New to photography

[Steve-O]

Well since i have a holiday to Cyprus this weekend and Baby due in Oct i've taken the plunge and invested in a Canon 500d SLR. I've also bought a shedload of gear such as polarising filter, UV filter, bag, tripod, spare battery, 16gb SD card, and blagged a load of freebies like a gorillapod and remote control the only thing left is to acquire a decent 17-300mm lens later for some long shots. Looking forward to using the camera on holiday to put into practice everything i have been reading up on this week, and moving forward taking some portrait pictures of my baby, charting its growth and also trackday/race events...

 

Anyway - i've been prepping my laptop to take away with me to offload the photos with a view of duplicating on my external 1TB hard drive also when i get back, what i would like to put to you budding WiM photographers is:

 

1) What is the best way of sharing images online at a decent quality and bandwidth? I use photobucket and its dog slow! Looking to do this as a backup of the backup...

2) Whats the best free photoshop-esque app for tidying up/cropping photos? Is there one that can do batch processing (applying water marks etc?)

3) Are there any beginners SLR websites that i should be aware of that might help me with regards understanding how aperture, shutterspeed and ISO all work together ?

 

I'll post up a couple of first-attempts for feedback once i sort out point #1!

 

Cheers

 

Steve

[parthiban]

My brother's got a 500D and it's a pretty decent camera (even though I annoy him by saying Nikon's better )

 

I use Picasa for all my basic photo needs, the desktop software is really easy to use, and it's really easy to sync with your google account.

[Rich]

Wow jump in at the deep end then, 500 quid camera for starting with would do me

 

I would've thought flickr would be the best place to upload photos to for backups.

 

As for software you could try GIMP or just acquire a copy of photoshop. For automated stuff I downloaded a free program called multiple image resizer, which seems good but I don't use it. Personally I prefer using the batch processes in photoshop and make my own for framing and watermarking.

 

A forum I've been reading on is talk photography, some stunning images on there and I'm really tempted to get a DSLR now but I'm suppose to be saving for a new car!

[Steve-O]

Wow jump in at the deep end then, 500 quid camera for starting with would do me

 

I would've thought flickr would be the best place to upload photos to for backups.

 

As for software you could try GIMP or just acquire a copy of photoshop. For automated stuff I downloaded a free program called multiple image resizer, which seems good but I don't use it. Personally I prefer using the batch processes in photoshop and make my own for framing and watermarking.

 

A forum I've been reading on is talk photography, some stunning images on there and I'm really tempted to get a DSLR now but I'm suppose to be saving for a new car!

 

Lol always the deep end for me mate - its the norm for me so its not scary anymore lol

 

Just taken a couple of images of the cat. Didn't bother with full auto - used the Av setting experimenting with the apperture (which for the most part was sat around 5/6) and adjusted the ISO to 1600-3200 so some graining is probably visable:

 

 

 

 

Pretty pleased with my first efforts. Never owned a camera before LOL

[Rich]

Very impressed for a first effort mate, I especially like the 2nd one and the eyes, very sharp

 

I think what is bugging me with my bridge camera is the colours are no where near as sharp and vibrant as a DSLR.

 

Did you buy the camera new, if so where from, what made you choose this one?

[Steve-O]

Very impressed for a first effort mate, I especially like the 2nd one and the eyes, very sharp

 

I think what is bugging me with my bridge camera is the colours are no where near as sharp and vibrant as a DSLR.

 

Did you buy the camera new, if so where from, what made you choose this one?

 

From my noob perspective i think the apperture was very important, with the ISO following afterwards.... i took a load experimenting to see what happens when you change various options... most were quite noticable so applying logic i managed to find a reasonable setting quite easily..

 

I have no idea why this would be more vibrant than something you might take on yours? Could it be the exposure level being too high or low alongside a slightly off ISO ??

 

If you are in the market look here : http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/ there is a good deal at comet for £545 at the moment.

 

I wont recommend pixmania where mine is from purely because their logistics and support is complete s***e. Prices good though. I paid £584ish for the camera, lens and accessory pack. I wont be using them again though thats for sure.

[Sagitar]

Very impressed for a first effort mate, I especially like the 2nd one and the eyes, very sharp

 

I think what is bugging me with my bridge camera is the colours are no where near as sharp and vibrant as a DSLR.

 

Did you buy the camera new, if so where from, what made you choose this one?

 

From my noob perspective i think the apperture was very important, with the ISO following afterwards.... i took a load experimenting to see what happens when you change various options... most were quite noticable so applying logic i managed to find a reasonable setting quite easily..

