what the flash would do inside the tunnel.

One other thing you could've tried, maybe, was spot metering. The default metering mode on the Nikon DSLRs is matrix metering, which means the camera uses the entire frame to decide the correct combination of aperture and shutter speed to get good exposure for the picture you're taking. If you go to spot metering, the settings are determined from the point in the center of the frame. If your subject is not in the center of the frame, you can get the appropriate exposure settings by aiming at them, get everything set, hold down the AE lock button (there's one on the D90 - not sure about the D60), re-compose your picture, and take the shot. That's something I'm trying to practice doing these days - it's a bit tricky. I think it might be easier to get the subject in the center, hold down the button halfway to focus and set exposure, move your camera to re-compose while holding the button down halfway, and then shoot.

Metering might also be key in the shots for your kids' plays. You will probably want to use spot or center-weighted metering so you're getting the correct settings for the stage rather than the room. If you can do it, determine the settings using your child's face with spot metering. The pro photographer who taught all of the classes I've taken uses the same basic strategy for sporting events and plays: take test shots to get the settings you want, then go into manual mode and feed in the settings for aperture and shutter speed that gave the results you want, and leave them alone for the rest of the evening. I'd probably go with aperture or shutter priority mode. You'll probably have to crank up the ISO as high as you can stand it on your camera in order to get a fast enough shutter speed. Highest acceptable ISO for a particular camera is partially an issue of personal taste, and a grainy picture may be better than no picture at all. You would also likely want the aperture to be wide open (lowest number) to let in as much light as possible. Summary for the plays: aperture wide open, ISO as high as it takes to get the correct shutter speed (at least above 1/60, but higher if you're using a zoom).

The bad thing about most zoom lenses is that they're not incredibly "fast" (don't let in a lot of light; lowest aperture setting is 4 or so), so you have to go with a higher ISO setting to get enough light. Fast zoom lenses will set you back several grand. My favorite low light lens is the cheapest lens in my bag: a 35mm lens with f/1.8. Got better pics at my niece's graduation with that lens than I did with my 300mm zoom due to the lighting. Also,if you use a zoom, the lowest shutter speed you want to use in order to avoid fuzzy shots corresponds to the mm setting - if you have a 200mm zoom, the slowest shutter speed you should use use is 1/200 sec at full zoom.

Hope all this helps! I'll be interested to hear what Lavabe has to say. He has more experience at this than I do. I can say all this, but I really need more practice at it.

I really won't disagree at all with Arkie. Her observations are dead on. I use my 70-200 f2.8 for photos of my daughter's play, and I can get away with A LOT!!

Having said that, I DO have several suggestions about COMPOSING your shots:
1) Did you get any good portraits? Sometimes we get SO caught up in the action that we lose track of getting a variety of photos for each subject. You have CUTE kids, but a lot of these photos are full body action AT THE COST of seeing their expressions. Nothing wrong about full body shots, but I also now make a point of getting portraits, stomach to head shots, and a variety of other ones. So, if you have a kid swinging at a pinata, it's good to get the shot of the full swing (if you can see the face), but I'd have gotten the photo from the front, and look at the facial expression as the swing takes place.
2) Don't be afraid to use flash. The grandparent (?) photo of the hug with grandchild would have worked with flash. It's very grainy, and the orange tint is from the incandescent bulb.
3) The train shot: your caption led me to believe that it was going to be a fun shot. The kids looked dead, and frankly, the train wasn't all that clear (I wouldn't have known it was a train had you not told me). And the facial expressions aren't doing much for me. There's no interaction; it looks posed, and the kids don't appear to interact.
4) whoa... boy silhouette in a playground tube is LOVELY.
5) on portraits (and on many shots), get at the same level as the kids.
6) take advantage of your knowledge of your kids. As a parent, you become familiar with little characteristics that are predictable and very revealing. I find I have to do the same thing when photographing lemurs. I have to learn each individual, THEN I photograph.

I'll see if I can dig up a photo or two from Madagascar that can illustrate some of these points.
Cheers,
Lavabe