 

I have no idea why this would be more vibrant than something you might take on yours? Could it be the exposure level being too high or low alongside a slightly off ISO ??

 

If you are in the market look here : http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/ there is a good deal at comet for �545 at the moment.

 

I wont recommend pixmania where mine is from purely because their logistics and support is complete s***e. Prices good though. I paid �584ish for the camera, lens and accessory pack. I wont be using them again though thats for sure.

 

Nice pics, but they look very warm - not under daylight I would guess? If you have the White Balance setting on Auto it does not always give good results with artificial lights. If you look for White Balance in the camera menu you will find settings for various kinds of lighting and it is worth experimenting. Alternatively your manual will probably set out a means of getting a Custom White Balance under any light, using a sheet of white paper to set up the camera. Alternatively you may be able to make adjustments in your photo software. Try including a white object in the picture and return it to white by altering the colour temperature.

 

Have a look here

[Rich]

From my noob perspective i think the apperture was very important, with the ISO following afterwards.... i took a load experimenting to see what happens when you change various options... most were quite noticable so applying logic i managed to find a reasonable setting quite easily..

 

I have no idea why this would be more vibrant than something you might take on yours? Could it be the exposure level being too high or low alongside a slightly off ISO ??

 

If you are in the market look here : http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/ there is a good deal at comet for �545 at the moment.

 

I wont recommend pixmania where mine is from purely because their logistics and support is complete s***e. Prices good though. I paid �584ish for the camera, lens and accessory pack. I wont be using them again though thats for sure.

 

I think you should use a higher ISO when natural lighting is poor, this means you get longer exposure times as the shutter stays open longer...I think!

 

If you look at any photo taken with a DSLR and then compare it to a compact or bridge camera you will see the difference, have a look at sagitars on here, they're amazing. I think it's down to the lens size or the sensor, I'm not too sure.

 

You got it for a good price then but I won't be using Pixmania, heard too many bad things about them. I have been looking at an entry level DSLR like the Canon 1000D so will take a look at that link

 

Nice pics, but they look very warm - not under daylight I would guess? If you have the White Balance setting on Auto it does not always give good results with artificial lights. If you look for White Balance in the camera menu you will find settings for various kinds of lighting and it is worth experimenting. Alternatively your manual will probably set out a means of getting a Custom White Balance under any light, using a sheet of white paper to set up the camera. Alternatively you may be able to make adjustments in your photo software. Try including a white object in the picture and return it to white by altering the colour temperature.

 

Have a look here

 

This is something I haven't played with ATM but that's mainly down to me not having a tripod so I've not been doing much indoor photography as they come out blurry. I have a mini tripod though so will experiment using that.

[parthiban]

Those are some great pics , love the second one.

 

I think what is bugging me with my bridge camera is the colours are no where near as sharp and vibrant as a DSLR.

 

Did you buy the camera new, if so where from, what made you choose this one?

If you're using a bridge, then the jump to SLR isn't really that big as you're already sort of used to the bulk. In terms of DSLR I think it's better to jump straight in. They're expensive purchases so to me better to just buy once! I also just went straight in without having a clue and bought the D90, which really is all the camera I'll ever need (doesn't mean I won't buy another, but it won't be because I need it!)

 

If you can get hold of a D90 I'd recommend it, it's a consumer camera that can mix it with the top end pro cameras and not come off too bad.......

[Rich]

If you're using a bridge, then the jump to SLR isn't really that big as you're already sort of used to the bulk. In terms of DSLR I think it's better to jump straight in. They're expensive purchases so to me better to just buy once! I also just went straight in without having a clue and bought the D90, which really is all the camera I'll ever need (doesn't mean I won't buy another, but it won't be because I need it!)

 

If you can get hold of a D90 I'd recommend it, it's a consumer camera that can mix it with the top end pro cameras and not come off too bad.......

 

At £800 I'll have to give the D90 a miss! I think it's time to do some research on DSLR and view some sample shots

[Steve-O]

Hi Parthiban

 

Cheers for the feedback. The pics were taken under halogen spot lights at dusk so the lighting was indeed rubbish. I understand what you are saying in terms of the colours being 'warm' and i did briefly pass by the settings related to colour adjustments but didnt play with them. But i will say i think the warm colours don't look that bad (to my eye)against my Ginger beast ! Don't they say you should shoot for yourself not for others ? I still want to learn and take better photos - thats the whole point of this! I'll try and take some similar photos with some adjustments for comparsion. Maybe i will like the new ones better once i see them!

 

Rich - Parthiban obvioulsy knows more than me about cameras but technical details aside - if photogrpahy is something you get plreasure from then i wouldn't ever see upgrading as a bad thing. Its like throwing money at cars - it stings a bit but the long term enjoyment far outweighs the initial costs. Yes its cost me the thick end of 700 quid but its going to be worth it for the long term memories. I will say that i think the most important part of a photograhers kit is their lenses - if you were to go from your bridge to even a modest spec SLR and spent the rest of the money one or two well chosen lenses - i'd bet you would appeciate the improvement and flexability of a long lens more in the real world than the specs/costs suggest...

 

If you want to road test my camera at the WiM meet let me know mate !

[parthiban]

I know very little mate, didn't have a clue about them until I bought one just under 2 years ago........

 

Sounds like it's gone up in price a bit then, I'm sure I got mine for around £650 - you can always find a used one or even refurbs, they're usually as good as new. The 1000D has had some really good reviews though, a good choice for an entry-level camera, but I hear a lot of people saying that at entry-level it's sometimes better to look away from Canon and Nikon and look at the other brands too because at that level they may be better.

 

Not sure how true that is, maybe Sagitar can shed some light on it?

 

 

 

I'll have to look into controlling the white balance manually too, I get that with shots indoors sometimes where it'll be far too warm...........after discovering photoshop that's not a problem so much any more but would be good to be able to get a better shot in the first place.

[Rich]

Hi Parthiban

 

Cheers for the feedback. The pics were taken under halogen spot lights at dusk so the lighting was indeed rubbish. I understand what you are saying in terms of the colours being 'warm' and i did briefly pass by the settings related to colour adjustments but didnt play with them. But i will say i think the warm colours don't look that bad (to my eye)against my Ginger beast ! Don't they say you should shoot for yourself not for others ? I still want to learn and take better photos - thats the whole point of this! I'll try and take some similar photos with some adjustments for comparsion. Maybe i will like the new ones better once i see them!

 

Rich - Parthiban obvioulsy knows more than me about cameras but technical details aside - if photogrpahy is something you get plreasure from then i wouldn't ever see upgrading as a bad thing. Its like throwing money at cars - it stings a bit but the long term enjoyment far outweighs the initial costs. Yes its cost me the thick end of 700 quid but its going to be worth it for the long term memories. I will say that i think the most important part of a photograhers kit is their lenses - if you were to go from your bridge to even a modest spec SLR and spent the rest of the money one or two well chosen lenses - i'd bet you would appeciate the improvement and flexability of a long lens more in the real world than the specs/costs suggest...

 

If you want to road test my camera at the WiM meet let me know mate !

 

Steve, I think you got Parthiban mixed up with Sagitar, he was the one who suggested the white balance Were those photos taken on the tripod?

 

You make a good point though, shoot for yourself not for others. But then if it wasn't for the help I've had from showing my photos I wouldn't of been able to improve them from the advice I received.

 

I'm reading up on the 1000D ATM and it gets great reviews for an entry level DSLR but like you say a good lens would probably make alot of difference.

 

I take it you're at the meet this Sunday? I'll take a look then see what it's like

[parthiban]

Steve, I think you got Parthiban mixed up with Sagitar, he was the one who suggested the white balance Were those photos taken on the tripod?

Lol, that makes more sense

[Steve-O]

Steve, I think you got Parthiban mixed up with Sagitar, he was the one who suggested the white balance Were those photos taken on the tripod?

Lol, that makes more sense

 

 

Sorry thats me badly writing my post - the pitfalls of surfing WiM and doing support at the same time lol! Thanks Sagitar for your feedback also !

 

No i didnt use a tripod on these - becuase the shutter speed is so fast i dont think its so much of an issue holding it by hand. There is a technique to holding a camera stedy though i've found.

 

Unfortunately i wont be at the meet - i am off to cyprus tomorrow on an all inclusive bender - hence the camera post etc !

[Rich]

Ah, you mean the pub meet! Is it wise bringing it with you?

[Steve-O]

Ah, you mean the pub meet! Is it wise bringing it with you?

 

Good point... well if the OH comes along she can look after it Is this a 'lads only' thing?

[Rich]

Ah, you mean the pub meet! Is it wise bringing it with you?

 

Good point... well if the OH comes along she can look after it Is this a 'lads only' thing?

 

I think so, my missus ain't coming and I don't think Lou is if Iain comes.

[Steve-O]

Thats cool

[Rich]

Been doing alot of reading at work (didn't have much to do!!) and I think I've narrowed it down to the Canon 1000D with the Sigma 18-200 Lens. Or to start with just get the lens kit, which comes with an 18-55 lens. I would probably go to Comet as you get 3% cashback on reserve and collect orders as well.

 

Or I've looked at the Nikon D3000 lens kit but additional lenses look very expensive so I'll probably go the Canon way.

 

Better start saving!!

[parthiban]

Doesn't Jessops do 4% cashback? Not sure about reserve and collect though.

 

If you're going with sigma lenses, there shouldn't be much difference between Canon fit or Nikon fit - are they quite different in price then? Only thing I'd recommend is going for a VR lens, they cost more but it is a really useful feature.

 

Not sure if you've done this already, but one other thing is to go to a camera store (like Jessops or something) and have an extended play with the cameras you're considering, and with the lenses you're planning to use with them. The way the camera feels in your hand is quite important, and sometimes can heavily determine which camera you go for. Also have a play with menus and stuff to see which you'd find easier to alter settings quickly.

[Rich]

Doesn't Jessops do 4% cashback? Not sure about reserve and collect though.

 

If you're going with sigma lenses, there shouldn't be much difference between Canon fit or Nikon fit - are they quite different in price then? Only thing I'd recommend is going for a VR lens, they cost more but it is a really useful feature.

 

Not sure if you've done this already, but one other thing is to go to a camera store (like Jessops or something) and have an extended play with the cameras you're considering, and with the lenses you're planning to use with them. The way the camera feels in your hand is quite important, and sometimes can heavily determine which camera you go for. Also have a play with menus and stuff to see which you'd find easier to alter settings quickly.

 

Not looked at Jessops cashback yet. I will definately be going to a shop to try them out first, it's alot of money to spend on the wrong camera so want the right one for me.

 

I will be getting a VR (Vibration Reduction) lens and most likely the sigma, heard good things about them. I didn't think they made them for the Nikon though, looking at that link Steve put up they have the lens for the Canon listed on there but not the Nikon.

[parthiban]

Not looked at Jessops cashback yet. I will definately be going to a shop to try them out first, it's alot of money to spend on the wrong camera so want the right one for me.

 

I will be getting a VR (Vibration Reduction) lens and most likely the sigma, heard good things about them. I didn't think they made them for the Nikon though, looking at that link Steve put up they have the lens for the Canon listed on there but not the Nikon.

They definitely do a 18-200 VR in Nikon fit as I was looking at them a while back, but the problem was that once you get into lenses with stabilisation the Sigma ones aren't actually that much cheaper than the Nikon ones. Off the top of my head, the Sigma was about £450, while the Nikon was about £580 so didn't really make sense because the Nikkor is a better lens - didn't actually end up going for either as the 18-105 lens that came in the kit has worked fine for me so far.

 

I know nothing about it, but people also mention Tamron as being quite good so worth looking at as they're quite a bit cheaper than sigma - I'm actually thinking about trying one of these out as that is a brilliant price for quite an incredible length of zoom.........LINK

[Rich]

I had a quick go on a Canon EOS 50D today, only had to press the shutter but the feel of the camera and using the viewfinder was an absolute joy. I know this camera is alot more expensive than what I'm looking at but I think that is more in terms of features rather than size/weight etc. I tried using the viewfinder on mine today and I couldn't get on with it, the shape and size didn't work for me

[Sagitar]

I had a quick go on a Canon EOS 50D today, only had to press the shutter but the feel of the camera and using the viewfinder was an absolute joy. I know this camera is alot more expensive than what I'm looking at but I think that is more in terms of features rather than size/weight etc. I tried using the viewfinder on mine today and I couldn't get on with it, the shape and size didn't work for me

 

The physical size of the viewfinder can vary quite a bit. Generally speaking, smaller bodies put limitations on mirror, prism and focusing screen size. You also need to consider eye separation. Some finders are difficult to see if you cannot get close enough and I find both of my favourite bodies difficult to use when I am wearing specs., so I have to make sure that I get the right eyesight correction on the viewing lens.

 

The brightness of the image in the viewfinder is affected to some extent by the mirror and focusing screen arrangments. Mirrors are often only partially silvered, so that some light passes through for metering purposes and never arrives at the viewfinder. Good quality screens make better use of the light and more expensive bodies will have interchangeable screens so that you can choose the right one for a particular purpose.

 

But the biggest influence on the brightness of the viewfinder is the lens that is fitted to the camera, so you should always compare SLR finders using the same lens. Many zoom lenses have relatively small apertures. My 24-105mm Canon lens is one of their L series, but has a maximum aperture of only f1:4. My 50mm prime lens has an aperture of f1:1.4.

 

Both lenses focus and meter at full aperture, but the 50mm lets in eight times as much light as the 24-105 so the viewfinder looks much brighter when it is fitted.